Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By Simon Micklewright
Does anyone know where I could obtain information where a manager has been prosecuted under section 37 of HASWA, where this manager was not a director or chief executive but of a middle management position.
I am putting together a presentation on risk assessments for middle managers at my workplace and would like to emphasise that these managers could be prosecuted by giving examples.
Anybody know of any clasic cases?
Thanks in advance
Simon
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Jennifer Jones
I haven't got any cases that spring to mind, but I have had similar discussions with middle managers and line managers, supervisors, etc, who argued that they weren't responsible as they weren't senior enough in the organisation etc etc. Just thought if you get this argument, remind them of Section 7 HASAWA, duties of employees to take reasonable care of their own health and safety and that of others who may be affected by their acts or omissions. The omissions bit I've always found useful to point out, as some people do think that the odd turning a blind eye makes them not responsible. I always say to them that a decision to do nothing is still a consious and deliberate decision, particularly when they are well aware that short cuts are being taken.
Anyway, good luck, hope this helps.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Michael Moore Simon, there are about 40 cases on the HSE prosecutons database. http://www.hse-databases...prosecutions/default.aspThe advanced search allows you to select specific breaches of acts, eg section 37 of HASWA (Select "act" then select "act section"). Hope this helps Mick
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Darby Allan
Simon
Another case - well known to Diploma students, is that of Armour v Skeen.
STRATHCLYDE REGIONAL COUNCIL DIRECTOR OF ROADS PROSECUTED
A maintenance worker drowned after falling from a bridge into the River Clyde. He was not provided with a safety harness nor a safe system of work.
Strathclyde R.C.
- Prosecuted under s.2 HSW Act
i.e. Failure to provide insofar as is reasonably practicable
Safe system of work
Instruction, Training, Supervision
Mr Armour (Director of Roads)
- Prosecuted under s.37 HSW Act
Neglected to discharge his personal responsibilities i.e.
- Failure to provide department safety policy
- Failure to ensure adequate training, instruction and supervision in safe working practices
NB: Council’s Policy placed responsibility on Directors/Heads of Departments for preparing departmental policies based on the requirements of the main policy.
(Reported as Armour - vs - Skeen [1977])
Regards
Darby
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ian Waldram
Why do you think that referring to prosecutions is likely to motivate these trainees?
Isn't it likely that examples which show how a good risk assement (as per what you are recommending) highlighted hazards that had been missed, or simple ways to make controls more efficient/less laborious, etc. or ineffective controls that were not actually reducing risk, and thus resulted in better management, less hassle/disruption, etc. would motivate them much better? Also I'm assuming you will emphasise the importance of input from those who do the work, not just managers & team leaders - again more likely then that what is agreed will be both effective and followed in practice.
Maybe I'm too cynical, and your proposed cases are only a very minor part of the sales package - but I strongly believe that OSH advisors must move from legislation-based to a risk-based reasons for suggesting that systems need to be in place.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Jennifer Jones
Ian,
You are of course totally correct, but I (and I am sure many others) have come up against certain managers who will absolutely refuse to do something unless you can clearly show them that they have a legal responsibility somewhere (and then they will try to argue this with you!). For some people I have met, the moral argument and good practise etc just doesn't hold any water with them. For people like this, the only thing you can fall back on is the legal position.
I try every approach to get people thinking in terms of good health and safety practise, but somewhere down the line it is important that their legal obligations are pointed out. Some managers (good ones) have been absolutely amazed to discover they are actually responsible legally for the health and safety of those who work for them!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Mike Miller
Cracking point Jennifer!
I have actually had a senior manager say to me 'what will happen if I just refused' Or 'I know the risk and I am prepared to pay the fine'
You just cannot dilly dally with these people. Stark warnings and reading the likes of previous convictions to them is the only thing that works. As for managers in general, I agree they are shocked to find out that managing health & safety is part of their duties just as much a managing profit and loss sheets.
Many have never had any formal health & safety training whatsoever. This is usually why you get a bad reaction because for some reason they feel intimidated by being challenged or questioned and some even take it personal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Diane Thomason
Sorry Simon, I've just realised I've given you a s7 not a s37 as you asked. However it's my understanding that if a middle manager is involved it would be s7 that would be used. s37 generally involves company secretaries and the like. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong!
Diane
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Chris Abbott
I advised a senior manager of their responsibilities under HSAWA etc.. The reaction was one of laughter, followed by "don't be silly, that's why we employed you".
Situation is this: I advise on a potential hazard (a small ceiling collapsed in an area of reception. Basically the fire/retardant tiles fell out of the framework of this "designer" wall/ceiling.)
I investigated the cause and discovered a number of faults relating to maintenance, scheduled repairs, bad management bla bla bla..
I told this "senior manager" that there were a number of problems relating to this - specifically (or to make matters worse) the tiles missed a post-man as they fell.. so that made it a Near Miss too...
The response was again to say - "but that's your job! Don't bring me problems, bring me solutions…."
What do you do when your advice is not accepted - not just ignored - but not accepted… ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Alan Dowler-Smith
Like Diane, I'd be surprised if middle and lower management would be prosecuted under Section 37 - to me, this section refers by implication to senior staff members and even board members. I'd suggest a better bet would be to concentrate on Sections 2,3 and 7!
Personally, I'd be interested if anyone has any case studies where local authority elected members (councillors) have been prosecuted under Section 36 or 37 of the HSWA
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By stephen j mills
Simon,
In March 2002, my LA prosecuted a national Cash and Carry business for a Section 2 HSW offence, for failing to ensure the health, safety and welfare of staff, and Reulations 9 and 17 of PUWER, for allowing untrained staff to operate work equipment, and not having clear, visible and identifiable controls and information.
At the same time, the local store manager was prosecuted under Section 37, (consent to offence contrary to Reg 9, or attributable to his neglect).
The Company was fined £10,000 for Section 2 offence, and £2000 for the Regulations offences.
The Manager was fined £2000.
So it would appear that Section 37 can be used against any manager of a company, and not just against executives of businesses.
E-mail me if you want to talk about it.
Regards,
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Jack
Alan, there was a discussion about COUNCILLORS some time ago.
Search under 'Councillors - where do they stand?'
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Alan Dowler-Smith
Jack,
Many thanks for this - I found the discussion you refer to back in the Old
Forum in 1999!
At that time no-one seemed to be aware of any prosecutions against
councillors or have any firm views as to what their responsibilities might
be.
As we're 5 years on, I might start another thread on in the forum and see if
anything has changed!
(By the way, I tried to e-mail this to you direct, but got a delivery failure message at your address)
Once again thanks for your help!
Alan
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Simon Micklewright
Thanks everyone for the constructive advice and information.
Yes many managers are unaware of the legal obligations and though quoting the law is allways the bottom of my list it is my duty to do so. We have an obligation to use all the information we have to make for a safer working environment, even if it means spooking people with the law, after all thats what its there for.
Simon
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.