Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Admin  
#1 Posted : 11 February 2007 10:28:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Crim Anyone seen this article, if so do you have any further information/views? If you haven't seen the article have a look at the Retail Bulletin.com website, from the home page look to the right hand side in the lagal news for "Retailers warned over health and safety ruling". Moderators - I hope it's OK to name the journal?
Admin  
#2 Posted : 11 February 2007 11:30:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By David AB Thomas See earlier discussion thread on 'so far as is reasonably practicable': http://www.iosh.co.uk/in...iew&forum=1&thread=25140
Admin  
#3 Posted : 11 February 2007 11:31:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Charley Farley-Trelawney Crim IOSH link here. http://www.iosh.co.uk/in...m?go=news.release&id=355 Whilst I see the article you refer to was targeted at retailers it still stands that if the HASAWA applies to you, then the potential (if ever) change ultimately affects many. CFT
Admin  
#4 Posted : 11 February 2007 11:31:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Merv Newman This is an article on the "reasonably practicable" definition as applied to UK H&S legislation which the European Court of Justice doesn't like. It prefers "absolute duty" So far the decision is going for the UK but there are no guarantees yet. I believe that even if "absolute duty" does eventually come in the UK courts would take a defence of "reasonably practicable" in mitigation. Merv
Admin  
#5 Posted : 11 February 2007 12:02:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By John Murgatroyd That depends. If alarp goes down the pan then any court accepting "reasonably practicable" as mitigation is highly likely to find itself going to court, in the EU. The case may well be "tried" in the EU courts anyway....whatever. In any case, the usual gripe about "spending a million to save a few peoples knees is ridiculous but the same amount on saving 150 lives is not" hardly applies to the 21st century. Now, you save the million by moving the jobs abroad where life is cheaper. 150 dead in London is alarming, 150 dead in India is hardly news. Even 20,000 dead in India is old news....just another H&S failure.
Admin  
#6 Posted : 11 February 2007 14:44:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Crim Thanks for your help, I'm now fully up to speed-I think!
Admin  
#7 Posted : 11 February 2007 15:14:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Jay Joshi What has this thread to do with outsourcing to India? What is relatively unknown to a lot of people is that India is now the third largest investor in the UK. It is not all a one way traffic. The membership of European Union was not compelled upon us. As a proportion of real incomes, cost of living is not "cheap" for Indians living in India. Yes, in comparative terms, it may seem cheaper for those living here, but not for those in India. and the standard of health & safety is not a significant factor. It is the unorganised sector in India that has huge safety issues, not the organised sector. It is not "cheap & easy" to hire & fire in India--refer to:- http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/...d/south_asia/4103554.stm In any economy, whether highly developed/emerging/developing or under-developed, unsafe practices resulting in fatalities and injuries cost in time & efficiency etc Some of its private and government sector has safety records at par with the best in the world. There are numerous other companies,in Manufacturing, Oil & Gas upstream & down stream, Chemicals, Pharmaceuticals and obviously IT, that have excellent governance (this includes HSE performance) and employee relations as the key to success. Tata Steel, for example, began the eight-hour work day for employees in 1912, long before the US or Europe, and a year after Britain accepted the 12-hour day. It introduced leave with pay in 1920, 25 years before it became law in India. It set up a provident fund for employees in 1920, 32 years before it became law in India. Link below give details:- http://www.tatasteel.com/company/milestones.asp http://www.tatasteel.com...stainability/default.asp
Users browsing this topic
Guest
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.