Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By Nicholas Morris
We have a non-unionised workforce with a number of self-nominated/ interviewed safety reps and a regular H&S Committee. Some of the reps are very good, others less so. We're currently looking to revitalise this group and, as part of this, introduce fresh blood and hopefully weed out some of the less effective ones.
Has anyone carried out a similar exercise? Any tips on how to manage the "restructure" would be most welcome.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Alexander Falconer
How were they elected in the first place?
It is my own opinion that when electing members to the committee, they are elected for a fixed period of say 1 year, 2 years or whatever suits the organisation.
Whenever re-election time comes, the employees themselves can determine who has (or not) been beneficial and subsequently re-elect back into the position once again.
Then again, you can always select the maximum number of times a person can be re-elected (just like the american presidential elections - 2 x 4 year terms)
Those who do nothing but whinge, moan or being unproductive will very often find their tenure short and sweet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Donk
Let the workforce elect the reps.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By John Cook
In non-unionised workplaces or for representation of non-union personnel the Health and Safety (Consultation with Employees)Regulations 1996 will apply and these state that the employer must consult with their employees directly or through elected representatives of employee safety.
If the people currently sitting on the committee were not elected by the workforce then it shouyld be relatively easy to remove by holding elections.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By dervan
i feel your pain if you find that you have safety reps who like the title rather than the work involved!
First off I think getting the rep elected by the workforce can create the situation where a few jokers gang together and vote in someone clearly unsuitable just to razz management - you know the guy who complains about silly things.
So i would suggest having an election and if it throws up solid interested people then great but if questionable folks show up looking for a badge of honour or extensive time off to surf the net "looking up safety stuff my buddy wants to know" then i would suggest an interview to make sure they understand and agree to the role they would be taking. Maybe suggest that they have to be active in the role for a two year minimum - that usually focuses them to understand the role fully before signing up.
hope this helps,
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By garyh
When I have managed safety committees in the past I allowed any member of the workforce to attend. The only people who took this up tended to be responsible - sometimes more so than elected reps. One volunteer is worth ....... etc
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
I think that beyond setting a maximum number of representatives and the periodicity of elections, after due consultation, employers have no actual rights to decide who can or cannot be reps or if there is a maximum length of service. The whole intention is that employees select who they want and for how long they remain in position.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Merv Newman
Are safety reps, elected or not, allowed a certain amount of time per week/month for the safety part of their job ? Or is it in addition to their normal duties ?
In France, where I work, they are allowed 15 hours per month. Though in one plant they managed to turn this into full time jobs. Until a new MD shoved them all back on to the worst jobs in the foundry : "tappage"
Merv
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By John Cook
The title here is a bit misleading. The individuals we are discussing are actually Representatives of Employee Safety. This is not the same as a TU appointed Health and Safety Representative.
There are differing legal aspects to the roles and both do not attract the same rights (if memory serves well).
Also agree entirely with earlier statement that employer does not have the right to appoint, it must be done via election by workforce.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Nicholas Morris
Many thanks to all so far for the useful contributions and observations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By John Murgatroyd
You can always consult directly with the employees. No need for elected reps then.
Just put a big sign up: This is the consultation we are required to have with you. If you don't like it, where are you working tomorrow ?
Supply PPE, and require the employees to "contribute" to a charity for it (straight into the slush fund that you use to bribe the HSE inspector)
In fact, you probably won't need any PPE, just hire a H&S consultancy that will do a survey and tell you that you don't need any.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By darren booth
lol, as a safety rep who now has to deal with a "consultant", i can agree entirely with johns post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By John J
Nicholas,
Can I suggest you look at what behaviour you expect from all members of your safety team and if necessary get everybody some behavioural skills training.
Getting the Safety rep/s off the team won't solve your problems. I will guarantee that they will be twice as destructive on the shop floor if they are carrying a grudge.
John
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Pete48
Nicholas,
As has been said, these are not representatives who speak on behalf of the workforce (as in union appointed reps), they are representative of the workforce. It is this point that often gets lost in my experience and one that you need to make sure is understood clearly by committee members.
I had an agenda item called "this months biggest whinge" together with another called "urgent matters for line managers".
We never discussed the detail just which was the most important whinge and which manager(s) should take action and provide a response at the next meeting (hopefully a "we fixed it and Joe Bloggs has agreed we have" note) If there was no response, this was reported at the managers meeting.
We then monitored the patterns and performance as part of our regular reviews. After a while the quality of the content improved dramatically.
The other area was to make sure that the committee was informed just as soon as possible, about any changes, new stuff etc so that they felt that this was meaningful cmmunication; that their views and suggestions were available before the tablet had been cast into stone and that they were not just an info download function.
Hope you can see my direction on this and that it will help you. Depends on where you are with managers as much as anything else I guess.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ian G Hutchings
Nicholas
I think to really progress H&S improvements you need to move away from the traditional health and safety meeting. Yes, there needs to be mechanisms in place for consulting with people, but it can be done differently.
All the activity should be aligned with your business/site/organisation improvement plan. All activities should be able to demonstrate visible improvement in H&S performance and/or risk reduction. All day-to-day H&S matters or issues should be immediately referred to team leader/line management; not saved up in a notebook for the next committee meeting. As long as you have this reactive meeting structure you will never truly achieve excellent H&S performance.
This change in approach needs to be managed sensitively and gradually, with clear reasoning and involvement of employees, in order to see the true value of what I normally call 'HS&E action teams'. The onus being on 'action', not "here is our list what are management going to do about it?".
Happy to talk about specifics and examples if you wish to email me.
Good luck
Ian
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By John Murgatroyd
"The other area was to make sure that the committee was informed just as soon as possible, about any changes, new stuff etc so that they felt that this was meaningful cmmunication; that their views and suggestions were available before the tablet had been cast into stone and that they were not just an info download function.
Hope you can see my direction on this and that it will help you"
Which, basically, means "we'll tell them about any changes but they're happening no matter what they say"
And also makes the various regulations about HAVING to consult with employees om H&S measures meaningless.
Most employers in this country adopt a policy of "letting them get on with it" to H&S.
The "safety policy" is adopted, usually at great expense from a H&S consultant, and is then handed down to the workforce (rather like the tablets to Moses) for them to read, sign that they have read, and is then ignored. Until the accident/s occur, when it is trotted-out to prove "we done it".
H&S, to the countries employers, is a gross inconvenience and needless expense. Most employers would provide no ppe to their employees if legislation did not require it, and would charge if it were not unlawful to so do. These are the basic facts.
My recomendations to safety reps.
Make any complaints, or relevant H&S findings, in WRITING. Keep a copy. Record all meetings.
This may seem adversarial, but dealing with most employers on H&S issues is usually so, especially when money is entered into the equation.
Yet with occupational disease seemingly rising all the time, you may have thought the message would have got through.
Obviously not.
I wonder why ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.