Rank: Super forum user 
|
Under the Health and Safety (Fees) Regulations 2012, companies that break health and safety laws are liable for fines to cover HSE-related costs, which include call-outs, inspections, investigations and taking enforcement action. According to the findings, the breaches ranged from slips, trips and falls to not providing enough toilets or washing facilities. The sectors that received the most fines were manufacturing (38 per cent) and construction (36 per cent), while at the bottom of the list were water and waste management (3 per cent) and agriculture (2 per cent). - See more at: http://www.shponline.co....ffi#sthash.lZnRcGol.dpufThere has been an 11 per cent drop in major injuries in the workplace according to new figures published by the HSE today (30 October). The figures show that although major injuries have hit an all time low, there has been little change in the industries like construction, agriculture, and waste and recycling, where workers are most likely to be injured by their jobs - See more at: http://www.shponline.co....ace#sthash.jm7Idwvd.dpuf
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
There's not necessarily a contradiction here because it is different kinds of statistics that are being compared.
If lots of people work in manufacturing and fewer in agriculture, then it is perfectly possible for a greater number of dangerous things to occur in manufacturing in total but for agriculture to be more dangerous per capita. So if (made-up figures for illustration) for 1,000 workers you had 900 in manufacturing and 100 in agriculture, and the risk of injury was 5% in manufacturing and 10% in agriculture (so the agricultural workers had twice the risk), you would get 45 injuries in manufacturing and only 10 in agriculture. Agriculture would still be the more dangerous occupation to be in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Oh dear... You'd think the authors of items in the SHP - the journal of our own institution no less - would know and understand the difference between a fine a civil cost recovery.
FFI stands for FEE for intervention not 'FINE' for intervention. If it was a fine there'd be a chance of a fair hearing before an impartial judge...
And even the HSE can't still believe that a drop in reported injuries necessarily reflects a drop in injuries occurring? Surely they're not really that naïve. Are they?
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.