I guess they have a point. Employees claiming has ensured employers are putting more effort into maintaining and improving their H&S performance due to fear of being hit in the wallet. By effort I mean, employing H&S professionals to guide, educate and implement on what is required, and showing the "top-down commitment" which again only comes from them being guided in the right way.

I agree, I think that claims have had an effect on improving health and safety performance along with many other factors. At my previous company there was a huge emphasis on claims management and claims defensibility. That involved ensuring that there was always strong documentary evidence available of thorough accident investigations with effective corrective and preventative actions , suitable risk assessments both pre and post accident, comprehensive training and robust absence management. All of this was partly driven by a desire to mitigate the effects of claims and reduce insurance premia as well as improving health and safety performance. The insurance companies conducted regular audits of these areas to ensure standards were maintained. So yes I do believe that the so called "claims culture" has had a beneficial effect on safety management.

Some good points - none of which is really wrong and which I have used myself. But I remain unconvinced that civil claims for compensation actually improve H&S performance. I've looked into this and following is a v brief summary of my views. - Workplace Accident - Employer prosecuted - fined £5k plus legal fees (paid for by either the EL insurer or less likely a legal expenses policy). A small court appearance cost (if director bothers to go) - Civil claim: Settled at , say £150k after 15% contributory negligence. This is paid by EL insurer - Annual premiums increases, say from £25k to £30K (OK I accept that is a continuing year on year increase but only until it is negotiated down) I think employer gets off pretty lightly.. the real cost of the claim - the compensation paid - is covered by the insurance (as it is meant to be) and employer gets off with costs that are a small fraction of the compensation. I accept I have left out all the other uninsured costs that HSE identifies e.g. overtime to cover missing employee, sick pay, maybe costs of temporary staff etc . But which ever way you cut it the largest component of the costs - compensation - isn't paid (directly) by the employer. When one takes into account that many/most SME type firms have a claim every other year, perhaps even longer I doubt fear of "claim costs" is a big motivator. Phil