I have been asked to benchmark our HSW team against organisations of a similar size. We have just over 2500 permanent employees globally, 32 small offices internationally, 2 warehouses and are responsible for ensuring health and safety standards are consistent across our sites (predominantly offices) and to have a wellbeing programme that provides something for all. I head the team and have 3 full-time members of staff as well as part-time (0.5 FTE) administrative support. We use a lot of temporary staff during peak periods as well as use trainers/contractors to manage events etc. across the globe. I would like to hear from other H&S colleagues who have similar or larger organisations with regard to the numbers of personnel they employ to manage the HSW function. We dont manage environmental issues as this comes under our FM.

The only realistic comparison would be with a company that is virtually identical to your own in structure, responsibilities, activities, geographical spread and size. And even then there would be differences in training needs, staff churn etc.

The way different organisations deal with working safely etc is key as to what dedicated safety resource they choose to have. Some will educate their managers to take full responsibnility for their own departments whilst others will have a H&S bod to support (or blame). Others will take a balanced approach with the H&S people being purely advisory whist others will buy in expertise as needed. Added to this is the statutory requirement in some countries for dedicated H&S people (to blame).

Sorry, but I don't think your question can really be answered in the way you hope.

Hi Athomas

As others (including you) have said very difficult to judge, but a bit more information would help.

Global geographic spread?

Size and nature of warehouses?

Nature of events?

What your contractors are doing?

What your own staff are doing, e.g. permanently based in offices v spending a lot of time in the field, thence at much greater, and more diverse risk.

For example, on one of my current projects, we have staff working alongside roads next week doing

Ground investigation - drilling rigs, potential need for traffic management on a trunk road

Watercourse surveys - rough ground, potential drowning

Structural inspections - work at height etc

Natural terrain hazard inspections - more rough ground and other risks, such as hazardous flora and fauna

......and most of them will have to travel over 60 miles before even starting work.

They will then inform other staff who can take all the information into account in designing a dual carriageway, side roads, rail and watercourse crossings, utilities protection etc etc

So a broad risk profile, including risks to local landowners, road users, contractors and our field staff.

All of this helps define the size of our health and safety team, training needs, and so on.

Originally Posted by: Brian Hagyard

Originally Posted by: David Bannister

The only realistic comparison would be with a company that is virtually identical to your own in structure, responsibilities, activities, geographical spread and size. And even then there would be differences in training needs, staff churn etc.

The way different organisations deal with working safely etc is key as to what dedicated safety resource they choose to have. Some will educate their managers to take full responsibnility for their own departments whilst others will have a H&S bod to support (or blame). Others will take a balanced approach with the H&S people being purely advisory whist others will buy in expertise as needed. Added to this is the statutory requirement in some countries for dedicated H&S people (to blame).

Sorry, but I don't think your question can really be answered in the way you hope.

.

Wish i had said that! I think David has hit the nail on the head.

I think a very broad measure would be to say can the team cope with everything they are expected to do and is the company broadly compliant in matters of H&S (I say broadly as i dont think anyone can ever say they are totaly compliant) if you say yes the team is big enough if no then the team is not big enough.

Now pour me a glass as well David!

So it's not the size of it, it's what you do with it (the team that is)