Posted By Brian McMillan
Scenario

Mr A works directly to the headteacher of a UK county secondary school. He is identified in his job description as being responsible for health and safety issues in the school.

The school arrange their own work. The council also arrange work to be done on site. Communication on externally organised work ranges from minimal to fairly thorough. Mr A is aware of at least one accident related to working at height in the school. The accident occurred on a council organised job that involved scaffolders throwing items to each other. A missed catch resulted in the hospitalisation of a sub contractor.

The school roof is due for refurbishment as it leaks at second floor level. Mr A is concerned that the two emergency exits and adjacent through routes to various areas of the school will need careful consideration to ensure the safety of persons on the site. The scaffolding operation will need to be well planned and carefully executed to ensure adequate protection of the pedestrian routes. Fans and temporary pedestrian routes will need to be provided. Poor communication up to the day of the scheduled pre start meeting means that this has not been formally discussed yet.

Mr A receives a telephone call to inform him that two persons have arrived on the school site. Access to the sloping second floor roof is required. It had just finished raining and the roof is known to be slippery when wet (galvanised sheeting).

Mr A went to reception and met two people dressed in casual attire. One of the people announced that their company had just been awarded the contract to undertake major works on the roof and their boss had asked if they could measure up so that they had some inforamtion ready for the pre start meeting which was due to start later that day.

Mr A explained that access to the roof was not possible for a number of reasons. These included the weather conditions, the callers attire, lack of fall arrest or edge protection and the fact that access would be via a busy corridor during the school day.

The visitors stated that if they did not gain access to the roof their company would pull out of the contract. Mr A informed the callers that they were welcome to return when access was likely to be safer. The callers went to make a phone call.

Mr A then received a telephone call from a council officer who asked Mr A to "be helpful and allow the callers to go on the roof" Mr A refused and the visitors left the site. A telephone call received later cancelled the pre start meeting.

Next morning Mr A was summoned to his bosses office. The contractor had pulled out of the contract and as the next quote was some £20,000 higher than the successful quote it was likely that the leaking roof would remain that way unless a compromise could be found

It was suggested that the contractor may be willing to undertake the work if "unnecessary interference" was stopped. Mr A's boss had been led to believe by the council that they held full reponsibility for persons they were sending to the site and the school had little to worry about. Mr A attempted to clarify the situation but without much success.

Mr A was later shown a letter that was to be sent to the contractor by the council. It stated that the council would guarantee the contractor unhindered access to the site. It also informed the contractor that Mr A would not be allowed to intefere with the job and certainly would not be allowed to stop the job for whatever reason.

Mr A responed in writing to his boss over this interventaion stating that he could not accept a situation where he was being effectively sidelined. He also outlined common law duty of care, controller of premises duties and the requirements of the management regulations.

The current situation is that the tone of the letter has been toned down somewhat but it still restricts Mr A's ability to participate in contract monitoring as it pertains to the health and safety of persons on site.

Mr A's boss is considering writing to legal services for their interpretation of the situation. Mr A stands by his actions and has received reassurance that his actions were correct.

What is extremely worrying is that there would seem to be a willingness to allow a contractor to hold a large body such as a council to ransom over what are essentially health and safety issues.

Advice please

Posted By james mackie
Brian
If the risk of any of the contractors is endangering your childern,teachers, staff, equipment or visitors by their failure to use the correct equipment (fall arrest and edge protection), a phone call to the local authority or HSE from Mr or Mrs X should get things done to your satisfaction. Works every time.

PS check what the risk assessment and method statement says and find out how has approved it.

regards

Jim

Posted By Stuart Nagle
An interesting situation.

I think Mr A did the correct thing to start with.

I think the problems lay with the Local Authority who are the contractors employers at law, and not with the property occupier, who has, it seems, little choice in who is going to do the job. The fact that the contractor has indicated his willingness already to flout safety and threaten to widthdraw from the contract give an indication of the level of professionalism of the contractor - pretty low I think!!

In Mr A's position I would do the following:

1) Indicate in writing to the Local Authority his concerns for health and safety.

2) ditto the Head and education authority

3) ditto the enforcing authority

(One letter copied to all three should suffice - make sure copies go on file at the school and in Mr A's personal file - for evidence)

4) Discuss with Head the problem and lack of experience in the field of construction/roofing etc and this area lays outside your field of expertise. Quote MHSW Regs. and suggest that Local Authority appoints a suitably qualified and experienced H&S officer to cover the works.

5) Under CDM regs certain responsibilities are inherent on all parties to the works for planning, designing, carrying out the work and recording what was done and with what etc if it falls within the regulations. This includes those parties recognised at law as Client (not the school but the Local Authority) the designer (also probably the Local Authority), the contractor and any sub-contractors. This should also be drawn to the Local Authorities attention in your letter.

6) stand back and concern yourself with H&S within the premises in accordance with your job description, and get some sleep at nights

7) Ultimately the Local Authority has responsibility for this. You may indeed report issues of concern and certainly the schools interests should be represented at any meetings to establish safe working and safe systems of work for all the tasks to be undertaken on the site, how else can the Local Authority comply with it's duty of care towards the schools pupils, staff and visitors.

Stuart

Posted By james mackie
emailing managers or writing letters does not necessary stop accidents happening (particularly if they take time that is not available). Take the bull by the horns and if they attempt to start work with the potential for an accident being obvious (fall from height), take the necessary action.
Failure to do this as a person of responsibility may be neglecting your duties and could end up with you in the dock to answer questions that you may not like.

What would you do if it was one of your children walking under these potentially dangerous people?

It is often difficult to make these unpopular decisions, but that is why we get paid that bit extra, if you can't do the job, don't take the money.

regards


jim

Posted By Brett Day

Surprise, surprise the LA is going for the cheapest bidder !! You pay peanuts and you get monkeys. I've been involved in a few bids and always lost out on price because we do things safely. I can only suggest the same as above a letter circulated to all parties (dare I say it even the contractor) and in Bold type at the bottom Cc it to the enforcing body. It works wonders it makes it clear to the other parts in the council that there are serious concerns and lets the contractor know that they could well get a visit from an inspector, the good contractors have little to fear. The bad ones have been known to pull out of a job when they know the HSE could be checking up on them.