Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By Richard Beevers
Does anyone have any well known (or not so well known) examples of companies losing out on tenders/contracts following a specific H&S failure?
I know Occidental went out of buisness following Piper Alpha, but I'm looking for a good specific example of customers going elsewhere folowing an event.
Any industry/sector. I've got a very commercially aware director who'll make changes if I can prove the loss of tenders is a liklihood.
Any ideas?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Dave Skipsey
Hi Richard
I have some not so wel known examples. Our company reviewed our contractor management arrangements a couple of years ago, resulting in the introduction of a requirment of our contractors to demonstrate their management of health and safety using the CHAS scheme, A small number of contractors we were using at the time chose not to go through the assessment process, resulting in them being removed from our tender list
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Peter MacDonald
Richard
Not sure what your line of business is but in construction/demolition you must pre-qualify for most major projects these days. Just to get on the approved contractors list to pre-qualify certain critera are measured. Safety is obviously one of them. I have seen thresholds of rejection been set that any more than one RIDDOR reportable event in three years will preclude you from the approved list. (probably why this forum continously has members asking what is and is not reportable).
So the options to get on the tender lists are to maintain high levels of safety management , lie or be lucky. This system relies on everyone being honest but nevermind.
Pete
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Darren (Daz) Fraser
Hi Richard
No examples for you, but I do know that companies & some (if not all) government agencies now stipulate that tenders can only be submitted by companies that operate a quality and environmental system that is recognised and accredited to the relevant standards, and that if the H&S system is the same then that tender will be looked on in a more favourable light.
Some companies (such as us) also look on the HSE prosecution database, and if they are on there we do not even contemplate using them. All companies have to go through an approval process initially and again every 12 months.
I can IMHO see this becoming the norm rather than the exception, and those that do not bother will find it more difficult to compete.
Sorry for not being able to provide any examples, but maybe it would be worth asking this director if the company reputation was to suffer from an adverse H&S reputation would they be willing to bet they would still be able to place tenders?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Dave Wilson
MMMM,
Just because a person does not appear on the prosecutions data base does that make them good? Just haven't been visited by HSE or caught!
There is no level playing field here and the MCG and certain other major players do require you to be on an 'approved list' and as stated H&S is part of this "approval" but it is crap!
At the end of the day its about the folding green stuff and if you think differently then my fellow friends you are not in the real world
However I really think that this is now getting beyond a joke, we fill in at least and mean at least 600 of these a year and employ a person just to do it.
CHAS / NAT Brit/ UDVB / EXOR / TiVA etc etc got em all but " sorry have to fill ours in!" It does my head in and some is making a few quid at it.
I had my H&S Policy rejected because I had the wrong date for new noise regs!!! Some jobsworth eh! Must have got the clown suit on with nose attachement!
Not good start to week for me!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Catman
Dave
Could not agree more.
The big players need to remember the consequences of their policies on their subbies.
We need a standardised approach as we are still drowning in paperwork, which all asks basically the same questions in different ways.
I thought the goal (in CDM2007 as well as generally) was to get things done safely with less bureaucracy, not to see how many subbies we can turn away/make jump through hoops.
Assessing competence is worthwhile and necessary, ticking boxes and proving how much you can savage smaller, less well resourced businesses with your insightful and detailed review of their safety policy is not.
Competence assessment should not principally be a guard dog to keep small businesses out, it should be a management tool to safely bring them in.
Cheers
TW
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Richard Beevers
Thanks to all so far in helping. I've come from an engineering/construction back ground, but now find myself in the world of the voluntary sector.
For tenders in this workld, H&S criteria are only just coming in; like constuction 20 years ago. There are no traditional standards like OHSAS18000 used, and I've got only construction based examples of loss of contracts. Tendering processes are very competitiv, but H&S seems to currently be a token gesture. I can see that swiftly changing.
I could really do with something less high risk as my director is"Oh, of course that happens in building, but we're different....."
Ideas?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.