Posted By MALCOLM HAMILTON I would make some suggestion with regards to your problem. Have a look at the IOSH technical data sheet that deals with employment abroad The Scottish Further Education Unit has published guidence on general work placements it is a excelent document if you contact them I am sure they will send you a copy. They might also be able to help specifically with placements abroad. These two publications put together should give you adequate information to argue a good case against workplacements abroad. As lets face it school trips abroad are bad enought. Hope this helps Malcolm SFEU 01786 892000

Posted By Ken Taylor Here's a response from the independent sector. Presumably you have the various publications from the DfEE and the HSE on work experience. We would only want to support work experience abroad for pupils who have attained the age of 16 years. In addition to the usual procedures for school trips abroad, we require parents to sign to the effect that: they are willing for their son or daughter to undertake work experience if offered or supported by a host family (engaged through our normal procedures); they accept that this is an arrangement entered into by the pupil and not by us and that we cannot attest to the suitability of the employment or work conditions and that we will not, therefore be held liable or responsible for the arrangement and anything arising therefrom; and that they believe their son/daughter to be sufficiently mature and confident to cease the work experience if they believe the working environment to be inadequate or unsafe and to report this to the host family and to the representative of the school.

Posted By Jerry Sanderson In response to the message posted by Lisa, I am sorry if this appears petty but I felt that your comments required an answer.Far from being the easy option saying "no"is often more difficult as it requires detailed and comprehensive explanation to justify why you are preventing something from happening. It must be great to work in an environment where positive promotion of the safety profession is the overriding concern.Unfortunately in the real world this is secondary to the role of the safety professional namely ensuring that the Employer complies with legislation and is therefore protected from prosecution or civil actions.This can generally best be achieved by ensuring the employer has systems in place to protect the health and safety of employees and non employees affected by their undertaking. Where no resonably practicable method of ensuring this can be devised then it may mean saying no.This appeared to be the case with this issue which is why I asked for comments from colleagues. Forgive me if my comments appear negative but as an experienced safety professinal I was asking colleagues for constructive advice on this issue,not for someone to tell me about self promotion. Regards. Jerry

Posted By Richard I agree with Stuart. You are the professional and you cannot transfer responsibility to the parent(s), or worse to the student. Does anyone seriously believe that a young person would refuse to go on a work placement abroad because they thought it was, or might become, dangerous? Come on, this is the real world. Young people believe themselves to be totally invincible and invulnerable, and long may that continue. A placement is an employee in virtually all respects, and a risk assesment should be carried out just as for any other employee working abroad, using all the knowledge and prebvious experience available. A reasoned and professional decision should then be made, not forgetting to inform the parents of the result where applicable Richard

Posted By Stuart Nagle Ken. I read your reply with interest. A few points: 1)Why is it that an organisations such as the education sector, with the amount of clout you have, have not insisted that the agencies you use perform better in respect of; planning, H&S checks, ensuring conditions ? I would suggest that if they are acting as your agents for employment is it reasonably practicable for them to have done this !! 2) The fact that the pupils are 16 or a little over has nothing to do with. In fact, legally (as you state) there is an legal duty of care to ensure the health, safety and welfare of young people at work !! over and above the requirements for more mature workers. 3) Parents of children should be assured that these things are done, not expected to accept responsibility that you have not checked, your agents have not checked, and the testimony of another person is relied upon to say it's all OK !! Obviously, as you state, if many of the 'host' parents are running their own businesses, then information on their health and safety provisions should be available to yourselves (even through your agents), as they must also comply with the EU H&S regulations and orders...!! 4) through protection your pupils you will be protecting yourselves. If you are not doing everything so far as reasonably practicable, then you will also be found at fault in the event of an incident !! 5) given that (I assume) reasonably large amounts of cash are directed into these schemes, basic checks, pre-palnning, approved lists and audits, should, I would have thought, been part of the process. If this is not being done by yourselves or your agents or the Dpt for Education, it would appear there is rather large hole in the system that any accomplished Barrister/Lawer may be able to drive a bus through. I would urge serious consideration of reviewing the system and putting some basic checks in place. At present, to assume all is Ok is neither satisfactory or reasonably practicable !! Regards... Stuart Nagle

Posted By Stuart Nagle Ken. From your responses, I feel that you are satisfied that those you may represent within the education sector are protected adequately against prosecution in the event of an incident arising. Having directions which advise. Whilst I fully understand the arguments you put forward, they seem purely to argue for protection of the establishment, and do not seem to seek improvements for those the establishment may be responsible for, the students, which seems to show a nonchalant attitude by the establishment, albeit I am sure, untrue. I for one, as a parent of teenage children, would be concerned with the stance taken and comments, as it appears that regardless of the potential outcomes and knowing that potential for improvements could be made, certainly by the agents, (after all, they should provide a service level that is acceptable, and obviously there is room for improvement in the system.) that maintenance of the status quo protectionist stance is taken rather than looking to seek improvement. I am aware that many, such as yourself perhaps, may have work within guidlines laid down elsewhere, but this surely does not prevent or preclude individual establishments or elements going the extra mile to demand or make increased efforts to produce improved systems. I do not wish to make comparisons, but one's mind is draw to the situation in recent times concerning student deaths on organised holidays with schools. Whilst ghastly, one should reflect that disclaimers sure to have been signed for these persuits did not prevent litigation being persued through the courts. I am sure that evidentially, if an establishment had known or was aware that improvements could have been made, and not investigated, recommended, taken or warned of the inadequacies, will not go far in assisting in any subsequent legal defence should an incident occur. I know the task may be onerous, however, I am sure that parents would welcome any organisations efforts, which, I am sure in the long term would provide dividends. Stuart Nagle

Posted By Jerry Hill I am currently employed by Sussex Enterprise, the Training Enterprise Council for Sussex and part of my brief is to manage the Health and Safety for Work Experience students in East and West Sussex. Email me direct and I'll give you whatever assistance I can Regards Jerry