Rank: Forum user 
|
I'm looking for some advice please. A UK company employees swedish-based staff, to work on a Sweden based contract. When putting H&S documentation together and providing h&s training, would this be based on Swedish h&s legislation, or UK. My gut says it needs to be good enough to meet local legislation, but I just wanted to get the opinion of others please. I've read previous forums that says HSE has no jurisdiction outside the UK. Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Swedish employee on a Swedish contract working in Sweden - didn't see "UK" once in that sentence. That said there is nothing stopping the employing company having higher standards than the local minimum - just be sure anything implemented is at, or above, local minimum. Normally find the opposite argument - US corporate is not good enough for our geographic location.
|
 2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Swedish employee on a Swedish contract working in Sweden - didn't see "UK" once in that sentence. That said there is nothing stopping the employing company having higher standards than the local minimum - just be sure anything implemented is at, or above, local minimum. Normally find the opposite argument - US corporate is not good enough for our geographic location.
|
2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Thanks for this. Do you know if Swedish occupational h&s is more stringent than UK?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
From personal experience it has distinct nuances.
By example the same year the HSE worked with a UK industry body and implemented full guarding on a type of industry machinery I saw an identical machine having its first (and only) guard fitted - the country norm having been a yellow line painted on the floor (Education as primary control - treating employees as idiots a last resort). Fast forward two decades and in a different but similarly dangerous industry and it appeared only the language of the signage and procedures had changed being near identical. To some extent the natural development of many decades of EU directive (transposed to national rules e.g. our COSHH) and regulation (direct equivalence in all member states e.g. REACH/CLP) have derived a commonality.
|
2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
From personal experience it has distinct nuances.
By example the same year the HSE worked with a UK industry body and implemented full guarding on a type of industry machinery I saw an identical machine having its first (and only) guard fitted - the country norm having been a yellow line painted on the floor (Education as primary control - treating employees as idiots a last resort). Fast forward two decades and in a different but similarly dangerous industry and it appeared only the language of the signage and procedures had changed being near identical. To some extent the natural development of many decades of EU directive (transposed to national rules e.g. our COSHH) and regulation (direct equivalence in all member states e.g. REACH/CLP) have derived a commonality.
|
2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
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.