Lord Youngs Legacy Lives On

Despite the fact Lord Young, the peer appointed by the present government to change the way safety is managed, resigned some weeks ago, it appears that the political will to follow guidance laid down in his report “Common Sense, Common Safety” shows no sign of abating.

Not only has the government announced that Business Minister Mark Prisk, is to see through reforms a back bench MP Christopher Chope – Conservative for Christchurch has sponsored six bills as a show of support for Youngs proposals. The appointment and timing of such measures demonstrates the wide spread support among the Government for a review of health and safety.

The six bills that received their first reading in October are:

The Health and Safety at Work (Amendment) Bill which wishes to separate play and leisure from work based activities.

The Compensation (Limitation) Bill which wants reform of civil litigation particularly the way in which legal costs are recovered.

The Health and Safety Consultants (Qualifications) Bill which wants to introduce minimum qualifications for those acting as health and safety consultants. This has already been adopted to some extent by significant health and safety bodies with a voluntary register being introduced from January 2011 which will be managed by the HSE.

The Low Hazard Workplace Risk Assessment Exemption Bill which wants to exempt employers producing risk assessments for low hazard workplaces.

The Reporting of Injuries Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulation Bill which wants to reduce current reporting requirements

The Self Employment (Risk Assessment Exemption) Bill to exempt the self employed in low hazard work from producing written risk assessments. (Although the self employed do not have to produce written risk assessments)

The bills will not be printed until nearer the second reading although the Reporting of Injuries etc. Bill is scheduled for debate before the end of 2011.
Private members bills very rarely become statute law, but as these have been presented health and safety reform is still very much in the Governments sights. However until any of them make the statute book the phrase “keep calm and carry on” springs to mind as of yet nothing has changed.

For more information on health and safety at work, risk management and business insurance, speak to Alan Boswell Insurance Brokers on 01603 218000 or visit our website – http://www.alanboswell.com/business-insurance/

Stress – A problem about to explode?

Stress as defined by The Health & Safety Executive is “The reaction people have to excessive pressures or other types of demands placed on them. It arises when they worry that they cannot cope.”


In other words, stress occurs when the pressures on a person exceed their ability to deal with them and the repercussions of work related stress have been highlighted in various recent research reports.


"Stress at work" commissioned by the British Academy to evaluate the current state of research on work related stress concluded that work related stress is getting worse against the background of the economic crisis, cost cutting and Lord Youngs, the government health and safety “Czar”, views on low risks. 


Professor Chandola the reports author stated work related stress is a common determinant of mental disorders, cardiovascular disease and heavily linked to sickness absence. The professor went on to explain that since 2009 there has been a sharp rise in job strain and job insecurity both determinants of work related stress. Poor support and bullying also appears to have increased.


This theory was echoed by Professor Sir Michael Marmot, lead author of the Whitehall II study of civil servants who said “fair employment” is key to tackling the stress problem.


The Trades Union Congress (TUC) biennial poll of safety reps showed nearly two thirds highlighting stress as a top five problem faced by the workforce. After stress bullying and harassment was the second most common. Overwork, listed separately for the first time, came in fifth.


Stress appears more prevalent in the public than private sector with 68% saying it was a problem as opposed to 54%. This is backed up by a survey by the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development which found that stress is the most common cause of persistently high long term absence.


The TUC believe a reason why stress is not being prevented is because too many employees put it in the “too difficult” box. Brendan Barber, TUC General Secretary, said there is a clear solution, risk assess, identify the stressors and put controls in place. He also suggested that lack of enforcement is also a barrier to improving the situation with employers being well aware that the chances of a prosecution for not tackling stress are almost nil.


Barber believes we are facing a ticking time bomb that could have a devastating effect on us all, saying we need to reduce stress levels before it becomes a 21st century epidemic.



For more information on health and safety at work, risk management and business insurance, speak to Alan Boswell Insurance Brokers on 01603 218000 or visit our website –http://www.alanboswell.com/business-insurance/

HSE and TUC at odds over workplace inspections?

"Scandalous" was the cry of Brendan Barber, General Secretary of the Trades Union Congress (TUC) after their biennial survey of safety reps revealed that almost half (49 per cent) of workplaces in the UK have never been visited by a health and safety inspector. This is despite evidence that inspection and enforcement activity, according to the TUC, is the most effective way to ensure that employers comply with health and safety laws.

The survey also revealed that:

• Nearly 1 in 10 of those questioned said the last health and safety workplace inspection was more than 3 years ago
• A further 15% indicated it was between 1 and 3 years ago
• 27% said their workplace was visited within the last 12 months

In small companies employing fewer than 50 people, only 16 per cent have had a workplace safety inspection in the last year. Even among large workplaces, with more than 1000 workers, only a third have been inspected within the last 12 months.

In 2009 on the launching of its strategy “Be part of the solution” the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) pledged that enforcement would remain at the heart of their approach, which the TUC see as not happening.

Statistics for 2009/10 just released by the HSE show 9,734 enforcement notices were served, an increase of 20% over the previous year but prosecutions dropped by 6% to 1,026.

Countering the TUC argument the HSE said it measures progress by the reduction in numbers of people killed or injured at work. It did not set targets for enforcement or the number of inspections.

While the HSE acknowledged that the possibility of inspection and the threat of legal action play an important part in improving safety in the workplace, it emphasized that “in the majority of workplaces, it is leadership and workforce involvement that create the right safety culture, not fear of the law, or the regulator.”

The spokesperson concluded: “The investment we make in advice, support and information for employers and workers about how to manage workplace risks in a pragmatic, common sense and proportionate way is valued by those in the workplace and it has played an important part in helping make Britain one of the safest places to work in the world.

Despite being one of the safest places in the world to work more than a million workers are currently suffering from an illness or injury caused by their work, and in 2009 over 30 million days were lost due to work-related sickness absence. This time off work cost employers an estimated £3.7 billion - yet much of this could have been prevented if they had ensured their workplaces were safe.

The TUC are worried that the recent cuts in government spending will result in less activity by the HSE, which in turn may lead to deterioration in the accident and illness statistics. The HSE seem to be putting emphasis on advice support and information, in addition to visits.

Denning QC once said “as people get wiser, standards go up” and perhaps the additional advice support and information given out by the HSE will make people wiser and thus more able to manage their risk better.  However together with the threat of enforcement, as people should be well aware of accident reporting by now, this joint approach may well work, unfortunately it’s a case of wait and see.

For more information on health and safety at work, risk management and business insurance, speak to Alan Boswell Insurance Brokers on 01603 218000 or visit our website – http://www.alanboswell.com/business-insurance/

Motorhome Self-drive Hire Insurance Options and Checklist

This week, we came across a lively discussion on the Pistonheads forum about the various options for motorhome self-drive hire insurance for a new venture.  You can see the discussion here:

• http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&f=92&t=918594&mid=0

As you will see, we get a mention!

Key points to check
Reading that thread made it clear to us that some people are unsure about what to consider when looking for this kind of insurance.  So, here are a few things we think should be checked:

1. Will the policy cover damage to the motorhome arising from cooking and heating?
2. Will the policy cover the risk of theft of a motorhome by the hirer?
3. Will the policy cover motorhomes both on hire and when parked at your premises or elsewhere (“off hire”).  Some insurances only cover the motorhomes when out on hire.  When you take out such a policy, you may need to arrange separate cover when the vehicles are “off hire” and parked at your premises.  Always check this aspect before accepting a quotation.
4. Will the policy also provide “social domestic and pleasure use” for named employees/family members – typically the proprietor(s) or directors.  Generally there should be no extra charge for this. 

My business is seasonal, why do I have to pay when my motorhomes aren’t on hire?
The premiums quoted on an annual policy reflect the underwriters’ assessment of the risk over the whole year (including when the motorhomes are parked at your premises).  This is not a “rip-off” – clearly most accidents will occur when a vehicle is on hire so any insurer that is being paid only to cover the “risky periods” would have to charge proportionately higher premiums.

Annual versus pay-as-you-go?
We much prefer annual policies because we want to build a long term relationship with our clients and - like our business insurance clients - we like to know that we have a consistent income stream.  Short term policies generally mean higher administration costs for everyone.

Our annual policy works best for businesses that have a sound business plan and intend to maximise their hiring activity.  The more you hire out your motorhomes, the better value the insurance will be.  A daily-rated or “pay as you go” policy will generally work out to be much more expensive if your business is successful.  Some “pay as you go” schemes also require that the operator uses their computer software systems, which puts off many people.

In order to help businesses smooth out the cost of their insurance, and budget properly, most brokers and insurers can offer financing arrangements to allow payment in monthly instalments.

Why are you buying insurance?
Increasingly, business insurance customers tend to focus on price.  This is perhaps understandable: economic times are tough and firms need to watch their expenditure.  The problem with always looking for the cheapest option can be that you simply ignore the question of value for money.  If you only want the cheapest possible insurance, why bother with comprehensive cover at all?

A prime consideration should be the claims service your insurer will be providing.  The success of your motorhome hire business will depend on your very expensive vehicles being available for hire.

You need to be sure that the insurer you choose understands the specialist nature of repairs on these motorhomes.  Will your insurer authorise claims quickly and make a fair offer in the event of a total loss?  The availability of a decent legal service to recover uninsured losses is also essential.

Ask for references
A badly handled claim or a gap in your cover could ruin your business.  Don’t entrust someone with your insurance business without first checking out their credentials.  Why not ask your peers for their advice or request references from similar firms?

Free advice on a range of business insurance needs
It’s useful if the insurance broker you choose can support your business in areas other than just your motor insurance.  You may need help and advice on other insurances and risk management services.  For example, you will probably need public liability insurance to cover your business premises if people come there to pick up or drop off motorhomes.

For more information
You can get more information about motorhome self-drive hire insurance facility on our website:

• http://www.alanboswell.com/business-insurance/commercial-motor-insurance/self-drive-hire-insurance/self-drive-motorhomes.aspx

The “frequently asked questions” section can be found here:

• http://www.alanboswell.com/business-insurance/commercial-motor-insurance/self-drive-hire-insurance/self-drive-hire-faq-motorhome.aspx

Striving for safer construction sites

On September 17th an agreement was signed between The HSE and the Building Control Alliance (BCA) to help it spread the message about health and safety in the construction industry, especially to hard-to-reach small sites. The agreement commits both parties to work more closely together particularly in providing advice to the construction industry.

The BCA is an umbrella group set up to represent building control professionals with responsibility for inspecting building works to ensure duty-holders are compliant with Building Regulations and the professional bodies that accredit them. They work in the local-authority and private sectors as Approved Inspectors. The HSE therefore believes these professionals are in an ideal position to promote the message "health and safety at work" on site.

The roles of each group are clearly set out in the agreement and it is clear that building control professionals will not be used as a replacement for HSE inspectors visiting sites. The HSE stated that “The aim …..is to improve the number of construction sites who receive life-saving advice on health and safety. We want to increase the standards of health and safety across the industry, especially with the smaller temporary sites, which can be hard to reach. This move is absolutely not about reducing the number of inspections that HSE carries out.”

Any matter creating a risk of serious personal injury, or ill health to workers or the public, which comes to the attention of building control professionals, is defined as a matter of evident concern (MoEC). Where such matters come to their attention on sites they are visiting they should bring them to the attention of the person in control of the site where they are able to do so. If they cannot do so or consider this is inappropriate or where the response to such an approach is not satisfactory they should report the MoEC to HSE, providing HSE is the relevant enforcing authority.”

Building control commenting on the HSE agreement described it as a “safety net”, stating the facility for their members to give feedback on issues relating to health and safety if they come across them is a “logical step”. The HSE see it as a “further example of how everyone involved in the construction industry can spread the health and safety message”.

Hopefully the closer working relationship between the HSE and The Building Control Alliance will over time help make building operations safer by reinforcing the health and safety message to a broader spectrum of people engaged in construction and thus leading to a reduction in the number of fatalities and accidents.

For more information on health and safety at work, risk management and business insurance, speak to Alan Boswell Insurance Brokers on 01603 218000 or visit our website – http://www.alanboswell.com/business-insurance/

Arson – A Perennial Problem

Fire, whether malicious or otherwise, is one of the most serious risks to the health and safety of individuals and the question of its alleviation should be foremost in the mind of any health and safety professionals.

The Fire Protection Association (FPA) says that arson has become the single most frequent cause of fire in buildings of all kinds. According to the FPA one of the biggest problems is the public perception of arson as they see it as a crime against property and not so much a problem as after all the insurer will pay. In other words they fail to link arson with the misery and suffering it can cause.

Each week in the UK, on average:

• there are over 2,000 arson attacks 
• two people die in arson fires 
• arson causes over 50 injuries 
• twenty schools and colleges are damaged or destroyed by arson  
• three hundred and sixty businesses and public buildings are damaged or destroyed.

Arson fires tend to be more costly than accidental fires because they are set with the aim of causing the maximum amount of damage. Arson costs insurers more than £1 million a day, and uninsured losses increase this cost considerably.

Your fire risk assessment should always include a section on the threat of a deliberate fire and include measures on how this threat is combated. The significance of the threat may depend on the business you work for, the people you employ and the area where the building is situate. Poor employee relations can also be problematic.

Protecting against arson is not just about installing expensive and elaborate security; it is also about organisational management of the site. Arson is primarily an opportunistic crime and we should endeavour to take that opportunity away from the would be arsonist. A correctly formulated risk assessment should achieve this.

It is a known fact that in economically trying times the risk of arson increases so no matter how remote you may think your own risk of suffering an arson attack is, it may be advisable to re-visit your fire risk assessment and re-evaluate the risk.

Arson poses a threat to people, property and the environment so try to ensure that you do not become just another statistic.

For more information on fire risk assessment, risk management and business insurance, speak to Alan Boswell Insurance Brokers on 01603 218000 or visit our website – http://www.alanboswell.com/business-insurance/

To Grit or Not to Grit? That is the Question.

Although we are all enjoying a long warm summer, with little thought at present being paid to the forthcoming cold dark days of winter, just to cheer us all up The Daily Telegraph has resurrected the old chestnut about legal liability from gritting beyond your properties boundaries. On Monday 26th July the newspaper reported that “The Institution of Occupational Safety and Health (IOSH) gave a warning that clearing and gritting the pavement could lead to legal action if somebody was injured.”

The original misrepresentative article appeared in The Sunday Telegraph and The Mail on Sunday in January earlier this year, quickly followed by articles in The Sun and The Daily Express. When the true facts materialised the latter two newspapers published retractions.

The true fact is that this was not the position adopted by IOSH then and is not the position adopted by IOSH now. IOSH urges businesses and communities to be good neighbours and do the right thing by clearing snow and ice from beyond their own boundaries and make sure that the task is carried out thoroughly. It is the object of health and safety to protect life and limb, not endanger it, so there is next to no risk of a public liability claim against your business insurance for clearing an icy path.

IOSH who have published the original story and rebuttal on their website have again expressed frustration at the new article which again misrepresents their comments.

IOSH is at present working closely with Lord Young as he undertakes his review into the growing risk aversion and fear of being sued in this country. It is to the benefit of everyone that sensible health and safety decisions are correctly made to the benefit of all.

Everyone agrees that excessive fear of litigation is contributing to bad health and safety decisions and such reporting does little to remove this fear. Still have the press have ever let the truth get in the way of what they think is a good story?

For more information on risk management, public liability insurance and business insurance, speak to Alan Boswell Insurance Brokers on 01603 218000 or visit our website – http://www.alanboswell.com/business-insurance/