Health and safety again becomes a political football

In a major speech this month David Cameron pledged to crack down on Britain’s excessive health and safety rules and regulations which he described as “the great knot of rules, regulations, expectations, and fears that I would call the over-the-top health and safety culture”.

Cameron, in his quest for votes, surely had the wrong profession in his sights. The media which perpetuate the myth that somehow health and safety is to blame for much of society’s ills, should surely be his target for its part in falsely reporting on health and safety issues.

However, he actually highlighted an important cultural issue by announcing that something has gone seriously wrong with the spirit of health and safety in the past decade. He acknowledged that the biggest problem is the way health and safety rules are interpreted and applied, and attacked the commercialisation of lawyers’ incentives to generate litigation and the growth of ‘ambulance-chasing’. He said “Businesses, organisations and individuals operate under the shadow of the worst-case scenario. The more vulnerable they feel, the more cautiously they act – and the more stringent their health and safety processes become.”

Reaction to the speech has been varied. Brendan Barber, general secretary of the TUC said that employers were not over zealous in their application of health and safety regulation and the figure of over 246,000 people being injured at work last year indicates the opposite. He added that in the UK we had more health and safety regulation 35 years ago than we do today and regulation today is simpler and easier to understand

IOSH (Institute of Occupational Safety and Health) welcomed the opportunity to move away from a culture of blame to one that’s based on better risk intelligence and said it would welcome any serious debate about risk and responsibility.

St John Ambulance, also welcomed the debate Cameron has opened saying as it stands at the moment, there is a great deal of confusion about the regulations. All of us working in health and safety need to do more to make clear how they should be interpreted. Organisations want to do the right thing, but don’t always know how. Somehow common sense gets lost, and we end up with the stories we all see about ‘health and safety gone mad’.

For more information on risk management and for expert business insurance advice, speak to Alan Boswell Insurance Brokers on 01603 218000, or visit our web site – http://www.alanboswell.com/risk-management/

HSE Asbestos Campaign Re-Launched

Working with asbestos? Know the risks; check you are up to date with your risk management and business insurance.

Asbestos was used in hundreds of different products and buildings from the 1950’s to the mid 1980’s. Asbestos cement was used up until 1999 in a variety of different premises and materials. Any building that was constructed or had major refurbishment between the 1950’s and mid 80’s is likely to contain some type of asbestos containing material. Use of asbestos peaked in the 60’s and early 70’s – premises built or refurbished during this time are the most likely to contain some form of asbestos.

When asbestos fibres are inhaled they can cause serious diseases which are responsible for around 4000 deaths a year, the single greatest cause of work related deaths in the UK. There are four main diseases caused by asbestos:

• mesothelioma (which is always fatal) 
• lung cancer (almost always fatal) 
• asbestosis (not always fatal, but it can be very debilitating) and  
• diffuse pleural thickening (not fatal).

On 2 November 2009 the HSE re-launch their campaign “Asbestos – The Hidden Killer” and its message is very clear – take asbestos very seriously.

The Control of Asbestos Regulations 2006 came into force on 13 November 2006 and affected owners, occupiers, and managers of and those responsible for non-domestic premises. These people are referred to as “the dutyholders”. The regulations require the dutyholders to:

• Manage the risk from asbestos or place a duty on them to co-operate with whoever manages the risk.
• The dutyholder must identify if there is asbestos in the premises, the amount and its condition. (It is to be presumed that materials contain asbestos unless there is strong evidence to the contrary).
• The asbestos risk must be suitably and sufficiently assessed and a management plan prepared detailing how the risk is to be managed.
• All steps needed to put the plan into action must be taken by the dutyholder and the plan and arrangements must be reviewed and monitored.
• Anyone who is liable to work on the asbestos or disturb it must be provided with information on its location, condition and where work with asbestos is being undertaken, the enforcing authority must be notified
• The dutyholder must ensure adequate information, instruction and training is given to employees
• Every dutyholder must prevent exposure to asbestos or reduce it to as low as reasonably practicable and provide adequate personal protective equipment.

In most cases, if you are working with asbestos you will need a licence to do so.

Summing up, any work that may involve exposure to asbestos needs to be very carefully planned and carried out. Penalties for failure can be business threatening with very large fines being imposed by courts.

For more information on risk management and for expert business insurance advice, speak to Alan Boswell Insurance Brokers on 01603 218000, or visit our web site – http://www.alanboswell.com/risk-management/

Taking the Strain

The recent “Fit for Work Europe” report by The Work Foundation, a London based think tank, has found that muscle and joint pain accounts for almost half of all sick leave, both in the UK and across Europe. It concluded 49 per cent of all sick leave is caused by musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs).
The report says an estimated one million people in the UK alone suffer from MSDs that cause them to take time off work, with 9.5 million working days lost each year. It estimates that this costs the UK economy £7bn each year.

Additionally the report found over 40 million workers throughout Europe suffer from chronic musculoskeletal pain costing the European Union economy as much as £219 billion per year.

Stephen Bevan, Managing Director of the Work Foundation, states: "MSDs clearly have a serious, negative impact on the EU workforce, as they were responsible for millions of lost working days”.

Tatiana Quadrello, senior researcher at The Work Foundation, said: 'The Fit for Work study clearly suggests that early intervention is a key factor in allowing people with MSDs to remain in work.”

The Work Foundation's strain injuries report seems to highlight the need for better occupational health and rehabilitation services.

Only two per cent of UK workers have access to comprehensive occupational health services through their employer. A GP referral to a specialist, could take months, by which time the condition could be chronic and could cost a worker their job.

The Work Foundation has now launched a Fit for Work Europe campaign calling for governments and healthcare professionals across Europe to do more to tackle musculoskeletal disorders.

For more information on risk management and for expert business insurance advice, speak to Alan Boswell Insurance Brokers on 01603 218000, or visit our web site – http://www.alanboswell.com/risk-management/

Managing Risk for Work Experience Placements

John Neil, Risk Management Consultant at business insurance specialists Alan Boswell Insurance Brokers, looks at the things businesses need to think about when they take on young people as part of a work experience programme.
It's back to school time and for many year 10 and 11 students this means getting ready for work experience. These workplace visits can be a bit of a health and safety minefield for businesses...
There's a lot to think about when a child arrives at your business premises from a local school for a short period of work experience. All too often young people are involved in accidents and experience shows that they must be carefully managed and supervised whilst on a work experience placement.

One thing you may not realise is there are a few extra health and safety regulations when employing people under the age of 18 and far as health and safety law goes, students on work experience placements are employees.

The main thing to note is you must assess the risks to anyone under 18 years old before they start work experience. You must also tell the young person what these risks are.

There's no need for a new risk assessment every time someone arrives for work experience. A generic assessment covering young workers is fine, so long as it's relevant however the assessments needs to take into account the young people's "psychological or physical immaturity, inexperience, and lack of awareness of existing or potential risks."

Of course, as with all risk assessments, employers have to follow up with some control measures.

The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations include an additional requirement which prohibits the employment of young people where the risk assessment identifies harmful exposure to toxic substances, radiation, extreme cold or heat, vibration, noise, work which is considered beyond their physical or physiological capacity, or work where the risk of accidents will not be recognised by young people, because of their carelessness, lack of experience, training or awareness. There are also some specific prohibitions on the employment of young persons in certain trades or the use of particular plant and machinery.

There is one other regulation worth noting. This applies to children below the minimum school leaving age. Here, parents or carers must be told about the findings of the risk assessment and the control measures being put in place before the child starts work experience.

For more information on risk management and for expert business insurance advice, speak to Alan Boswell Insurance Brokers on 01603 218000, or visit our web site – http://www.alanboswell.com/risk-management/

Driver CPC - What is it all about?

You may have already heard murmurings about The Driver Certificate of Professional Competence (Driver CPC) which is a hot topic at present within the haulage industry. But what does it mean for fleet insurance clients?

Developed as a requirement of the EU Directive 2003/59, the Driver CPC is designed to improve the knowledge and skills of professional LGV and PCV drivers throughout their working life. This in turn should lead to safer driving, subsequently safer roads and, in theory at least, reduced fleet insurance premiums.

The Driver CPC for PCV drivers was implemented on 10th September 2008, and for LGV drivers it will be implemented on 10th September 2009.

• From 10th of September 2009, any newly licenced LGV driver must have a Driver CPC. They get this by passing the Driver CPC theory and practical tests. These are in addition to the tests they must sit to get their LGV driving licence.
  
• Anyone already licenced to drive a goods vehicle over 3.5 tonnes before 10th September 2009 does not have to sit the initial Driver CPC tests However, all LGV drivers will have to complete 35 hours of Driver CPC training every five years, or they will no longer be allowed to drive professionally.

So what should hauliers do? It would be advisable to get their drivers trained sooner rather than later because if they leave it too late, they could find there aren't enough approved Driver CPC training centres to cope with demand. As we know haulage companies can't operate without drivers.

Secondly hauliers who begin training immediately will automatically stand out: showing their customers and their fleet insurance provider that they care about the safety of their drivers and other road users.

There is a number of Driver CPC exemptions associated with the Directive. These are listed below:

• Vehicles with a maximum speed not exceeding 45 Kph
• Vehicles used by the armed forces, civil defence, and emergency services
• Vehicles undergoing road tests for technical development, repair or maintenance
• Vehicles used in states of emergency
• Vehicles used in the course of driving lessons or examinations
• Vehicles used for non-commercial carriage of passenger or goods – for personal use
• Vehicles used for carrying material of equipment to be used by the driver in the course of his or her work, providing that driving the vehicles is not the drivers’ principle activity

Ultimately, it is up the driver and their employer to decide if they are covered by these exemptions, and if necessary, justify it to the competent authority.

For more information on fleet insurance and fleet risk management, please visit http://www.alanboswell.com/.

Risk Assessments – Not interesting but very necessary

Revisiting your risk assessments could reduce accidents in the workplace by up to 75% and lead to lower business insurance premiums.

I have always stated that the most important part of any health and safety regime is the correct identification of risk and highlighting methods of control, then documenting this in the form of an easily understood risk assessment that is properly communicated to staff.

When you then pass this message on enthusiasm seems to wane, eyes roll and people seem to lose the will to live. I could talk about how risk assessments lie at the heart of all health and safety legislation and practice or about how they are a legal requirement, but instead to highlight their importance I will share with you some details of research from a major UK insurer.

Aviva took a detailed look at around 7,500 employers' liability insurance claims - incidents where someone was killed or injured at work.

In particular they wanted to know what was behind most of these cases. The thing most employers hadn't done to stop these incidents happening was “failure to carry out a proper risk assessment." This finding was attributed to 38% of all business insurance liability claims.

The next two most common failings after risk assessments were "lack of training" - found in 27% of cases - and "poor housekeeping" – found in 11% of cases.

So as you can see, despite the apparent lack of interest the words risk assessment conjure up, they are very important.

When next asked what's really important when it comes to health and safety, I'm going to say "risk assessment, training and housekeeping".

Because by Aviva’s reckoning that should cover just over three-quarters of all incidents where someone ends up losing their life or suffering an injury at work.

So probably the best piece of health and safety advice anyone can give is make sure you do your risk assessments.

For more information and advice on business insurance and risk management, please visit: http://www.alanboswell.com/business_insurance/

U K Fire Losses hit 1.3 billion

The cost of fire damage in the UK was a record £1.3bn, according to new figures from the Association of British Insurers (ABI). Commercial business insurance fire damage cost £865m, up 15% on the previous year and fire damage to homes cost £408m, up 17% on the previous year.

School fires alone cost £33m with there being at least 1 serious school fire per month.

There has been a particular increase in what are termed large loss fires (those over £500,000) and the ABI says it is researching the causes of this increase. While it says that both fraudulent arson and arson generally are factors it is not ruling out other factors such as modern materials used in construction.

The ABI have expressed serious concern over the figures stating they highlight the importance of risk management, fire insurance, and reducing and managing the fire risk.

Meanwhile the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order has just received its first official review from the Communities and Local Government department.

The general picture from this early snapshot from both enforcers and responsible persons is that the Order is bedding in well and there are many positives to take from this. The report states that all parties tend to think that the risk assessment approach is the correct one and are embracing it to a greater or lesser degree.

But the report concedes there are some areas which could benefit from further action. These include:

• raising awareness of the requirements of the Order
• consideration of more tailored advice to ‘responsible persons’
• clarification of who a ‘responsible person’ is
• clarification of who may have an appropriate level of fire safety expertise to assist with delivering compliance with the order
• ensuring fire and rescue authorities continue to take a supportive and educational approach to compliance

For more information on risk management and fire regulations, please visit http://www.alanboswell.com/

Publicans urged to review overheads as recession bites

With recent reports showing that pubs are closing their doors at the alarming rate of 39 per week, there has never been a better time for publicans to review their overheads with a view to improving profitability. The double whammy of falling sales and rising costs might seem insurmountable for hard-pressed publicans. But research shows that there’s still much that pubs can do to ensure survival in times of recession.

Attracting new customers and increasing sales is obviously important. But reducing overheads is perhaps a quicker and easier way to have an impact on the bottom line. A recent survey of 2,675 pubs by the Association of Licensed Multiple Retailers (ALMR) indicated that they spend an average of 53% of turnover on controllable costs. About 27% goes on wages and 11% on premises, excluding rent.

Publicans should take a hard look at where the money goes and see if they are getting good value. The good news is that savings are there to be had. For example, data from pub insurance specialists Alan Boswell Group has shown that pub insurance premiums have dropped by about 8.5% in the past two years. According to the broker, the average premium paid by pubs it insures is now around £1,050. That figure is about 30% lower than it was in 2005.

Jon Preston, who deals with our pub insurance scheme, commented, “There are more insurers fighting for a reducing number of pubs, and the competition in the market is more intense than ever. Publicans with a good track record and a decent claims record can expect to save money if they shop around.”

Publicans should not be tempted to skimp on insurance cover. It’s important to get the balance right; saving money simply by cutting down on your protection is a risky approach. Getting the wrong cover for your pub, or using an insurer with poor claims handling processes could finish off a business that’s been weakened by the poor economic climate. As ever, getting independent advice from a broker seems like the best route. The busy publican can effectively out-source the insurance procurement process to their insurance broker.

Slips Trips and Falls

The Health and Safety Executive has recently launched its Shattered Lives campaign to stress the serious consequences that slips trips and falls can have.

Slips trips and falls are the most common cause of accidents, accounting for around a third of major reported injuries, the biggest cause of injury to the UK workforce. Over a thousand people every month are seriously injured because of slips trips and falls from ground level alone.

Slips trips and falls can affect employees, customers, visitors and members of the public so anyone with responsibility for buildings or land should identify, assess and manage the associated risk. Those who own property and land have a responsibility to make it safe.

Compensation for slips trips and falls may not always be substantial but it will not reduce the seriousness of the injury. A similar fall may well find a young person relatively unharmed but be potentially life threatening to an older person with brittle bones.

To say that managing health and safety costs too much money will ultimately lead to higher costs in the long-term. Ensuring that significant risks are managed well is an investment well made. As the saying goes, if you think health and safety is expensive, try an accident!

At Alan Boswell Group, business insurance customers have automatic access to our in-house health and safety and risk management consultant. Please contact us for a free no-obligation business insurance consultation.

Why Do Insurance Premiums Vary So Much?

You may sometimes wonder why the premiums for property owners insurance vary so much, or even why they change mid-year in some cases. Of course, premiums do not change for no odd reason and insurance companies cannot just arbitrarily charge more during the year because they feel like it – or they are losing money on claims.

The reason for mid-term changes is invariably that something has changed; and this is most commonly the use to which your property is being put.

Insurance premiums are based on a number of factors, some of which are fairly immutable and others that can change at any time. The construction of the premises and its location can be a rating factor. For example, an old thatched, wooden barn is far more likely to burn down than a factory that is brick built with a slate or tiled roof; that is fairly obvious and will influence the amount that an insurance company needs to charge for insurance. But a building near to a waterway can also be more liable to flooding than one that is more remote; although this is not invariably the case. Therefore, again insurance costs are likely to be higher.

Premiums can also be influenced by the level of claims that have been experienced by the premises themselves, or in some cases adjoining properties. If, however, the buildings are separated from your property by a significant gap, or there is a perfect party wall - one that extends up beyond the roof line - then the experience of neighbouring property may be of less significance.

Insurance costs can be positively influenced - i.e. come down - where suitable physical protection is in place. This can include such things as fire extinguishers or automatic sprinklers, but not smoke detectors or fire alarms, which are more designed to protect human life than property - which is what fire insurance is about, after all.

The most significant 'rating factor' is, however, usually the use to which property is put. For residential landlords, this is usually relatively straightforward as there are no special factors that make the insurance much more expensive than a normal home. However, in the case of flats above commercial property, even if these are owned by someone else, it is the occupation of the commercial property - unless separated from the residential accommodation by some form of fire break - that affects the cost of insurance for the entire building.

For example, the fire risk associated with a fish and chip shop is significantly higher than that associated with a solicitors' office, or even a hardware store. The same applies to industrial premises. A building occupied for manufacturing pre-formed timber roof trusses is likely to attract a higher fire rating than premises occupied as a store for bathroom appliances. The greater the risk of fire, the higher the premium; it makes sense.

So, how might this change mid-term? The reason that things might change part-way thought the year might be that the tenant has changed and a new occupation is involved, or there is some other significant change to the risk, such as the introduction of a mobile oil-fired heater, or the addition of a sprinkler system. It is not enough to delay telling your insurance adviser until the renewal date. Changes of this nature are material facts and if you fail to notify the insurance company as soon as it happens, they could avoid paying a subsequent claim, because of a material change in the risk.

This seldom happens, perhaps, but it is always better to be safe than sorry. Obtaining landlords insurance for commercial premises is a specialised area and you should always ask your insurance brokers what experience they have of dealing in this sector.
Andrew Regan writes for a digital marketing agency. This article has been commissioned by a client of said agency. This article is not designed to promote, but should be considered professional content.

Hauliers Beware

It has been revealed that reported lorry crime has doubled over the past year, with 4,171 incidents detailed by mid-December 2008. Less than 15% of lorries stolen are ever recovered.

Organised crime is now targeting the freight industry, according to Truckpol.( Truckpol is a national intelligence unit which forms part of the national ACPO Vehicle Crime Intelligence Service, collating and disseminating statistical data and intelligence on road freight crime within the UK)

The theft of large goods vehicles and their loads causes significant economic and logistical harm to manufacturers, operators and retailers alike and the estimated cost to the UK economy is up to £250 million.

"One of the problems that we have is that when we have anything of value, that could be stolen or sold on, we have to make it secure," Don Armour, of the Freight Transport Association, told the BBC.

Alan Boswell Risk Management advises that those responsible for ensuring the safety of drivers, vehicles and loads should plan ahead, consider secure and safe parking areas, fitting tracking devices, providing adequate security training & advice, risk assessment for all drivers, as well as displaying deterrent notices on vehicles. An effective risk managment programme makes good business sense and could reduce your motor fleet insurance costs.

For further information on types of criminal activity and the latest reported incidents visit http://www.truckpol.com/

Forklift truck inspections – How often?

The Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment (Regulations) 1998 (LOLER) classify forklift trucks as lifting equipment and place a responsibility on the employer to maintain them in safe condition and ensure they are suitable for their intended use. Additionally they require a thorough examination.

Many people assume that thorough inspections are an annual requirement but that is not always the case. The frequency between inspections depends on the type of truck, how often it is used and what it is used for.

Below is a guide for inspection frequency:

• Trucks used up to 40 hours per week - Annually
• Trucks used from 41 to 80 hours per week – Every 6 months
• Trucks used over 80 hour per week – Every 4 months
• Trucks used to lift personnel such as in a basket on forks – Every 6 months
• Trucks fitted with an attachment other than a sideshift – Every 6 months
• Trucks working in arduous conditions – Every 4 months irrespective of use

Modern forklifts normally have onboard computers that record usage so anyone who inspects the truck will know how much it has been used.

So remember if your forklift truck inspector tells you that annual inspections are not adequate he may not be trying to just get more work!

For more information on risk management and business insurance, visit www.alanboswell.com