Rate this!
shane sweeting
Member - 4 posts
Can anyone give advise please?
I am wanting to increase the numbers of safety reps at my workplace. we only have six to cover all shifs and the area to be covered is huge and dangers varied.
I asked the management team if we could recruit more reps to train and improve safety and replace the ageing reps once they leave. I was told we have enough reps but could give names of individuals which could be given safety related tasks. I was also told that not enough commitment had been shown from staff to allow management to accept more reps. The fact we have volunteers i thought would be enough. please help.
Rate this!
Nigel DuPree
Member - 158 posts
I should get their rather cavalier response in writing as if the Corporate Manslaughter legislation doesn't focus their attention I would want to make sure my buns were covered and how do the existing Safety Rep fosuls feel ?
In addition, as an initial result of your enquirie, you did get 'permission' to put forward additional people for safety related tasks who, of course, will need extra training and if you could put forward enough names they might have to eat their words regarding lack of committment to taking health and safety issues seriously.
Although everyone is actually responsible for their own and others health and safety you would not want 'them' to get away with claiming contributory neglegence 'when' and not 'if' something happens as it surely will.
With regard to original question of max numbers of reps this would be a 'foreseeable' and 'reasonably practicable' answer in terms of adequately covering each shift and/or work areas where a large scale site where there could be marginalised or lone or remote workers.
Rate this!
Pasc Ruggiero CFIOSH, FIIRSM
Member - 49 posts
Shane,
There is something seriously wrong with a management culture that turns away free assistance! However, Safety Representatives cannot be assigned any “responsibilities” in addition to their normal employee role. They can undertake agreed “duties” but their main function is “consultation”. The 1977 and 1996 regulations apply. The former is only mandatory where unions appoint Safety Reps. However, best practice is to follow HSE guide L87.
Employees are generally only responsible for matters under there control (as this effects others).
Rate this!
Richard Thompson
Member - 6 posts
Hi Shane
I fully understand your situation. I have expirienced the same lack of interest by management, until something goes wrong. The management then soon sit - up! As in many cases, the shareholders dividends, and the cost of implementing a stronger Health & Safety culture, is in many managements opinion not a priority. It is a very great shame that some deem to analyse H & S this way.
May I suggest that you make sure all matters relating to Health & Safety are in dicument format. i.e. ( Email / memo / Faxes ) when the time come god forbid, you can then hold them to account because thw law will.
Have you got a Helath & Safety Committee? you can use this committee to carry matters through as it should br minuted!!
Best of Luck
Richard
Rate this!
shane sweeting
Member - 4 posts
Gents,
Thank you for your replies. I have the problem that the remaining safety reps are not active and would not back me up on my proposal. The management team have picked up on this. I am taking this further and intend to push it with my unions support. All I get at the moment is a" why rock the boat attitude" from union and safety reps who have been in their positions for so long that they haven't done any training or active work for years. I feel like pulling my hair out when senior reps are just seeing me as a threat and not why I am doing this.. to improve safety.
Rate this!
Craig Stuart
Member - 98 posts
Hi Shane
It would be worth speaking to your Branch Secretary or Full-time Officer. My union, the GMB, are working hard on workplace organising issues (one of the most important being Health and Safety) and I would imagine so is your union. If current representatives are not pulling their weight, then this means that the Full-time Officer has to do more 'servicing'; taking up time better spent elsewhere and I would imagine that this is not what the union wants.
You can of course see if there are any other unon members willing to take up the position of safety representative and stand them against the current postholders. This I know is difficult, but sometimes it's the only way to bring about change for everyone.
Best wishes.
Rate this!
James Larkin
Member - 6 posts
Unfortunately an increasing number of employers are taking a similar but restrictive line on the number of safety reps and the level of training they can receive. this is a result of an increasing trend towards deregulation of health and safety legislation and enforcement. It is with regret that I can sympathise with the growing apathy amongst safety reps. All this inspite of the HSE once again commenting that safety reps make safer workplaces.
Rate this!
Pasc Ruggiero CFIOSH, FIIRSM
Member - 49 posts
The HSE repeatedly pay lip service to Safety Reps. They have produced reports which demonstrate that a 50% reduction in accidents has been found when comparing similar employers, with and without EFFECTIVE worker consultation.
The HSE should be asked why have they never prosecuted under the 1977 and 1996 regulations and the additional provisions in the CDM Regs 2007(&1994)? Yes over 30 years of un-enforced legislation under a spectrum of governments/parties!!
0 (0)
