Enforcement notices had to be issued to one in five construction sites visited by the HSE during its latest health and safety crackdown.
Practices were so poor that the month-long random inspection of 1,748 repair and refurbishment sites resulted in 360 sites being issued with enforcement notices.
In addition, 40% of all sites visited (691) failed health and safety spot-checks, exhibiting poor standards and dangerous practices. Many of the issues uncovered by inspectors could have been easily prevented with simple, straightforward management and planning, said the HSE.
A total 313 prohibition notices and 235 improvement notices were issued during the crackdown. The focus was on health risks, and 35% of the notices served were for issues such as management of asbestos, failure to control exposure to harmful dusts, noise and vibration, and insufficient welfare.
Failure to provide basic safety measures for people working at height was the most common issue identified, accounting for 42% of enforcement notices, followed by failure to control dust (12%), insufficient welfare (12%), and asbestos (10%).
12% of the HSE’s enforcement notices were for failure to control dust
This site was closed immediately
HSE’s chief of construction, Philip White, said: “These results show that whilst the majority of employers in the refurbishment sector are getting it right, a significant part of the industry is seriously failing its workers. The inability to properly plan working at height continues to be a major issue, despite well-known safety measures being straightforward to implement. It is just not acceptable that inspectors had to order work to stop immediately on over 200 occasions because of dangerous practices.”
He continued: “We also find health is often overlooked as its implications are not immediately visible, however the effects of uncontrolled exposure to deadly dusts such as asbestos and silica can be irreversible. We urge industry to ensure the most basic of measures such as use of protective equipment and dust suppression methods are put in place to help protect the future health of workers. We need to continue to educate industry through initiatives like this and encourage a change in behaviour on small projects where over half the industry’s fatal accidents still occur and many workers become seriously ill.”
Steve Murphy, general secretary of trade union UCATT commented: “These findings are simply appalling. Time after time employers are putting workers in danger. The HSE inspections only touch a tiny fraction of construction sites and most construction workers never see an HSE inspector unless a major accident has occurred.”
He added: “The HSE are uncovering basic and straightforward safety breaches. It is imperative that far greater emphasis is applied to uncovering dangerous construction practices and prosecuting the guilty. Construction employers will never improve safety unless they fear being caught.”
I’m astonished at the previous comments. If a workman is working unsafely on your site, it’s your responsibility and that’s part of your job.
Mark Whelan I’m equally astonished by your comment. Grahame seems far more objective. Prosecutions need to understand this, and I’m sure some do.
Workers have an equal responsibility for health and safety. It is not good enough for Steve Murphy to only blame the employers.
Prosecute the individual workers for putting themselves and others at risk. Unless individuals are prosecuted the employers will fight a losing battle. Every time the employer gets blamed for the failings of individuals despite site inductions, training, issuing yellow cards, time out etc. Get to the root and prosecute the individuals who don’t care.
It is about preventing accidents from happening and this needs behavioural change from the workforce. It is the individual’s responsibility for working safely and to ensure that their actions do not harm others as well as the employer’s responsibility. All I am saying that if the worker decides to work unsafely despite all the training and inductions than he should be prosecuted as well. This way it will help bring about a behavioural change.
There is truth in the arguments of both sides. It is not all nasty employers, it is not all stupid men, but a few of each can spoil it for all of us. Just think of the charges for intervention though!
The loo on a wall is a classic.
This is the very reason we set up the safecontractor assessment business.