• Government Reveals Health And Safety Plans
• Kentish Town Residents In Action
• New Labour Council To Axe Health And Safety
• National Hazards Campaign Conference calls for stronger enforcement
• Centre News

Government Reveals Health And Safety Plans

Provisional figures from the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) show that fatalities and serious injuries at work rose significantly in the last year of the Tory government - when the final figures are in, the picture may look bleaker still. Workplace accidents killed 302 workers from April 1996 to March 1997, up from 258 in the previous year. Deaths were concentrated in agriculture, construction and manufacturing. The increase in major accidents was even greater; the provisional total of over 28,000 was two-thirds up on that for the previous year.

The HSE declined to offer any explanation for this deterioration which it described as "disappointing and giving cause for concern." However, it was noticeable that the rise in the total of fatalities resulted from a sharp increase in the deaths of casual workers. TUC General Secretary John Monks commented, "The rising death toll for the self-employed is especially alarming and should give pause for thought for everyone applauding greater labour market flexibility." But the TUC missed the opportunity to invite Tony Blair to pause and think when he extolled the benefits of flexible working at their conference in September.

All these developments have heightened interest in the new Government's plans for health and safety. Angela Eagle, the junior health and safety minister who liaises with the HSE, has outlined these in recent statements. It is intended to introduce a ban on the import of white asbestos towards the end of 1998 but only after the HSE has carried out a review. There will be an attempt to bring in a European Union-wide ban on asbestos. The HSE will also investigate how much it would cost to carry out a survey of asbestos in public buildings. There will be a somewhat tougher approach to law enforcement with encouragement for the courts to award bigger fines and an end to the iniquitous "minded to" system (see Daily Hazard 53). It is intended to provide more protection for home workers and self-employed workers, to review the noise regulations, focus more on occupational health and offer some protection to "whistleblowers".

All this amounts to a rather timid programme, one that is certainly a far cry from the outlook of the Hazards Charter (see Daily Hazard 55). It seems to bear the stamp of the policy makers in the HSE rather than of the ministers themselves.

The HSE has also announced its own work plan for the next year which involves a focus on dermatitis and cancer, including asbestos-related cancer, more vigorous enforcement with inspectors spending more time on company visits, assistance for small firms, a review of all guidance on legislation by Spring 1998 and the introduction of new legislation on major accident hazards.

Some commentators have surmised that the HSE has been given a free hand on policy in return for not challenging the freeze on its funding at Tory levels which will last for at least another 18 months.

A delegation from the London Hazards Centre met the Secretary of State for the Environment, Michael Meacher, who is in overall charge of health and safety in the Government. Our purpose was to make a presentation to the minister on the Hazards Charter. Meacher, who recently described the Government's spending plans as a "straitjacket", gave us a sympathetic hearing and was clearly looking for significant improvements in the standards set by the previous Government. The outlook was also reflected in the speech he intended to make at the Hazards Conference, copies of which were made available to delegates.

Meacher said that he wanted to see the introduction of a new offence of corporate killing, a position taken by health and safety spokespersons before the election. This would require new legislation and would be handled by the Home Office: he could not tell us when such legislation might be introduced because of the competing claims on Parliamentary time.

We objected to further delays in introducing an asbestos ban and Meacher clearly nudged his officials towards more speed on this. He was interested in the problems faced by safety representatives and responded favourably to our opinion that the time had arrived to strengthen the law in this area. He had positive opinions on the central role of well trained union reps.

Other topics on which we exchanged views were the Working Time Directive, no fault compensation, stress and bullying, and funding for TUC education and occupational health facilities. Overall Meacher said he wanted to see procedures with some cutting edge in terms of employers' compliance with health and safety law. He invited us to keep in touch.

Since the previous Government never let us in the door, there is obviously a very different attitude on the part of the new team. Whether this will be translated into changes of real substance is another question entirely. What can be said with fair certainty is that it will be just as necessary to campaign for improvements with this Government as it was for the last one. Workers will have to make it crystal clear that they will not accept anything less if the new Government is to fulfil its pledge to make things better.

Kentish Town Residents In Action

Residents in Kentish town are campaigning successfully over the proposed redevelopment of a polluted site in their midst. They formed the Ascham Anti-Contamination Action Group earlier this year when plans emerged for the transformation of an old electroplating works into a nursing home. The group was instrumental in persuading Camden Council to reject the first planning application though the developers, Ascham Community Care 2000, are proceeding with a second. The developers have made no effort to meet residents or respond to their concerns.

The electroplating firm has been long out of business but the original building still stands the site has not been cleaned up. The residents were initially worried by the threat of asbestos in the building and then became aware of the risks posed by heavy metal contamination of the soil. Some analysis results from the 1980s showed areas of very heavy pollution in gardens surrounding the site by metals typically used in electroplating such as nickel. It appears the developers have had their own tests done but have not released the results to the residents. However it is likely the situation hasn't changed much since the old tests were done and that the soil underneath the works is very dirty indeed. These metals can harm the development of children, among other effects.

The Action Group kicked off with a public meeting and quickly drew in over 100 supporters in the four streets affected. A representative was appointed for each street and open meetings were held weekly to build the campaign. The Group organised a petition, made contact with local newspapers and began lobbying Council planners with the aid of legal advice. Representations were also made to local councillors. Not the least of the activities was a highly enjoyable street party.

The Group demanded that the Council ensure that there was independent soil analysis and investigation of other contamination. They wanted the method statement for demolition and clearance of the site to be made public with a month's notice of the beginning of the work. The Council should exercise strong control over work on the site with adequate safeguards on such matters as waste disposal and hours of work. The Group was also critical of the plans for the nursing home intended for the site, believing it would provide sub-standard accommodation for elderly people.

The campaigners did not form a favourable view of how the planning process operated. Street representative Nandita Dowson comments, "The Council seemed to think we should be grateful to the developers. They didn't particularly consider what local people wanted."

But despite that, the Group scored a victory when the first planning application was rejected by the Council. But the developers have come back with a new application and the Group is now gearing up for this second challenge.

New Labour Council To Axe Health And Safety

Ealing Council claims that it must reduce its budget by 9.3 million during the next Financial Year and proposes to axe the health and safety budget by 30,000 as part of the process.

A Committee Report circulated for consultation in June, recommends sacking the Principal Safety Officer and reducing the Council's corporate responsibility for maintaining safety standards. The report claims that the move is in line with the Council's Safety Policy and the 1992 Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations.

Safety reps and shop stewards argued that since the Safety Policy was adopted 2 years ago, management had done nothing to improve departmental safety standards, or raise the level of health and safety training for managers, both key requirements of the Safety Policy. They warned that if the proposed cut and devolution went ahead, the safety of both employees and members of the public would be delivered into the hands of a ragbag of disorganised and ad hoc arrangements.

By September the Committee Report had been agreed by the Council's Central Management Team, consisting of the directors and the chief executive. Safety reps tabled the issue at the September meeting of the Joint Safety Committee. A few days before the meeting, UNISON obtained a copy of a further report agreed by the Central Management Team in March. This report states that the framework of the law and the Safety Policy, "suggest that line managers must take greater responsibility for health and safety than they do at present", and goes on to say, "this outcome will not be achieved in the short term and the Council would be ill advised to attempt it."

The report also contains the warning: "The non-strategic safety work could be devolved by 31/3/98 but the Council would need to satisfy itself that safety management was going to be carried out at all by line managers, let alone to a satisfactory standard. The indications are that the organisation (the Council) is not ready for this approach and that safety management would simply not be carried out. There is little evidence for example that much work activity has been subject to even the most cursory risk assessment, and this is already a defined line management responsibility and a matter of Council Policy."

In the light of this report, safety reps asked the Council what had changed between March and June, and were told quite bluntly that the Budget and the need to balance the books must come first!

Employee-side safety secretary Dave Drury said, "If this proposal goes ahead it will represent the triumph of pig headed stupidity over common sense. It seems incredible that a Labour Council is prepared to put the safety of thousands of employees, children in schools, social services clients, and all of the people who use Council buildings at considerable risk in order to save 30,000. If this is New Labour you can tell that Tony Blair he can stuff it!"

National Hazards Campaign Conference calls for stronger enforcement

The national Hazards Campaign conference, held in Bradford from 5-7 September, attracted over 300 delegates from a wide range of services and industries.

At this, the first Hazards Campaign conference under a Labour government, Michael Meacher, Secretary of State for the Environment was to attend at the last minute. However, in his prepared speech, which was circulated to delegates, he insisted that the government was determined to "promote compliance with the law through its effective enforcement, with severe penalties for those who break the law".

Nigel Bryson, national health and safety officer for the GMB union questioned whether this could be done without allocating more resources to the Health and Safety Executive. There would be no progress until money was provided to pay for more inspectors. He called on the HSE to concentrate employers' minds by using prohibition notices more extensively. He also criticised the agency's failure to publicise more effectively the improvements to safety reps' rights to information and consultation contained in the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations.

Alan Dalton, national health and safety officer for the Transport and General Workers' Union, focused on the relevance to the Hazards Campaign of wider environmental issues, for example ozone depletion and traffic fumes which increased the threat of skin cancer and asthma respectively, especially to outdoor workers. He claimed that recent research proved conclusively that tighter environmental controls on business were not a threat to jobs and called on delegates to campaign for "clean production" and compulsory independent eco-auditing of companies.

In an attempt to encourage and focus campaigning on all these issues, further discussions took place on the Hazards Charter adopted at last year's conference. Since then, the Charter has been adopted by the Manufacturing, Science and Finance Union , the Bakers, Food and Allied Workers' Union and the National Association of Probation Officers trade unions, some Trades Union Councils, the greater London Labour Party and some constituency Parties. However, discussion has been limited in many areas of the hazards movement and health and safety activists still need to address the issue of how to carry this campaign forward in a more effective manner: perhaps a stronger organising focus on two or three priority issues would be part of the answer.

Workshops on RSI, stress, working time, asbestos, asthma, manual handling, violence, bullying, chemicals, homeworking, construction, occupational health services, corporate manslaughter, sick pay and sickness absence, information finding, risk assessment and other issues allowed delegates to exchange ideas and discuss how to take matters forward.

Delegates held a minute's silence in memory of the 302 workers killed at work over the last year, including Doug Jay, a cinema projectionist and member of the Broadcasting, Entertainment, Cinematograph and Theatre Union). Doug was looking forward to attending the conference but was electrocuted at work at the end of August.

Copies of the Hazards Charter and Michael Meacher's speech can be obtained from the London Hazards Centre (s.a.e. appreciated).

Centre News

The Centre's Management Council has been strengthened recently by the addition of four new members: John Hague (NAPO), John McClean (GMB), Lynnette Rispoli (UNISON) and Barry Todman (MSF). However, we have lost one long serving member, though hopefully only for a while. Sheila O'Sullivan (AHRTAG) has gone to work in Namibia for a spell though she is still in regular contact by e-mail.

Work has begun on the Centre's next handbook, on chemical safety. Publication is scheduled for Summer 1998.

LHC Members