Risks must be eat in the workplace
Page 38
Page 39
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Health and safety ....among drive
COMMERCIAL transport drivers are no strangers to traffic laws and regulations. No one can drive at all, let alone professionally, without some understanding of the risks in an accident — to the driver, to any passenger, to pedestrian and to property owners fronting roads. The Health and Safety at Work etc Act, 1974, supplemented such familiar legislation as the Road Traffic Acts and the Construction and Use Regulations, so far as the driver and his employer is concerned. It would be very convenient if there existed a handy, concise guidebook telling transport workers, and managers, precisely where they stand with regard to Health and Safety rules. It is unlikely, I think, that any definitive reference book will be published for some time. It is easy enough for legislators to churn out Acts of Parliament, but complex legislation takes a long time to seep down until it is thoroughly understood — at least in spirit — and accepted by everyone as sensible.
Long before there was a
Health and Safety Act the responsibilities of employers were defined to a considerable extent in the Factories Act and the Offices, Shops and Railways Premises Act, and in what is termed -common law". Where the law is concerned with premises, which can be measured for size, window area, lighting efficiency, ventilation, safe access and egress, etc, managers and workers can readily learn about the legal requirements.
But when we come to look at the lorry driver and the bus or coach driver, the "'place of work", at least for some hours each day, is mobile. The driver is his own master for much of his time. If he is a self-employed owner-driver he must shoulder both the employer's and the employee's responsibilities for health and safety. Generally, the worker's responsibilities under the Health and Safety legislation are greater when the workforce is small.
A large firm can afford to employ specialist personnel and safety officers who can organise instructional courses; the owner of a small firm cannot do so. To him, the Health and Safety at Work Act is likely to have been yet another piece of vexatious legislation which he could well have done without.
But an attitude of hostility to Health and Safety legislation, which was designed to help both sides of industry, and the public at large, is surely unreasonable. The employer wants his workers to perform efficiently, and safety is one large element in this. Absence through injuries at work or through avoidable sickness, is costly.
Many hauliers already have agreed arrangements with their staff for regular medical checks. There is not much published evidence about the normal health risks of driving, but it is sometimes claimed that minor ailments such as haemorrhoids (piles) are induced by prolonged sitting, and drivers who do not, in their leisure hours, take ough exercise, may be rr predisposed to heart attack5 London Transport givi medical examination to crev the age of 50, repeated at 56, 59, 62 and then at 6 recent agreement with TGWU calls for retirement driving at 68.
We have seen the rei concern of the Secretary Transport that everything sible should be done in country in the movement storage of hazardous prodi Health and Safety legisla has always tended to focui the more dangerous job mining, quarrying, iron steel manufacture, constru nal building trades, etc EVE ally, there will be codes of r tice for most industries probably, for most sector transport.
Already, the legislation, environmental aspects of are leading to safer and r comfortable driving cabs, physical work of the driver the road, is being easec improved vehicle and seat pension techniques. Vibra damping, and cab sot proofing are seen to be noi and necessary requirements
Cab amenities and ric comfort contribute to dri, performance and health, so concern drivers and emplo) The Bostrom company.. naturally studied the cab vironrnent. It claims ther strong evidence that after SE hours exposure to noise vibration in a truck there significant increase in a drit accident-proneness.
In a survey of 100 goods drivers, 28 sufferedl ear troubles, 18 complaine back trouble and 15 stiff( "aches and pains-. The attributed these complaint the nature of their job and least to the design and struction of the lorry cab.
Whenever a particular ha arises in industry, inspectoi the Health and Safety Exect can require effective action t
n t remedy the position. rly designed cabs were .ate by drivers for many s a d they must have conled to much avoidable ill. 0 e would expect vehicle )ne s to respond in future to er ttitudes, particularly n upported by medical ion omprehensive surveys hint on the safety of worpr ctices and the working ro ment — including cle cabs — may well be a ire of trade union claims re ling.
eca se the H and S legislais most easily applied to
s it is likely that it will a I rger part when vehicles 3ct ally off the public higha d within an industrial Bu there would seem to be of "grey areas-. Roadwork ng vehicles could be in an istr al context at work hel
1 ith road surfacing, or :ret ng.
he ealth and Safety Act is idy being invoked by drivers ye ing beer, wines and ts o public houses. Often, ng the products to the celinv Ives some hazard to the vs concerned. They are .3r uressure from police and fic wardens to minimise pi g times in busy streets, thy cannot afford to take 3 o costly damage to the les cases, crates or kegs. ce the risks of crushed
and toes. ow of one company staff insisted on getting ector along — the local les work in conjunction e Health and Safety ssion — to confirm that a lar delivery required a three men, and not the wo employed by this y.
not very fruitful, in my o speculate on which piece of legislation covers "grey area' incidents, or even quite normal working practices in particular places.
The only sensible method of approach is to apply a safety philosophy at all times. The Health and Safety at Work Act under Regulations introduced in 1976, gives specific powers to recognised trade unions to appoint safety representatives from among employees; many companies have already established safety committees, with defined terms of reference.
Consider the vexed question of vehicle headboards. Every year there are a number of tragic deaths to lorry drivers when loads move forward through the cab with often fatal results to the driver. Does it matter a fig if the design characteristics of the headboard, or the load restraint devices employed, are made more stringent by pressure from a safety committee, or through the RHA or FTA or a trade union? What matters is that action is taken quickly.
I was glad to learn from Mr Norman Sanders, senior safety training adviser to the RTITB,. that a five-day course on Load Safety is being arranged by hgv driving instructors. He reminded me that in the field of chemicals transport, group training associations and some specialist tanker operators have already established driver training courses. More care is now taken to ensure that forklift drivers are well trained.
Mr Sanders raised the question of truck rental, and in particular the duty of suppliers of vehicles. Section 6 (1) of the Act lays down very specific requirements for -any person who designs, manufactures, imports, or supplies any article for use at work(and this presumably includes a rented vehicle).
It is necessary to ensure -so
far as reasonably practicable'' that the article is safe and "without risks to health when properly used"; the supplier may have to test and examine the article and supply adequate information and details of any conditions necessary to ensure operation is safe and without risk to health. There is much more besides, certainly enough to suggest that drive-yourself vans, for example, should bear a clear notice about the safe capacity load permitted.
It is true that S.6, Sub-para 8 permits the supplier to transfer to the user responsibility for ensuring proper use and maintenance, but it is possible to imagine some difficult matters of responsibility. Ropes could be new, and quite strong enough to restrain a particular load, but whose pigeon is it if loading hooks are sub-standard, and fracture?
Suppose a driver has an accident in which a vehicle defect is alleged. In what circumstances would that driver's safety representative be entitled to visit the scene of the accident, along with the transport manager or fleet engirieer? And what status will safety representatives have in a roadside incident, vis-a-vis the police?
I suspect that most transport managers would look askance if a safety representative sought permission to visit the scene of
an accident far from the depot, but some accidents — such as an allegedly careless trailer coupling — are a -sackingmatter.
The police take some time to become accustomed to new features of law, such as the safety representatives set up under the Health and Safety Act. Certainly, one would expect the police to give no more help to the safety rep than to the employer concerned; perhaps rather less, initially.
I believe that the Health and Safety at Work etc Act provides abundant opportunities for the trade unions to press for more stringent safety standards.
Often, practices which are risky, and which would be made less risky by purpose-designed vehicles with more built-in safety features to assist loading, are tolerated by drivers as part of the challenge of the job.
But as more statistics become available in particular industries using road transport which. pinpoint risk areas, we can expect joint pressure from managers and driving crews progressively to eliminate avoidable risks. A joint approach to safety consciousness is desirable because undue pressure from the trade unions could hugely inflate operational costs and, pressed to the limit, make some transport operations uneconomic.
• by John Darker