NEWS Issue 1
2021
Enforcement visits: Without teeth, can the HSE clamp down on Covid infringements?
Also inside this issue Get to know your new FAAM Registrar Asbestos 2020 in review The Annals of Work Exposures and Health & FAAM An official publication of
NEWS Issue 1
2021
Contents 01 Welcome to FAAM News from Past Registrar, Martin Stear 06 Meet the Member, Jonathan Mackay 07 Get to know your new Registrar, Jonathan Grant 09 Asbestos 2020 in review 11 Asbestos 2020 Mock Trial, what they said... 13 Enforcement visits: Without teeth, can the HSE clamp down on Covid infringements? 17 OH2021 Advert 18 The Annals of Work Exposures and Health & FAAM
Welcome to I have now finished my tenure as Registrar of FAAM, with Jonathan Grant your newly elected Registrar for at least the next 3 years. It has been an honour to be FAAM’s first registrar, from the dawn of an idea to now a successful professional body. I have no doubt that Jonathan will bring renewed vigour to the role as FAAM continues to grow and develop. However, before I sign off, I want to again talk about the importance of our role as asbestos professionals. Asbestos is the biggest cause of occupational disease that the UK has ever seen or ever likely to see, but despite everything we have learned and put in place over the last few decades, we are still getting it wrong at times. There are still too many instances of poor advice being given, whether this results in a failure to prevent or minimise
risk, or results in unnecessary and costly actions being taken. This comes in part down to our ability to assess risk or at least our ability to convey risk to those who seek advice. This is the focus of my article. I recently received a call from a member of the public who was very concerned about his potential exposure to asbestos. He told me that he had found a piece of asbestos insulating board (AIB) in his garden, which he confirmed through testing. Given he said it was small enough to sit on the end of a garden trowel, I do not know what caused him to believe it contained asbestos. Whilst he was vague about the exact circumstances as to how it got there, it seems he had purchased some top soil at some point. His concern was not the soil but that in carrying the piece of AIB, he had somehow contaminated the
Follow us on social media! @BOHSWorld @BOHSWorld BOHS Head Office 5/6 Melbourne Business Court, Millenium Way, Pride Park, Derby, DE24 8LZ +44 (0) 1334 298101 | membership@bohs.org | www.bohs.org The views expressed in this issue are not necessarily those of the BOHS Council
@BOHS @BOHSWorld @BOHS Video
FAAM News fleece he was wearing and in turn contaminated his house. How do you deal with this? Two options, dismiss any potential, telling him no asbestos was transferred to his fleece and, therefore, none was transferred to his house or, alternatively, take a more scientific approach, explaining that theoretically a few fibres could have found their way into his house, but the risk would be so low as to be meaningless. I recall saying any potential risk was ‘nil’. There is no safe level I hear you scream, but there is a level upon which we can say the risk is so small that it is trivial or in effect ‘nil’. I took the latter approach, explaining that we all have asbestos in our lungs, its all around us at very low levels etc. and, therefore, any fibres that entered the house are unimportant. This did not reassure him. He wanted the first option, even if he did not realise it when he contacted me. The problem was that he did not want to deal with fibres getting into his house as he (as he admitted to me) couldn’t deal with the idea of them being there. He was dealing not with risk but with presence. It escalated, to the point that if I said, ‘well even if some fibres got in and you were exposed’, your risk is less than a chance in a million. He now had
Martin Stear Past Registrar of FAAM
a number and started to expand on the bit he had found; what if more fibres had got in his house from his garden, would it go to 1 chance in a 100,000 or 1 chance in 10,000. He got hung up on the numbers. It got to the point after weeks of email exchange that he then started to think about more asbestos fibres in the soil, worms bringing them to the surface, his children standing on the fibres and walking them into the house.
Unhappily, asbestos enjoys an image, sadly peddled by the media, of almost poison likely qualities. It is a horrible material and if a time machine were available to us, no doubt we would all go back and have a word with the key protagonists. It is quite possible that whatever I have said would not have reassured him and trust me I tried plenty of approaches to explain risk and the trivial nature
of what he was describing. Unhappily, asbestos enjoys an image, sadly peddled by the media, of almost poison likely qualities. It is a horrible material and if a time machine were available to us, no doubt we would all go back and have a word with the key protagonists. For what we do as asbestos professionals, we need to have a deep understanding of risk and what needs to be done to manage it. Going back to this example, I can imagine readers wondering whether the soil should have been tested, given the piece he found. As I have said, he was vague about the soil and I suspect he did not want to tell me the full story, but he kept reiterating that there was no evidence of any more material. This is not really the point of this example, but rather how his perception of risk from asbestos was so skewed.
I was also contacted by a gentleman from America this year, who openly admitted to “having OCD when it comes to asbestos”. He visited a friend’s home and noted that the friend had had some work done. It seems he was not concerned at this time, but only later when he wondered if the work had disturbed asbestos. Whether or not, he said no work was taking place when he visited. As he was concerned, he took samples from his clothing and sent them for testing by electron microscopy, one of which was positive for asbestos. Not only that, the single fibre found was tremolite asbestos. Given his existing obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD) and hence why he tested in the first place, he was very concerned.
The point is that as asbestos professionals we need to know when to dismiss / reassure and when to advise action.
The point is he asked whether he should do more testing of his clothes and testing of his home as he did, in his mind, take some asbestos home? I vehemently said no more testing. The tremolite asbestos fibre may have come from the visit to his friend’s house or could be explained by any number of reasons. My point to him was that in terms of risk, the result is no more than a
curiosity. He did not see any works taking place at his friend’s house and he had no knowledge of asbestos being disturbed. I doubt any further testing would have found anything but if it did, it would simply have been heightened his fears. As I have said, asbestos is treated like a poison by the illinformed. As the first gentlemen admitted, it is simply presence that concerns him, rather than likely risk. I also had a solicitor call me who deals with asbestos-related disease claims, who had a similar trivial story to tell and who berated himself as he said he ‘should know better’. The final contact I have had recently is different. As a side note I am not sure why I get so many calls from concerned members of the public. In this final example, the homeowner had commissioned an ‘asbestos removal company’ to remove some asbestos cement sheets that were lining the ceiling of his garage. They did so but left some dust and debris behind. I believe the contractors were non licensed, although I am not at all persuaded this was nonlicensed work. I still advised a low risk but more significantly, that he should report this to HSE and commission a survey and more competent removal and clean up. The point is that as asbestos professionals we need to know when to dismiss / reassure and when to advise action. If, to be on the safe side, we advise
testing, then the person seeking our competent advice may end up spend hundreds or thousands of pounds. Imagine if I told the American gentleman to do testing in his house and he found 1 or 2 tremolite fibres: he may have wanted his house decontaminating. I very much doubt testing would have found anything but if you advise testing, always be ready for what advice you are going to give if the results come back positive. A little further back I did get involved with a homeowner who believed that their house was contaminated. It was a very large old house which contained its own asbestos-lagged boiler and pipework. In brief, some removal was carried out badly and despite my involvement being many years later and the house looking spotless, I recommended testing. Testing by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) found low level contamination, at such a low level that I advised the risk to their health was very low. I also advised that they could continue to live in the house as the contamination was in discrete areas and they were in their late 70s, with negligible risk to them. However, I advised the testing and then advised of the need for clean up as there had been a known contamination event that should not have happened and for which remediation should take place. In the end, this comes down to how comfortable we are to
explain risk regarding asbestos exposure. Simply stating there is no known safe level is not helpful to those concerned. Conversely, stating that the air test ‘passed’ or is ‘acceptable’ as the level is below 0.01 fibre/ml is equally unhelpful, but also wrong. A level of 0.01 fibre/ml is no more than a rudimentary air test after a thorough and robust visual inspection, it is not a ‘safe’ or even ‘acceptable’ level. It is not typically appropriate as a means of general reassurance, but that is a subject for another time. Whilst we can never claim asbestos to have a ‘safe level’ of exposure, there are things we can say. Dealing first with asbestosis and asbestosrelated lung cancer, we can say, for the examples I have given, the risk is nil. "Asbestos, asbestosis, and cancer, the Helsinki criteria for diagnosis and attribution 2014: recommendations", Scand J Work Environ Health.
2015;41(1):5–15. doi:10.5271/sjweh.3462, states that, "A cumulative exposure of 25 fibre-years is estimated to increase the risk of lung cancer 2‑fold, clinical cases of asbestosis may occur at comparable cumulative exposures". This talks about a doubling of risk at 25 fibre/ml years and not an absence of any risk below this specific figure. However, 25 fibre/ml years is 25 years at 1 fibre/ml for 8 hours of every working day, or 1 year at 25 fibres/ml all day every day. There are many other derivations of this, but the point is that you need a lot of exposure, often over many years. Take the example of the homeowner who carried the piece of AIB on his garden trowel, if as extreme, we assume he was exposed to 1 fibre/ml for 10 minutes. I doubt it would have been anywhere near this but for this illustration, his dose would have been 1 fibre/ml x 10 minutes (or 0.17 of
an hour) / 1920 hours (a working year), which gives 0.00009 fibre/ml years. For those not used to doing dose calculations, it is worth familiarising yourself with doing so. If someone says I just took a power saw and blasted through an asbestos insulating board (AIB) wall, which of course is a terrible thing to do, you can put some context to this. There are plenty of HSE and other literature sources on exposure level, but if the person did this taking an hour (another extreme) and at 20 fibre/ml, then dose would be 20 fibre/ml x 1 hour / 1920 hours; i.e. 0.01 fibre/ml.years. If the person said he did it every week for a year, then its 20 fibre/ml x 1 hour x 48 working weeks in a year / 1920 hours; i.e. now 48 times greater at about 0.5 fibre/ml.years. None of these numbers get anywhere near 25 fibre/ml years and a doubling of risk for asbestosis and asbestos-related lung cancer, but what about mesothelioma? Its
mesothelioma that causes us the greatest concern and the reason why we say there is no safe level of exposure. For starters, looking at the above numbers and the person in the garden at 0.00009 fibre/ml years, this is much lower risk than the person who kept cutting the AIB. But the person in the garden wants to know about his risk, not simply that someone else has had it worse. We have heard from various eminent epidemiologists at FAAM conferences, including Andrew Darnton of Hodgson and Darnton (2000), "The Quantitative Risks of Mesothelioma and Lung Cancer in Relation to Asbestos Exposure". If you do not have a copy of this study, I suggest you get one. It’s a heavy read but I am not suggesting you become an epidemiologist but rather generally understand this study and, in particular, Table 11. Table 11 provides risk estimates at different dose levels for a person aged 30 at first exposure. For my examples, it states that a dose of 0.00009 fibre/ml years presents an ‘significant risk’, which the authors define as <1 chance in 100,000. The study explains why it regards this as an insignificant risk, by reference to HSE’s guidelines for tolerability of risk but also because at such levels, “It is also well below the level at which it is suggested that mesothelioma would occur in the absence of asbestos exposure: a clear majority of
the very few mesotheliomas that would occur at this level would not be caused by asbestos”. For the person who cut through AIB once a week for a year, Table 11 says somewhere in the region of 15 to 90 deaths per 100,000 exposed at this level. As stated, this is all for a 30 year old at first exposure. Table 9 gives adjustment factors for other ages. There are other studies but the point I am making is that all asbestos professionals need to have an appreciation of the different asbestos-related diseases and broadly, what risk looks like at different doses. I am not suggesting you would ever go to a Mr & Mrs Smith and saying I have worked it out and at your age, given the circumstances, you have a chance of x in 100,000. Numbers can reassure or scare at whatever level. But if you understand the numbers, rather than clumsily saying things like ‘well you never know’, ‘there is no safe level’ or ‘you should be okay’, you will feel more confident in stating that risk is nil (in practical terms) or negligible etc. You will feel more confident in being able to reassure and conversely, target action where it is necessary. I am sure FAAM will continue to do more at its various scientific forums to help members enhance their knowledge of such matters.
Martin Stear
2021
ASBESTOS
17th - 18th November
2021 sees the fourth annual asbestos conference and for the 2nd year running we go virtual! The event will bring together researchers, academics, practitioners and regulators, through various plenary talks and technical sessions with a programme that will include UK and international speakers, dealing with scientific topics covering key areas regarding the assessment, control and management of asbestos. More information to be released soon!
Meet The Member
Jonathan Mackay 1. What was the first job you got when you finished fulltime education? Water quality sampler and technician at Portsmouth Water Company. I would travel around Portsmouth and the surrounding areas collecting water samples, then return them to the lab for chemical, microbiological and taste testing.
2. When and why did you join
FAAM? I became a member in 2018 following my move to Artisan Environmental. Our journey to grow our company was just beginning, and despite our many years of experience we knew we still had a lot to learn. The opportunity to meet, talk and collaborate with some of the most knowledgeable people in our industry has been invaluable, and continually inspires us to run our company the right way.
3. Describe a typical day in your work.
Being a small company I do wear a few different hats. My day is generally filled with a mixture and quality management and project development duties. I still love getting out on site to meet and help clients, and I still carry out the odd survey when needed just to keep my eye in. Whatever the day however, it always begins with coffee.
4. How did you get your current job?
I have known the director of Artisan Environmental for many years… in fact he was my best man! He was looking to grow the business and improve technically. I was keen to use my knowledge and experience to help grow a small business. Hopefully he made a good choice.
I’m not being dad I enjoy messing around with my vinyl collection, playing bass guitar, spinning, practicing Tai Chi, and the occasional hour on the Xbox.
6. Where did you last go on holiday?
Isle of Wight
7. Favourite food? Curry.
8. Favourite film? Transformers: The Movie (1986)
9. Favourite book? Mythos by Stephen Fry
10. What was the first/last
music album you bought?
The first album I ever bought with my own money was OK Computer by Radiohead. The last album I bought was Medicine at Midnight by Foo Fighters.
5. What do you enjoy doing
when you are not working? The most enjoyable time away from work is spent with my wife and two young girls, but when
The opportunity to meet, talk and collaborate with some of the most knowledgeable people in our industry has been invaluable, and continually inspires us to run our company the right way.
Get to know your new Registrar: Jonathan Grant 1. What was the first job you got when you finished fulltime education? Working at Hampshire County Council’s Public Analysts Laboratory – my very first role was testing toys, which involved trying to set fire to teddy bears to make sure they were safe. I miss that job. Unfortunately, I soon moved to their asbestos and occupational hygiene department.
2. When and why did you join FAAM?
Back in 2016 I was asked to join the FAAM Steering Group to provide a viewpoint from a commercial and business perspective. I still remember nervously walking down the road in Derby to the BOHS office for my first meeting, feeling like an imposter with the great and the good of the asbestos world waiting there. It turned out that everyone was lovely!
3. What made you sign up to the FAAM Committee?
I really believe in the vision of FAAM in terms of professionalising the industry and I hope that I can be a small part of that.
4. Describe a typical day in your work
There is honestly no typical day for me. I’m doing a lot of tenders at the moment, which makes me want to cry especially when I review the pricing schedules for asbestos survey work.
5. How do you envision the future of FAAM?
There is no doubt for me that FAAM has a bright future. We have just developed a new FAAM strategy document (so look out for the publication of that soon), but two of the key aims for me are growing membership and gaining
I keep thinking that the next FAAM Conference can’t be better than the last one, but somehow it keeps getting better! I don’t want to give anything away just yet, but there is already a full 2-day schedule planned!
Chartered status for our members.
7. 1.How did you get into the asbestos industry? I was asked to stop burning teddy bears.
8. What do you enjoy doing when you are not working? I was going to say, ‘going to the pub’, but this feels like one of those bits on a cv where you’re supposed to say something clever and exciting (and I haven’t been to the pub for ages anyway because of Covid). I love going camping with my family in our motorhome.
9. Where did you last go on holiday? Camping with my family in our motorhome at Bassenthwaite Sailing Club.
10. Favourite film? Return of the Jedi.
I still remember nervously walking down the road in Derby to the BOHS office for my first meeting, feeling like an imposter with the great and the good of the asbestos world waiting there. It turned out that everyone was lovely! 11. Favourite book? The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe (it was the first book I remember reading cover to cover by myself)
MEET YOUR NEW FAAM COMMITTEE This year, the following nominees were unopposed and therefore, a ballot was not required:
Position FAAM Registrar FAAM Committee Member
Appointee Jonathan Grant Catherine Holmes
MEET YOUR NEW FOH COMMITTEE This year, we received more than five nominations for FOH Committee Member and therefore, the following individuals were appointed by election.
Position
Appointee
12. What was the first and last
FOH Committee Member
Alex Hills
My music tase is awful - I’m not sure I want to answer this one.
FOH Committee Member
Duncan Smith
FOH Committee Member
Gordon Smith
FOH Committee Member
Michael Slater
music album you bought?
FOH Committee Member
Pinky Bhatt
ASBESTOS 2020 IN REVIEW Thanks to the speakers, sponsors, audience, FAAM / BOHS, Connect Communications and fellow conference committee members (Colette Willoughby, Sara Mason, Garry Burdett and Marie Townsend) who all combined to make the virtual Asbestos 2020 conference such a great success. It’s not just me saying it: the responses have been brilliant.
Day 1 fulfilled its science based themes, the opening session being inspired by the ECHA (European Chemical Agency) review on the European Control Limit for asbestos. It sparked a lot of chat between those favouring lower limits (and analysis by SEM) and those wanting fast results (only available by light microscopy) to give assurance that all control measures were working.
Having started the year planning a venue for the usual face to face meeting, the emergence of Covid 19 imposed a whole new approach – and fast. But we did it and afterwards, participants were exactly equally split between liking virtual versus face to face meetings. Decisions for next year.
Andrey Korchevskiy and Ann Wylie (joining us at an unearthly hour for them) from the US gave an illuminating tutorial on the geology and toxicology of mineral fragments compared with mineral fibres (asbestos) and the difficulties in discrimination between single particles, particularly for amphiboles. Three other interesting current research items concluded the first day.
There is no need to repeat the programme – you will all have seen it and the wide-ranging topics that were covered.
...the emergence of Covid 19 imposed a whole new approach – and fast. But we did it and afterwards participants were exactly equally split between liking virtual versus face to face meetings. Decisions for next year.
ASBESTOS 2020 IN REVIEW Day 2 opened with the conference highlight, a Mock Trial organised by Colette Willoughby, with Kevin Bampton (CEO of BOHS) taking the role of barrister. This imaginary civil case with volunteer witnesses was a convincing and realistic demonstration of how things worked in a courtroom. Both watchers and witnesses were obviously uncomfortable as the evidence was ruthlessly scrutinised and the consequences of actions (or inaction) were driven home. But we met all the witnesses as themselves at the end for a friendly chat about the experience, with everyone convinced that Courts should be avoided! And the best way to do that is to comply fully with the available guidance. If you are ever considering cutting any corners, watch this! Managers of premises in occupation and those of refurbishment or demolition projects, showed common difficulties with asbestos surveys, the main one being that the reports were frequently written without consideration of the client’s ease of use. For those with UKAS accreditations there was an explanation of their new approach.
Technology and Myth Busting concluded the day. The event was introduced and concluded by Colette Willoughby representing the conference committee (standing in for the technophobic chairperson, me, for which I am most grateful).
But, as with all things, there are also advantages to a virtual conference, not least being the recording which attendees can review at their leisure and others can now buy. Any such purchase will benefit the Mavis Nye Foundation, her interview being an inspirational part of conference played in the lunch break.
And her conclusion, raising a glass to all viewers reminded us all of what we missed most about a virtual conference, the social side.
Your Expectations - Overall Thoughts Of Our First Asbestos Virtual Conference Answered: 66 Skipped: 0
Greatly exceeded expectations
27.27%
Exceeded expectations
56.06%
16.67%
Met expectations
Fell short of expectations
Fell well short of expectations
0
10
20
30
40
50 %
60
70
80
90
100
ASBESTOS 2020
MOCK TRIAL
WHAT THEY SAID...
ALAN WILLOUGHBY MFAAM TECH IOSH CCP (ASBESTOS) Founding Director Asbestos Management Consultant Asbestos Compliance Limited Before joining the asbestos industry, I spent around 20 years working in the construction industry. The industry changed considerably within this time frame. The biggest improvements were in safety on site. Yet in all the time I spent on site I was never once given any information with regards to the risks that asbestos presented. Having joined the asbestos industry, I have seen widely varying reactions to asbestos on construction sites. One site deserted in a matter of minutes
... as the questioning continued it became more difficult not to accept a portion of the blame. For things to go wrong it usually takes multiple failures to be combined
due to some vinyl floor tiles being discovered, while others are happy to work side by side with licensed removal. There still appears to be a huge level of ignorance present within the industry. I tried to play my character in the mock trial true to the personalities that I met in my time in the construction industry. The construction programs that are agreed are tight and sometimes ridiculously short. This means that any delay has
a catastrophic result on achieving the completion date for the project. As a participant in the trial, I felt I had a reasonable chance to defend my position. However, as the questioning continued it became more difficult not to accept a portion of the blame. For things to go wrong it usually takes multiple failures to be combined but all those involved have the opportunity to stop this sequence of events.
WHAT THEY SAID...
TONY REILLY
PAUL LYONS BSC COCA MFAA
The Manchester Metropolitan University
My intrigue got the better of me when I was so kindly thought of to play the part of the Project Manager in the mock trial, and thank the lucky stars that this was only a mock trial!
Deputy Asbestos Safety Manager
There isn’t a role that Daniel DayLewis couldn’t play but even I think he would have crumbed facing Kevin Bampton in the dock, still disappointed that Kevin didn’t wear the wig for the proceedings though. Having reviewed the survey report that I somehow had to try to justify in court was daunting but scarily the report I was reading weren’t a million miles away from reports I have encountered in the not too distance past. From starting as an asbestos consultant and now working as a client all the failings discussed during the trial were all too familiar. I hope it was a reminder and an opportunity to take stock for all that if work isn’t planned correctly with competent project managers, contractors and clarity in scope it could all fall down like a house of cards. The ramifications reputational, financially and worst of all stuck in the dock for real isn’t a thought worth bearing. If another thespian performance is required again next year have your people call my people.
Assistant Compliance Manager Manchester University
Having read through all of the reports and documents I could see that some of the errors were all too familiar. This could quite have easily been a real-life situation and the potential financial, reputational and more important the health
costs would have been huge. Everyone in the mock trial had failings and the consequences were severe. Exposing people to a class 1 carcinogen material and knowing that you could have prevented this quite easily is inexcusable. As a FAAM community, let’s get this message far and wide, because “If only” is one of the loneliest thoughts when you are on that stand.
PAUL LYONS BSC COCA MFAA Assistant Compliance Manager Manchester University I didn’t know what to expect from the session but was told by our guest barrister that I would have it easy as the claimant – and wasn’t he right?! “Act indignant and put upon” was my brief, and so I went into ‘De-Niro’ mode and did my best to mock outrage.
I thought the session was fantastic – it really brought home the approach a prosecutor would take in these circumstances, and most tellingly the brief involved a ‘mock situation’ that we all recognised as real and evidential in all of our professional lives.
Enforcement visits: Without teeth, can the HSE clamp down on Covid infringements? Nick Garland , MFAAM
The Covid pandemic is virtually unprecedented in living memory. And aside from the awful human cost, its impact on the economy will be felt for many years to come. As a health and safety consultant, I’m also fascinated by the challenges it has created around workplace safety, and the effect on employers,
employees and the regulator as we all try to stay safe.
its ability to enforce Covid-safe working conditions.
And what of the regulator? The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has been under enormous budgetary pressure for many years. And over the long months of the pandemic, I’ve become increasingly concerned that its lack of resources is hampering
Let’s begin by looking at how the HSE’s budgetary challenges were already impacting its operations before Covid. Looking at the data from the 2017-18 and 2019-20 annual reports, we can see the following:
HSE Annual Report
HSE Annual Report
(2017/2018)
(2019/2020)
20,000
13,300
Prosecutions
Not reported
355
INs
Not reported
5,000
PNs
Not reported
1,900
Asbestos Visits
1,000
900
Inspectors
1,058
1,059
Prosecutions
509
355
Construction Fatalities
30
40
Proactive Inspection Visits
While the number of inspectors didn’t drop between reports, site visits did very markedly. Even the HSE’s attendance on asbestos sites fell by 10%. In the same period, prosecutions were down by 30%, and construction fatalities climbed by a third. The tail end of this reporting period also saw the emergence and spread of Covid-19. The HSE recently told the Guardian that it had made 32,000 site visits during the pandemic. Meanwhile, the HSE’s Coronavirus management information dashboard provides this monthly breakdown of
covid case notifications throughout 2020-21: If these figures are accurate, they represent a massive surge in activity for an already overstretched body. Despite the recent trend of falling
attendance on site and a reduction in prosecutions, there has now been a huge increase in numbers of unannounced visits. But is it having the desired effect?
Are offices being overlooked? A brief look at the enforcement action register suggests that the number of enforcement notices might even be lower than these headline figures. I found eight PNs where the only reason COVID was mentioned was as a justification as to why another misdemeanor was hard to close out. A similar investigation into the INs might show up similar cases. Further analysis shows another interesting trend – Covid-related enforcements seem to centre on companies in the construction sector. Of the nine remaining PNs I found, five went to just two companies. Of the six companies found at fault, all but one were in the construction sector – and the inspectors’ comments seem to focus on washing facilities. This seems out of step with reality when, as the BBC notes, the 500 confirmed or suspected office outbreaks in the second half of 2020 were more than those centered on supermarkets, construction sites, warehouses, restaurants and cafes combined. So why were no PNs issued here? As others have noted, while workplace safety enforcement in the UK as a whole relies on
the Health and Safety at Work Act (HASAWA), Scotland has legally obligated employers to ensure their employees can work from home wherever possible. But is this the most sensible health and safety advice? HASAWA should give ample powers to the regulators. Since 1974, employers must assess the risks at work and reduce them so far as reasonably practicable. And if they don’t there is the big stick of enforcement action and prosecution. Many of the examples given in the articles above appear to be pretty flagrant breaches.
However, home working or furloughing staff might add financial burdens that are the final straw for a company’s survival. And therein lies the balancing act for an employer. I can imagine situations where, in the face of practical and financial challenges from sending people home, a diligent employer is instead able to make the workplace covid secure. The flexibility of HASAWA allows this to happen. If home working was an employee’s right, imaginative and effective solutions might not exist, and some companies may not survive.
...home working or furloughing staff might add financial burdens that are the final straw for a company’s survival.
Risk Assessment
Beware relying on advice
Obviously, where it’s reasonably practicable, the goal should be to eliminate the risk. In the case of Covid19:
An example contained in a second BBC article hints at where we might be going wrong on workplace Covid safety. A member of the public alleges that he works among 30 people on one floor of his employer’s office, that the windows are always closed, and – unbelievably – that they still hot-desk. With five or six covid cases apparently linked to the firm, it seems a clear example of a company not doing enough, or at least taking actions that are demonstrably not working.
The hazard is transmission of the virus in the workplace Elimination of this risk would be for employees to work from home Mitigation / reduction of the risk might include measures such as masks, regular testing, workplace distancing, one-way systems or increased fresh air ventilation Elimination may be impossible, or very burdensome, whereas mitigation may bring the risk down to a low enough level for people to remain in the workplace. Despite this, in many cases cited by journalists it looks like little or no effort has been made. Interviewees speak of working side by side in warehouses, or conducting telephone sales and administration in a very small or poorly ventilated office. The law is simple: if a company has not done enough to mitigate or eliminate a risk, then they are liable for serious punishment. But only if they get caught. With 33,000 visits, it’s clear that the HSE is making serious efforts to enforce safety during Covid. But with only approximately 80 INs and nine PNs, the evidence suggests that its approach to enforcement might be very light-touch.
The firm states in its defence: “We have worked closely with Public Health England since the start of the pandemic to implement extensive safety measures in line with government advice.”
And for me, that’s the heart of the issue. During the pandemic, companies are looking to the guidance and – in far too many cases – scratching their heads on how they follow it and still make a profit. What they’re not doing is following the principle on which the HASAWA is built: looking at their underlying duties, and ensuring they take effective and specific actions to deliver a safe workplace. An employer is compelled by law to ensure that its place of work is as safe as possible. The government also provides helpful advice (guidance) on how employers can fulfill this legal duty. How you go about making your workplace safe is, to some extent, up to you. You can follow the guidance, or craft something else – but the immutable fact remains that your legal duty is to make it safe. My fear is that the HSE’s approach may be permitting a culture in which companies can point to generic guidance, in place of implementing specific measures that keep their employees most safe in their specific workplace. The HASAWA is beautifully crafted to get the extra mile out of employers – but if there is no enforcement, then an important pillar is missing, and the whole church is at risk of falling down.
The Annals of Work Exposures and Health
&
The Faculty of Asbestos Assessment and Management
The Annals of Work Exposures and Health is the flagship journal publication of BOHS. Published by Oxford University Press, it presents high-quality, peer-reviewed science dedicated to the assessment and control of risks to health and well-being at work. With a distinguished international editorial board led by Dr Rachael Jones, the journal is read in 175 countries worldwide and had over a million downloads in 2020. There are nine regular issues plus additional supplements.
Asbestos Thematic Issue Asbestos is a classic occupational hazard, occupying a large role in many occupational hygienists’ work life. Annals of Work Exposures and Health continues to publish current research on this ancient topic. We collect articles directly addressing asbestos related questions, which have been published since 2013. Those articles, found here, continue to be relevant, while
Read the Annals
As a FAAM member, you can read all Annals papers online as part of your membership benefits. This is the only way to obtain a personal subscription to the journal. You can activate your online access to the Annals via their website: https://academic.oup.com/ann weh. You will need your subscriber number, which you should have received in an email from OUP. If you do not know your number then please contact the BOHS Membership team for help at membership@bohs.org.
the newer research in this collection adds to the record. Despite the risks of asbestos being well known and thoroughly researched, this collection demonstrates the ongoing development of the science, and the continuing controversies around risk and mitigation strategies. See to the right a few example papers and access the whole collection at:
https://bohs.link/asbestosissue
Publish in the Annals There are many benefits to publishing research in the journal. A key question applied is, "Is this paper going to help readers better understand, quantify, and control conditions at work that adversely or positively affect health and well-being?" If you're considering the Annals as the home for your research, please read the Author Guidelines for more information on the types of material published, how to prepare a submission, the editorial and publication process, and specific requirements of the journal. Asbestos Exposure among Transmission Mechanics in Automotive Repair Shops Airborne Asbestos Exposures from Warm Air Heating Systems in Schools Estimating Occupational Exposure to Asbestos in Australia Estimating Lifetime Asbestos Exposure in Patients With Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis Asbestos Exposure of Chrysotile Miners and Millers in Balangero, Italy
Designing out Health Risks
Changing Behaviors and Attitudes
Researching Prevention and Control
Educating for Occupational Health
OH2021
Sustainable Workplace Health Conference
SAVE THE DATE
8th - 11th November 2021
OH2021 Sustainable Workplace Health Conference will be bigger and more innovative than ever! We have included the best parts of the physical face to face conference we all know, love and missed during 2020 along with elements of the virtual world we have found to beneficial over the last few months. Find out more information: https://bohs.link/OH2021