The duty to manage asbestos is contained in regulation 4 of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2006. It requires the person who has the duty to:

• take reasonable steps to find out if there are materials containing asbestos in non-domestic premises, and if so, its amount, where it is and what condition it is in;
• presume materials contain asbestos unless there is strong evidence that they do not;
• make, and keep up-to-date, a record of the location and condition of the asbestos containing materials - or materials which are presumed to contain asbestos;
• assess the risk of anyone being exposed to fibres from the materials identified;
• prepare a plan that sets out in detail how the risks from these materials will be managed;
• take the necessary steps to put the plan into action;
• periodically review and monitor the plan and the arrangements to act on it so that the plan remains relevant and up-to-date; and
• provide information on the location and condition of the materials to anyone who is liable to work on or disturb them.

There is also a requirement on anyone to co-operate as far as is necessary to allow the dutyholder to comply with the above requirements.

Who has the duty?

In many cases, the dutyholder is the person or organisation that has clear responsibility for the maintenance or repair of non-domestic premises through an explicit agreement such as a tenancy agreement or contract.
The extent of the duty will depend on the nature of that agreement. In a building occupied by one leaseholder, the agreement might be for either the owner or leaseholder to take on the full duty for the whole building; or it might be to share the duty. In a multi-occupied building, the agreement might be that the owner takes on the full duty for the whole building. Or it might be that the duty is shared - for example, the owner takes responsibility for the common parts while the leaseholders take responsibility for the parts they occupy. Sometimes, there might be an agreement to pass the responsibilities to a managing agent.
In some cases, there may be no tenancy agreement or contract. Or, if there is, it may not specify who has responsibility for the maintenance or repair of non-domestic premises. In these cases, or where the premises are unoccupied, the duty is placed on whoever has control of the premises, or part of the premises. Often this will be the owner.

What premises are affected?

The duty to manage covers all non-domestic premises. Such premises include all industrial, commercial or public buildings such as factories, warehouses, offices, shops, hospitals and schools.
Non-domestic premises also include those ‘common’ areas of certain domestic premises: purpose-built flats or houses converted into flats. The common areas of such domestic premises might include foyers, corridors, lifts and lift-shafts, staircases, roof spaces, gardens, yards, outhouses and garages - but would not include the flat itself. Such common areas would not include rooms within a private residence that are shared by more than one household such as bathrooms, kitchens etc in shared houses and communal dining rooms and lounges in sheltered accommodation.

How do dutyholders comply?

There are three essential steps:

• find out whether the premises contains asbestos, and, if so, where it is and what condition it is in. If in doubt, materials must be presumed to contain asbestos;
• assess the risk; and
• make a plan to manage that risk and act on it.

Here are some basic principles to remember:

• asbestos is only dangerous when disturbed. If it is safely managed and contained, it doesn’t present a health hazard;
• don’t remove asbestos unnecessarily - removing it can be more dangerous than leaving it in place and managing it;
• not all asbestos materials present the same risk. The measures that need to be taken for controlling the risks from materials such as pipe insulation are different from those needed in relation to asbestos cement;
• don’t assume you need to bring in a specialist in every case (for example, you can inspect your own building rather than employ a surveyor).
• if you are unsure about whether certain materials contain asbestos, you can presume they do and treat them as such;
• remember that the duty to manage is all about putting in place the practical steps necessary to protect maintenance workers and others from the risk of exposure to asbestos fibres. It is not about removing all asbestos.

If any ACMs need to be sealed, encapsulated or removed, remember you will need to employ a licensed contractor if the materials are high risk (eg pipe insulation and asbestos insulating panels). If the materials are lower risk (eg asbestos cement) then an unlicensed but competent contractor may carry out this work.

More »

Modified scaffolding results in fine - September 29, 2008

A Staffordshire company is being fined £2,000 after health and safety breaches in which unsafe scaffolding was used.

Unlicensed asbestos removal costs director £36,000 – September 30, 2008

A company director has been fined £36,000 after his firm removed asbestos from a shop without a license.

Working at height injury to be investigated – October 1, 2008

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) is investigating the death of an employee who was working at height, a source reveals.

Health and safety breaches cost Chelford £10,500 – October 2, 2008

A Lancashire firm has been fined £6,000 after breaching health and safety regulations at its construction site.

Scaffolding safety day to be held – October 2, 2008

Employee serves up highest health and safety exam scores – October 3, 2008

�

More »

Spot checks to be made on Derbyshire construction firms - September 22, 2008

Health and Safety Executive (HSE) inspectors will be conducting spot checks on construction sites in the High Peak region of Derbyshire.

Firm fined for burning asbestos debris – September 23, 2008

A construction firm has received a £10,000 fine after burning waste which contained asbestos near Newmarket.

Lakeside fined after working at height accident – September 23, 2008

An Essex company has been fined £13,400 after an accident which took place while working at height left a worker with a number of injuries.

£60,000 fine over gas-cylinder explosion – September 24, 2008

A company has been fined £60,000 after the death of one of its employees in an explosion at its recycling site.

Laundry fined after employee injured – September 24, 2008

A company has been fined £30,000 over an inadequate risk assessment which led to an employee suffering a number of injuries.

Good leadership ‘required for workplace safety’ – September 25, 2008

Reducing health and safety risks in the workplace requires good leadership, an expert says.

More »

In order to tackle this uncertain situation, budgets are likely to be squeezed, and it is tempting to see training as an easy target for cutbacks, not least the health and safety training budget. However, this is a false economy.  If an employee were injured or even killed through lack of training, this could result in prosecution, a large fine or even imprisonment under the recent Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007.

According to HSE statistics, 228 people were killed at work in 2007/08, 34 of them in manufacturing, and nearly half a million people were injured while at work. Thirty-six million working days were lost, 30 million due to work-related ill health and 6 million due to workplace injury.

Legislation 

The HSE states that employers have a duty to provide information, instruction, training and supervision and make sure all their workers can understand it. This, coupled with the ever-increasing burden of UK and EU health and safety legislation, means there is an escalating need for training rather than the reverse, to ensure compliance and avoid penalty.

The implications of the Corporate Manslaughter Act, under which organisations can be found guilty of corporate manslaughter as a result of serious management failures resulting in a gross breach of a duty of care, are not yet always well understood by employers, making health and safety awareness training even more vital for business. 

Providing health and safety information is essential to maintain a good safety culture within an organisation, so that safety is utmost in the minds of workers, and they feel well cared for by their employer. And ultimately, giving successful training can save the employer money.

Delivery

When weighing up the training needs of the organisation, factors such as the expected outcome from the training, the people who need to be trained, the effectiveness of the training currently provided, the available training budget and the types of training needed, all need to be examined.

Employers should consider the most appropriate method of training delivery.  Should you opt for traditional, or more cutting-edge, training? How does it fit with the organisation and how are you going to get the message across in the timeline you want? Traditional health and safety training delivery may encompass in-house or off-site training, on a one-to-one basis or in groups or seminars. This type of training can be very expensive, but things have moved on, and newer methods offer an attractive alternative. 

Traditional training in each health and safety subject costs the employer at least £50 per person, but it can cost as little as 50 pence per person if E-Learning, or online training, is used.  However, even though it costs less, the quality of the training is not compromised.

E-Learning has developed enormously in recent years after a relatively slow start ten years ago, and is an increasingly important method of training, owing to almost universal access to the internet. Incorporating many interactive features and deliverable in any number of different languages, E-Learning is now widely regarded as a mainstream training method, integrated into the training strategy of an increasing number of organisations. 

E-Learning is becoming more and more necessary because of the growing mobility of busy workers and geographic diversity of organisations’ sites. The benefits of online training include speed, efficiency, cost, convenience and interactivity. Employees find it flexible and engaging, and enjoy the control it gives them over their own learning programmes.

Employers, for their part, discover E-Learning delivers sizeable cost and time savings, as well as effective staff training. The software can be installed on the organisation’s intranet, or it can be hosted by the supplier on its own web portal. This means training can be provided not only to end users who have direct access to a PC, but also those who do not have use of a PC at work, such as warehouse, factory, and sales staff. Group training sessions can be organised for these users, using handsets that interact with the trainer. Because modules can be accessed when travelling or at home, as well as at work, e-learning therefore reduces employee down-time.

Health and safety training should never be overlooked during financial downturns, as doing this could have disastrous consequences and make matters worse. Health and safety training by e-learning can not only save money compared with traditional training, but it can provide high-quality and effective instruction to ensure that all employees are fully up to speed with this vital issue. 

More »

Please find below the health and safety news from this week.

Asbestos victim receives £177,000 from old employer - September 15, 2008

A man has received £177,000 from a former employer in an out-of-court settlement over his exposure to asbestos in the 1970s

HSE campaigns with council for sensible risk management – September 16, 2008

A local authority is to work with the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) to promote a series of ten principles it claims are central to sensible risk management.

HSE holds health and safety awareness day – September 16, 2008

A leading health and safety watchdog is to hold an awareness day near Stoke-on-Trent for members of the construction industry.

Authorities warn of forklift danger – September 17, 2008

Pedestrians and forklift trucks don’t mix, according to the Forklift Truck Association (FLTA).The group is running National Forklift Safety Week in an attempt to cut down on the number of accidents which take place this September during “the deadliest month of the year”.

Firm fined £20,000 after forklift accident – September 19, 2008

A firm has been fined £20,000 after an accident cost an employee her leg.

More »

Again, there have been substantial fines charged this week for accidents in the workplace. A call has been made for people to make a distinction between effective health and safety measures and “the nonsense. Please find below this week’s main health and safety happenings in detail:-

Council fined £17,005 over asbestos exposure – September 8, 2008

A local authority has been fined £17,005 plus nearly £4,000 in costs after a caretaker was exposed to asbestos in a local school.

Health and safety breaches led to refuse-truck death – September 8, 2008

A local authority is being bound for sentencing after health and safety breaches led to a man’s death.

Accident at height costs firm £6000 – September 9, 2008

A firm has been ordered to pay £4,000 in fines after an accident in which an employee sustained injuries.

Real health and safety must be separated from the nonsense – September 9, 2008

People must make a distinction between effective health and safety measures and “the nonsense”, a leading member of a watchdog says.

Two companies pay nearly £58000 after glass accident – September 10, 2008

Two companies have been fined after an accident in which a lorry driver was injured beneath a 600 kg glass panel.

Fines issued for accident leading to two machinery deaths - September 10, 2008

Two companies are being fined for the deaths of two employees in an accident involving machinery cleaning.

More »

HSE investigates cherry-picker accident – September 1, 2008

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has launched an investigation into a death caused by an accident at a Simons Development construction site, a source says.

Health and safety fine issued over hazardous materials – September 2, 2008

A company has been fined for health and safety breaches after an employee was injured handling hazardous material.

Employee crushed working on rail tracks – September 3, 2008

A rail employee has been injured in an accident while working on tracks in Warwickshire.

Accident crushes two men at construction site – September 3, 2008

Health and Safety Executive (HSE) officers are investigating the site of an accident where two men were crushed, a source says.

Health and safety uncertainty disrupts work – September 4, 2008

Construction on the Union Square mall has halted due to a misunderstanding about health and safety rules regulating the colour of hard hats, a source says.

Aram fined £75,000 for health and safety breaches - September 5, 2008

A company is being fined £75,000 after health and safety infractions led to an employee’s death.

Firm fined £125,000 for construction accident – September 5, 2008

A construction firm has been fined £125,000 after a worker fell to his death, a source says.

More »

Company charged after accident - 26 August, 2008

SITA is being charged with the death of an employee after an accident involving one of its recycling machines, a source says.

Firm fined £400,000 for collision accident - 26 August, 2008

A quarrying firm is being fined £400,000 after an accident in which two employees have died.

Equity fines for corporate accountability - 26 August, 2008

A politician suggests judges should tie fines for death and injury to company’s share prices to increase corporate accountability, a source says.

HSE informed of building site accident - 27 August, 2008

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has been informed of an accident leading to a workman being hospitalised, a source says.

HSE announces asbestos campaign - 27 August, 2008

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) is planning a new campaign to raise awareness of the danger asbestos fibres present workers.

Accident leaves recycling firm in court - 28 August, 2008

A waste disposal company is being prosecuted for an accident leading to the death of a worker, a source says.

£24,000 paid over manual handling accident - 28 August, 2008

A catering company is being fined after a manual handling accident left an employee injured.

Health and safety body prosecutes over fork-lift death - 29 August, 2008

A local authority is being brought to court by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) after one of its employees was killed by a fork-lift truck.

¼/p>