Mobile Devices - Deadly distraction

An accident in which eleven people were killed was caused because an individual was playing games on his phone. What can be learned from this?

Click to read more ...


Accident Investigation - Tell key staff how to investigate accidents

If one of your employees had an accident would you be confident that the supervisor or manager on duty would know what information to collect, which reports to fill out and so on? Our flow chart will keep them on track.

Click to read more ...


What training is necessary for a telehandler?

One of our customers has a telehandler which is used by experienced drivers. During a recent inspection the business was told it must provide formal training. Is this really necessary and if so, what’s the minimum required?

Hard Lesson

The business received a visit from an HSE inspector who later sent improvement notices requiring staff to be trained in the use of its telehandler. It was surprised because there had not been any accidents and the inspector had no specific concerns about the way the equipment was being operated on the day.

The Law

Regulation 9 of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 requires that employers ensure that all those who use work equipment have received “adequate” training. To identify what this means in practice it’s necessary to refer to the Approved Code of Practice (ACoP) Rider-operated lift trucks: Operator training and safe use (L117)

Legal Status

Advice provided within an ACoP has a special legal status. If you follow it, you are deemed to have done enough to comply with the law. But if you choose not to and you are challenged, you must show that you complied with the Regulations in some other way. It is simplest to treat an ACoP as if it is compulsory as trying to prove that your alternative method was equally effective is likely to be an uphill struggle.

Approved Actions

L117 states that all operators of telehandlers need formal training: “Employers should not allow anyone to operate, even on a very occasional basis, lift trucks within the scope of this ACoP who have not satisfactorily completed basic training and testing as described in this ACoP.”

Tip 1. Our customer proposed to put their staff through an in-house competency test as an alternative. But the inspector informed them that this isn’t good enough on its own. The trainer and assessor must be suitably qualified. Your only practical option is to use an accredited or registered trainer

Tip 2. Even if your staff already hold a valid basic training certificate there is more to do. You must arrange two further levels of training: (1) “specific job”; and (2) “familiarisation”. There’s also a need for formal authorisation and periodic refresher training.

Note. Familiarisation training is the only part of the instruction programme you can undertake without a specialist instructor. It must be carried out on your premises under the close supervision of “someone with appropriate knowledge”. This could be an experienced supervisor, for example. Your trainer should be able to help you to select a suitable individual.

There are specific requirements for telehandler training, including a strict regime of basic, job-specific and familiarisation training. Having in-house arrangements for assessing competence is no substitute for formal training, though your supervisor may be able to undertake the familiarisation element of the instruction.



The biggest change to health and safety law for 40 years!

The new sentencing guidelines for health and safety, corporate manslaughter, food hygiene and food safety offences have now come into full force. Although there are no changes to substantive Acts or regulations, this undoubtedly represents the biggest change in the law since 1974.

In simple terms, it will introduce the prospect of million pound fines for larger organisations, and smaller businesses could see fines in excess of 10% of TURNOVER not Profit. It also lowers the threshold for potential imprisonment for individuals so that negligent actions which put people at risk, rather than just reckless or deliberate behaviour, could result in any employee or director facing the possibility of a stretch behind bars.

A large organisation (with a turnover greater than £50million) being sentenced for high culpability and harm (a workplace fatality for example) can expect a fine in the range of £1.5m to £6m with a starting point of £2.4m (to be adjusted on the facts of the case). If the culpability is very high the range is £2.6m to £10m with an entry point of £4m. Nor is £10m a ceiling. Large organisations with a turnover several times more than £50m potentially face considerably larger fines.

Is it all Bad news?

Although businesses which fail to take any steps to manage risks will be hit even harder in the pocket, those which have made an effort to get their house in order are more likely to have their achievement recognised and avoid harsh treatment. This is because the guidelines make it clear that the culpability of the organisation must be taken into account when sentences are determined.

So, for example, even if there’s an accident, if you can prove that you have completed risk assessments, followed industry guidance, trained your staff, etc., then your efforts must be considered.

Tip. The value of a robust paper trail will be greater than ever. Ask yourself, Are my risk assessments up to date? Have I given all my staff safe working practices? Do I review my policies annually? Are all my staff trained to cover all legal standards (Fork Lift Truck, Manual Handling, Fire Awareness etc)?

If you can answer to the affirmative, then it unlikely that you need to do anything fundamentally different simply because of the threat of much higher fines if they get anything wrong.


Effective H&S Management System and Safe Working Practice Highlighted after Incident at Agricultural Dealer.

In November last year the health and Safety Executive (HSE) released details of an investigation into an incident which occurred at a Company which sells and services agricultural machinery, resulting in a fine of £750,000 for the Company and a worker left permanently blind in one eye. The incident happened during the re-inflation of an agricultural vehicle tyre.

The HSE Principal Inspector commented after the hearing   “Employers undertaking this type of activity have a duty to ensure that staff are competent to inflate larger higher risk tyres, to use a system of work that is safe, and to implement effective management systems to supervise and monitor such activities……..while all tyre technicians require suitable training, those inflating the large, higher- pressure tyres fitted to many agricultural, commercial and construction vehicles need to implement key additional precautions”.

This highlights the need to have your employees follow a suitable Safe Working Practice (SWP) for this kind of service activity. A sample SWP or this activity can be downloaded free here and this is just one of over 70 SWP’s that we provide as part of the package for BAGMA members.  If you would like more information, please contact us on 08000 806801.

Further guidelines regarding tyre inflation can be found at

Page 1 ... 2 3 4 5 6 ... 13 Next 5 Entries »