Glen Farrow UK Ltd undertook the installation of a liquid LPG bottle filling system at the food preparation company during January and February 2018. An inspection by the LPG supplier on 13 February 2018 found numerous defects in the installation which put the safety of workers at the factory at risk.
A HSE investigation found that the company took on work that they did not have the competencies for. They failed to plan the work adequately and to specify the correct materials and design for the installation. The engineer they sent was not competent to work on a liquid LPG installation of this sort. When asked to quote for this work, Glen Farrow UK Ltd should have realised that it was outside of their competence and subcontracted the work to a company with expertise in liquid LPG installations.
Glen Farrow UK Ltd of Glendum Close, Pinchbeck, Spalding pleaded guilty to breaching Sections 2 and 3 of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. They were fined £20,000 and ordered to pay costs of £3,131.60.
Speaking after the hearing, HSE inspector Martin Giles, said: “Gas engineers must understand that certain tasks are not part of their normal functions and should only be done by competent contractors.”
This is valid as of 8th February 2022.
What you’ll get: On 22 May 2017, roofer Marius Andrus was completing snagging work on a replacement roof. The worker had accessed a part of the old roof made of fragile asbestos cement sheets, which gave way. He fell through the sheets to the ground below sustaining fatal injuries.
The HSE’s investigation found that the area accessed did not have safety nets fitted and that the employer failed to take reasonably practicable measures to reduce the risk to those working on the roof.
AJM Services (Midlands) Ltd of Llanfihangel, Llanfyllin, Powys pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 4(1) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005. The company was fined £51,000 and ordered to pay costs of £5,000.
Speaking after the hearing, HSE inspector Andy McGrory said: “This was a tragic incident, which resulted in a needless loss of life and could have easily been avoided by properly planning the work and ensuring appropriate safeguards were in place.
“Those in control of work at height have a responsibility to devise safe methods of working, which should include providing clear and comprehensive information for their workers and ensuring that they are adequately supervised.”
Owners of the building Pearsons Glass of Maddrell Street, Liverpool pleaded guilty to breaching the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974, section 3, at an earlier hearing and were sentenced at Liverpool Crown Court in February 2021. The company was fined £80,000 and ordered to pay costs of £6,656
This is valid as of 7th February 2022.
With employees and customers returning to workplaces and retail stores following the pandemic, the FIA point out that JLA’s study highlights that many companies are ill-equipped to deal with the growing risk of fires at their sites, in turn posing huge risks to their employees and customer safety.
The nationally representative survey of 250 business owners found that over one third of businesses (38% of those questioned) do not have suitable fire risk assessments in place. Upwards of 80% don’t include details of regulations about fire alarms, and the risks they pose, within their company handbooks.
Almost 40% of the businesses surveyed have not given all of their staff training on the common causes of false alarms and how to mitigate the risks of them happening within the workplace. This is particularly prevalent in restaurants, bars and cafes, where that figure rises to 75%.
Damaged reputation, loss of revenue and a decrease in business efficiency are all potential consequences if businesses and employees are not prepared to deal with the impact of a false fire alarm sounding.
Conducted as part of the company’s ‘False Fire Alarms’ campaign, JLA’s research reveals a huge lack of business preparedness in mitigating the risks associated with false fire alarms.
Commenting on this research, Peter Martin (operations director for fire and security at JLA) said: “The events of the past year have understandably caused companies’ attentions to move on towards more ‘business-critical’ decisions. However, with a potential 18 months of fire safety complacency, the risks posed to businesses now, as staff and customers slowly start to return to sites, could be much worse than anticipated.
“Our survey has revealed worrying statistics around businesses not maintaining their fire safety equipment and not delivering vital fire safety training to their staff. This suggests that, if a fire were to occur, many organisations could be placing their customers and, indeed, their employees under extreme risk.”
This is valid as of 4th February 2022.
What you’ll get: A hierarchy of road-users sets out that quicker or heavier modes of travel have the greatest responsibility to reduce the danger or threat they may pose to others on the road.
Cyclists also receive fresh guidance to ride in the centre of a lane on quieter roads, in slower-moving traffic and at the approach to junctions in order to make themselves as clearly visible as possible. They are reminded they can ride two abreast – as has always been the case and which can be safer in large groups or with children – but they must be aware of drivers behind them and allow them to overtake if it is safe to do so.
Meanwhile, motorists are encouraged to adopt the so-called ‘Dutch Reach’ – opening the door next to them with the opposite hand so they look over their shoulder, meaning they’re less likely to injure passing cyclists and pedestrians.
In total, 9 sections of The Highway Code have been updated, with 50 rules being added or updated.
The government’s THINK! campaign will soon launch a communications drive, backed by over £500,000 in funding, raising awareness of the changes and ensuring road-users across the country understand their responsibilities. The campaign will run across radio and social media channels, with further campaign activity to follow later in the summer.
The new updates are advisory, so non-compliance will not result in a fine.
Roads Minister Baroness Vere said: “I’m proud to say we have some of the safest roads in the world, but I’m determined to make them safer still for everyone.
“These updates to The Highway Code will do just that by bringing the rules into the 21st century, encouraging people to respect and consider the needs of those around them, and ensuring all road-users know the rules of the road.”
The government initially announced the detail of the incoming updates to The Highway Code last summer. They follow a public consultation where nearly 21,000 people submitted their views, with the majority supporting every single one of the changes coming into force this weekend.
The changes seek to improve the safety of those most at risk on our roads. Everyone has an equal right to use the road and, likewise, everyone has a shared responsibility to behave in a safe and considerate manner.
The Department for Transport (DfT) engaged with key stakeholders while developing the changes, and a Highway Code Communications Working Group has been established with industry working alongside government to raise awareness.
The changes will be made to the digital version of The Highway Code first, followed by an update to the printed version which is due to be published in April 2022.
This is valid as of 3rd February 2022.
What you’ll get: The 65-year-old resident of Orchard Care Home in Tullibody, Clackmannanshire was on a specialist diet of minced and moist food after a severe stroke and vascular dementia left her at risk of choking.
However, on 7 August 2019, she was given a piece of jam doughnut as a snack from the tea trolley, which she choked on. Despite the efforts of care home staff and paramedics to remove the food, the resident died.
HC-One Limited, who run the care home, pleaded guilty to breaching the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974, Section 3(1) and Section 33(1)(a) and were fined £640,000.
The resident was on a minced and moist diet since being assessed as having a high risk of choking on 2 December 2018. Bread products are not suitable for this modified diet as they cannot be mashed small enough.
Prior to her death, the resident had frequently been given sandwiches from the snack trolley, repeatedly putting her at risk.
Main meals at the home were prepared by the kitchen and labelled with each resident’s name. However, the snack trolley did not have information on modified diets or food suitability. Staff in charge of the trolley had also not had sufficient training on modified diets.
HC-One Limited have since made changes at the home to ensure the snack trolley has suitable food for all residents. Training has also taken place.
Alistair Duncan, Head of the Health and Safety Investigation Unit of the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, said: “The death of this vulnerable care home resident could have been prevented if suitable training and procedures were in place.
“HC-One Limited left all residents at risk by failing to ensure modified diets were adhered to and staff had the relevant knowledge to keep those in their care safe. This prosecution should reiterate the need for all care homes to protect their residents and remind them they will be held accountable if they fail to do so.
“Our thoughts are with the family of the resident at what must be a difficult time for them.”
This is valid as of 1st February 2022.
What you’ll get: The company was visited by the HSE in March 2018 following a concern received from an employee. During that visit it was found that there were multiple health and safety breaches, resulting in the company being issued with Improvement Notices.
The HSE’s investigation found that there were systemic failings to recognise the risk of hand arm vibration syndrome (HAVS) or to take appropriate action to control exposure. Of particular concern were accounts from employees of pain and tingling in their fingers, hands and arms and that there were no limits on their use of vibrating tools such as angle grinders.
MTL Advanced Limited of Grange Lane, Rotherham, South Yorkshire pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2 (1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974. The company was fined £90,000 and ordered to pay £14,061 in costs.
Speaking after the hearing, HSE inspector Laura Hunter said: “Work activities involving vibrating tools should be properly assessed so that appropriate controls can be implemented to avoid exposing employees to harm.
“Employees suffering from HAVS can experience difficulty in carrying out tasks in the workplace involving fine or manipulative work and are less able to work in cold conditions. Sadly, these effects can be permanent and life changing.”
This is valid as of 31st January 2022.
What you’ll get: Under the new Leaseholder and Resident Service, those living in tower blocks will have access to updates on the status of their building’s application to the government’s Building Safety Fund. This will help leaseholders to understand where their building is in the process.
The service is designed to speed up the process of removing unsafe non-ACM cladding from the highest risk buildings, forcing building owners to be more transparent, and exposing those who have failed to take action to make their buildings safe.
This is one of a number of steps announced by the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities earlier this month to apply pressure on industry and protect leaseholders from unnecessary costs and delays.
Minister of State for Building Safety and Fire, Lord Greenhalgh said: “It is unacceptable that four years after the Grenfell tragedy innocent leaseholders are still living in buildings with unsafe cladding.
“Building owners are responsible for making their building’s safe, and we will no longer allow them to shirk from their duties and hide behind processes and corporate loopholes.
“Everyone – including leaseholders – has a right to know what is happening with their building and to live safely. [This] launch is a key step in providing them with both the service and the peace of mind that they deserve.”
In his landmark Building Safety reset on 10 January, the Secretary of State announced that leaseholders would no longer pay for the fixing of unsafe cladding, with building owners and industry footing the bill instead.
While the majority of building owners are already engaged with the Building Safety Fund, a £5.1 billion fund targeted at remediating unsafe non-ACM cladding on residential buildings 18m and over, a minority have yet to come forward and provide building information, leading to unnecessary delays and costs for innocent leaseholders.
Under this new service, a unique code will enable leaseholders and residents to track the progress of their building’s application through an online service, with information updated monthly. This will enable leaseholders to keep track of their building’s application and help apply pressure on their building owners if action is needed.
Leaseholders will receive a unique code from their building owners and are encouraged to contact owners if they do not receive their code, or if they have any further queries on the status of their building’s application. Many residents will also receive their codes directly from government.
To maintain the pace of building remediation and ensure the Building Safety Fund is further targeted at the highest risk buildings, the Secretary of State is currently reviewing the wider programme ahead of the next phase of funding, expected early this year.
This is valid as of 27th January 2022.
An East London employment tribunal found that Mrs. Best, who worked at raw pet food company Embark on Raw in Billericay, Essex, made protected disclosures when she raised alarm over colleagues not wearing face coverings – although these were optional at the time – and ignoring social distancing guidelines.
Best also complained about not having access to hot water to wash her hands while in her main place of work, despite having to handle raw meat, and expressed concern about a colleague who continued to work while someone in his household appeared to have COVID-19 symptoms – however she later found out the individual did not have the virus.
She also made a claim for harassment related to her age and sex, alleging that the company owner suggested she might be menopausal.
The tribunal was told that Best “expressed extreme anxiety and stress” after witnessing a colleague coughing in the shop while not wearing a mask.
She raised her concerns about mask-wearing on a WhatsApp group which included several of her colleagues. She ended her message by asking managers to speak to staff about what she perceived to be a “worrying situation”.
The organisation dismissed her health and safety concerns and told her “we are doing the best that we can and we are not breaking any rules. Masks are not required but we do it as an extra measure”.
She was told to “relax” and “stop digging [sic] the youngsters”.
The tribunal’s judgment says: “The claimant’s reasonable belief in the endangerment to health and safety is evidenced by the fact that she was present in the shop and observed and noted the actions of her colleagues.
“There is no documented investigation of the claimant’s allegations; there is no evidence from the respondent that any steps were taken to interview the other five employees or speak to them individually or collectively to find out if the claimant’s anxieties were in fact justified. On the contrary the respondent entirely believed the co-workers’ complaints that they were the ones being treated badly by Mrs. Best.”
In April 2020 a colleague made a complaint about Best, which started that she would “boss” other staff around and treated colleagues “as kids” about the alleged failures to wear masks and socially distance. The complainant said that she and other colleagues were considering leaving the company because of Best.
The following day, one of the company owners phoned Best and told her that she had “created a bit of a divide in the business” and accused her of having “ranted off” about COVID measures. She was worried that Best would expose her business as the source of any illness she might contract.
The claimant was given a verbal warning, but this was not formally logged despite the warning being given as part of the reason for her dismissal a few weeks later.
The judgment says: “Without further investigation of the employee complaints and/or previous actions of the other employees the respondent imposed detriment and eventually dismissed the claimant as a direct result of her protected disclosures and the consequences of those complaints in terms of working relationships.
“No independent intervention such as mediation was attempted. The co-workers were believed and the claimant was identified as the source of all the relevant ‘alienation’ at work.”
One director told the tribunal that after hearing about the complaint against Best, he told his wife that “it’s time to let her go now…they can’t work with her and I can’t work with her, we have to let her go”. He said that he was faced with a situation where either Best was dismissed or he would lose all or a substantial number of his other employees, which would threaten the future of the business.
The tribunal found that the meeting in which Best was dismissed did not comply with the Acas code on disciplinary and grievance procedures as she had been given no notice of the disciplinary allegations against her and therefore no opportunity to prepare a defence or explanation for her actions.
“We find that the principal reason for the claimant’s dismissal on 11 May 2020 was that she made protected disclosures,” the judgment says.
“One of the consequences of those disclosures was the complaint or complaints by her colleagues. The respondent accepted those complaints without intervention, with no proper investigation and sought to preserve its residual workforce by taking the step of dismissing the claimant. The nexus between the making of the disclosures and the dismissal is clearly established.”
Although Best had not been employed at the company for the two-year qualifying period for protection against unfair dismissal, the tribunal found that her claim could succeed because the company had not followed Acas guidance.
A compensation order has not yet been made, but the tribunal found Best would be entitled to a 20% uplift because of the firm’s failure to follow correct disciplinary procedures. Her claims for harassment and victimisation also succeeded.
This is valid as of 25th January 2022.
What you’ll get: On 5 June 2018, Northumbrian Water Limited had contracted JW Colpitts and Co Limited to connect a 1.5-tonne water valve in a confined chamber at Kielder Reservoir, Northumberland. The valve was suspended from a lorry mounted crane when it swung across the chamber and struck the worker. He sustained an open compound fracture of his tibia and fibula and was airlifted to hospital.
Investigating, the HSE found that both companies had failed to risk assess the work and the additional hazards introduced by a change in the scope of work. They failed to implement suitable safety measures and safe systems of work; and provide adequate supervision to the workers.
Northumbrian Water Limited of Northumbria House, Abbey Road, Pity Me, Durham pleaded guilty to breaching Sections 2(1) and 3 (1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974. They were fined £365,000 and ordered to pay costs of £14,360.69 and a victim surcharge of £120.00.
JW Colpitts and Co Limited of John Anderson House, Coniston Road, Blyth Riverside Industrial Estate, Blyth pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 etc. They were fined £30,000 and ordered to pay costs of £17,452.22 and a victim surcharge of £120.
Speaking after the hearing, HSE inspector Clare Maltby said: “Companies must understand that work activities involving confined spaces, work at height and lifting operations must be subject to a robust risk assessment. Furthermore, risk assessments should be reviewed if the scope of work changes and additional hazards are introduced.
“Companies must also ensure that they have suitable safety control measures and safe systems of work in place to address the identified risks. Appropriate arrangements should be in place to supervise and monitor work.”
This is valid as of 24th January 2022.
The company was fined for health and safety failings relating to the removal of asbestos during refurbishment work at an industrial unit in Ballybrakes Business Park, Ballymoney.
Oriental Developments Limited pleaded guilty to three separate health and safety offences at Antrim Crown Court and was fined £15,000.
The HSENI investigation followed a complaint of unsafe work practices, alleging worker exposure to asbestos during construction work at the Ballymoney industrial unit in October 2018. The investigation found that refurbishment of the unit had commenced before any assessment was made as to the presence of asbestos in the building. A prohibition notice was subsequently served by an HSENI Inspector, prohibiting any further work from continuing.
Following the analysis of samples taken by HSENI Inspectors, asbestos containing materials were confirmed to be present throughout the unit. None of the tradespersons that were working on site had been advised that asbestos containing materials were present before construction work commenced.
Of significance, the investigation also found that previous enforcement action had been taken by HSENI Inspectors against Oriental Developments Limited in respect of assessing and managing asbestos at the same location.
Speaking after sentencing, HSENI Inspector Julian Richmond said: “Employers have a legal duty to manage any work involving asbestos, including maintenance, which may result in harmful asbestos fibres being released and worker health being put at risk.
“In this case, the company failed to plan how the work would be carried out safely, to minimise the risk of spread of asbestos fragments and fibres. These risks could easily have been avoided by acting on the findings of the asbestos survey and carrying out correct control measures and safe working practices”
Northern Ireland statistics show that in 2019, asbestos related disease accounted for some 63 deaths where asbestosis or mesothelioma were recorded as the primary or secondary cause of death. Preventing exposure to asbestos is essential to reduce the incidence of asbestos related disease in the future.
This is valid as of 20th January 2022.
What you’ll get: Providing a clear explanation of their rights, the charter aims to improve journeys for disabled people by helping ensure they can travel easily and more confidently.
It will bring together a host of information for disabled passengers travelling across England and advice for passengers on what to do when things do not go as expected.
The charter follows last year’s unveiling of the government’s National Disability Strategy – a range of initiatives to improve journeys for disabled people including:
• an accessibility audit of all rail stations
• clearer audible and visual announcements on buses
• introducing legislation for taxis and private hire vehicles in Parliament
• £1 million to improve access at seaports.
Wendy Morton, Accessibility Minister, said: “I am delighted that we will be partnering with Scope to develop a charter for disabled passengers that will help boost confidence across our road and rail network.
“This practical guide will pull together disabled passengers’ rights so they understand how they can get from A to B with the dignity and ease they deserve.”
Scope research suggests that passengers who travel frequently are faced with a multitude of documents about their rights, which can be unclear. Acting on this feedback, the charter will collate existing information for passengers and centralise it into one coherent and easy-to-use format.
Once developed, it will be published online, providing a one-stop shop on passenger rights and complaints procedures.
Mark Hodgkinson, Scope Chief Executive, said: “We are delighted to work with the Department for Transport to develop a Passenger Charter. Thousands of Scope supporters have backed calls for this vital step towards transforming a system that sometimes makes travel unnecessarily hard, if not impossible, if you are disabled.
“Public transport should be accessible for everyone and this charter will help disabled passengers better understand their rights, the standards they should expect across the network and how to hold providers to account when travel goes wrong.”
This is valid as of 19th January 2022.
What you’ll get: Mr Gove wrote to developers last week, giving them a deadline of early March to agree a fully funded plan of action including remediating unsafe cladding on 11-18 metre buildings, currently estimated to be £4 billion.
He warns he will take all steps necessary to make this happen, including restricting access to government funding and future procurements, the use of planning powers and the pursuit of companies through the courts. He adds that if industry fails to take responsibility, the government will if necessary impose a solution in law.
In the letter, the Secretary of State asks companies to agree to:
• make financial contributions to a dedicated fund to cover the full outstanding cost to remediate unsafe cladding on 11-18 metre buildings, currently estimated to be £4 billion
• fund and undertake all necessary remediation of buildings over 11 metres that they have played a role in developing
• provide comprehensive information on all buildings over 11 meters which have historic safety defects and which they have played a part in constructing in the last 30 years
The vast majority of 11-18 metre buildings are safe and others that do have combustible cladding may also be safe or can be made safe through effective use of existing or new fire safety measures, such as sprinklers and alarms. There are, however, a small number of residential buildings with unsafe cladding which must be addressed.
Mr. Gove says developers must take forward all necessary remediation work at pace – prioritising those with greatest risks first and in all cases finding the quickest and most proportionate solution to make buildings safe.
He calls on industry to enter an open and transparent dialogue with the government to hear their proposals, starting with a roundtable with the largest residential developers and trade bodies. The government will invite leaseholders and those affected by the Grenfell Tower tragedy to the table to discuss solutions at appropriate junctures to ensure discussions are not taking place behind closed doors.
The government will announce a decision on which companies are in scope for funding contributions following discussions with industry but expect it to cover all firms with annual profits from housebuilding at or above £10 million.
Following Mr. Gove’s letter to industry, the old proposed loan scheme for leaseholders in medium-rise flats will be scrapped, with industry given two months to agree to a financial contributions scheme to fund the new plan, otherwise, if necessary, the government will impose a solution in law.
In addition, a new dedicated team is being established to pursue and expose companies at fault and to force them to shoulder the burden of making buildings safe.
Mr. Gove revealed a 4-point plan to reset the government’s approach:
• Opening up the next phase of the Building Safety Fund to drive forward taking dangerous cladding off high-rise buildings, prioritising the government’s £5.1 billion funding on the highest risk
• Those at fault will be held properly to account: a new team is being established to pursue and expose companies at fault, making them fix the buildings they built and face commercial consequences if they refuse
• Restoring common sense to building assessments: indemnifying building assessors from being sued; and withdrawing the old, misinterpreted government advice that prompted too many buildings being declared as unsafe; and
• New protections for leaseholders living in their own flats: with no bills for fixing unsafe cladding and new statutory protections for leaseholders within the Building Safety Bill.
This is valid as of 18th January 2022.
Free downloads, advance notice of webinars, product updates and perks – all straight to your inbox.