The number of people killed at work in Britain last year rose by 16 per cent, prompting renewed calls on the Government to rethink its strategy to reduce health and safety activity and resources.
Provisional figures released by the HSE yesterday (28 June) revealed that 171 workers died in 2010/11 – up from the record low of 147 deaths in 2009/10. The rate of fatal injury per 100,000 workers also went up – from 0.5 to 0.6.
The construction industry recorded 50 deaths among its workers – an increase of 22 per cent on last year’s total of 41 fatalities. The fatal-injury rate in the industry was 2.4 deaths per 100,000 workers. In the agriculture sector, which, along with construction, is traditionally the most dangerous in which to work, deaths fell from 39 last year to 34 in 2010/11.
HSE chair Judith Hackitt admitted that the increase was “disappointing” but was keen to emphasise that Britain still has one of the lowest rates of fatal injury anywhere in Europe.
Calling on all stakeholders to continue to focus on “real risks and not on trivia and pointless paperwork”, she said: “We all have a role to play – employers, employees and regulators – and leadership is fundamental to maintaining and improving our performance even further.”
But the TUC, while agreeing that the responsibility for the rise in fatalities “must be placed at the door of negligent employers”, was adamant that more needs to be done by the Government to ensure workers are protected. Said general secretary, Brendan Barber: “
The Government’s recent decision to reduce workplace inspections, and the budget cuts for both the HSE and local authorities, make it far less likely that problems will be identified before something goes wrong.
“Traditionally, injury rates increase as we come out of a recession. If we are going to stop this year’s increase becoming a long-term trend we need more inspections in the workplace, not fewer.”
His comments were echoed by IOSH, which said that as the economy recovers and industry picks up it is “essential” to maintain inspection levels, increase awareness and ensure access to reliable information and advice.
Head of policy and public affairs Richard Jones commented: “We are disappointed and concerned with the overall increase in fatalities, particularly the growth in the construction and waste and recycling sectors. Cuts mustn’t cost lives and one death is too many.”
The union that represents HSE staff pointed out that the figures were “even more alarming, given that economic output has remained stagnant over the past 12 months”.
Mike Macdonald, negotiator for Prospect, called on the Government to rethink the 35-per-cent cut to the regulator’s budget, saying: “Not only does the HSE’s work save lives and reduce the misery felt by friends and family following the death of a loved one, it saves industry and the taxpayer hundreds of millions of pounds in lost working days and medical bills.
“Therefore, we have to question how appropriate it is for the Government to make cuts of 35 per cent, which will result in fewer front-line inspections.”
He added that Prospect is particularly concerned by the decision to scale back proactive inspections – something which pressure group the Hazards Campaign also emphasised in its reaction to the latest figures.
The Campaign said: “Nationally, there were 47 deaths in the services sector, 34 in agriculture, and 27 in manufacturing – all sectors that will soon be free of unannounced, proactive inspections that spot hazards before they kill someone, but which [Employment minister] Chris Grayling has scrapped.”
However, the minister countered with the assertion that “the reforms will ensure that action is better targeted on those who irresponsibly put workers and the public at risk”.
The statistics can be viewed on the HSE website at www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/fatals.htm
Proof if proof were needed!
How many of us secretly have thought that our existance as H&S officers, etc will only ever be justified if that one irratating know-it-all has an accident.
OK we are classed as non-productive, H&S is a pain, but when will these people realise that we are there for a reason. Yes its a pain paying out for something that might happen, thats why we all pay car insurance, but surely this proves that you need inspections to prevent you paying a lot more than money
The Government have to rethink there strategy, we need more proactive HSE Inspectors that will work with Company’s to prevent accidents and needless deaths at work.
There are too many company’s out there who have no regard for safety and if we continue to cut inspections and Inspectors, injury rates are going to increase.
Is this the governments approach to HSE or the cuts of 35% that are responsible?
Maybe it is the economic climate that has pushed employers into taking risks, the job market condition pushing employees to just get on with it.
Without jumping the gun on the topic itself and without the full scheme of the facts in place I think all aspects need consideration. For the future a government promoting good safety and practitioners giving practical and sensible advice is required.
I consider most of the comments are premature. Some fall under the heading of ‘wishful political thinking’ from those who have NEVER understood the damage done to our economy by the increasingly bizarre interpretations of HASAWA, under the aegis of the last chairman of the HSC.
Statistics have always drifted up and down, even under governments like the last one, intent on social-engineering & job creation – an area in which health & safety must have been quite useful in the last 10 years.
Let’s just remember that last year’s excellent results were tempered (almost condemned by some on here!) by the fact that the UK economy was in recession, that employment was high and that it was nothing to get excited about. As the ecomomy has levelled out, surely we should also expect a return to the more normal levels of accidents, as undesirable as it may be? The HSE is not responsible as such for work place safety, it remains the duty of the employer. Funding wont change that fact.
Well there we have it – Common Sense, Common Safety and what actually constitutes a real risk and just what is pointless paperwork. Judith, the UK has always led the way in occupational health and safety but for how much longer. These statistics are discussing and unforgivable; please drop the public appeasing rhetoric and get on with your job of saving lives.
Not too surprising, good safety requires an investment – not a 35% cut in the HSEs budget! Judith is quite keen on writing letters, I wonder if she will be drafting one to Mr Cameron asking him to re-think his strategy on ‘red tape’ and to increase funding for the HSE?
Richard, employers only comply with the law for fear of being caught, prosecuted and punished. If detection rates are low through a reduction of proactive inspections by the regulators, then there will be more non-compliance with the law.
The notion that employers comply with the law through some moral duty is laudable, but the reality is, that these are in the minority. Most prosecutions result from a serious incident – the ‘unlucky’ duty holders who live by a ‘wing and a prayer’.
This should be a stark reminder to all employers not to let health and safety slip down their list of priorities. The planned reduction in HSE inspection should not be interpreted as a reason to lose focus on workplace safety. It’s vital that all employers make the necessary efforts to ensure their health and safety provision is up-to-scratch, covering risk management and prevention, as well as having the skills and equipment in place to respond when an accident does occur.
#@sphererhsm
This news accurately forecasts the large scale increase in fatalitis due to the Governments dogmatic response to helping the right wing press get their message over about red tape.
Such bad decisions should lead to Head of the Government Depts and their civil servants losing their jobs.
The 2010-11 figure of 171 fatalities may be up on the previous year but it is DOWN 17% on the previous 5 year average (205 deaths). Progress is often two steps forward, one step back.
There is no evidence that the trend is not downward.