Claire Rizos, director, Clarity Safety Solutions Ltd
In August 2011 SHP published a story about a Councillor who refused to wear a hard hat when visiting a construction site.
Stephen Carr, the leader of Bromley Council, was visiting a £5 million leisure centre development. Prior to the visit he informed the site manager that he would not be wearing a hard hat, saying he didn’t “do hats”. Higgins Construction’s site manager carried out a risk assessment to ensure that the visit could go ahead without the Councillor wearing a hat whilst ensuring that he did not come to any harm (other, of course than the reputational fall out).
Since publication on SHP’s website the story has topped the ‘Most Commented’ list and is also one of the most read. The majority of those commenting criticise the councillor for his failure to lead by example. Some have correctly pointed out that strictly speaking there is and was no absolute requirement to wear a safety helmet on a construction site, even under the Construction (Head Protection) Regulations which were in force at the time.
The issue is one of a lack of leadership. Calling the situation “peer pressure” (the words used by Higgins in their response to SHP), implied an equality of rank which was not present. The situation was more akin to pulling rank.
Over the years I’ve carried out more audits, inspections and accident investigations than I can count. I’ve spent most of my working days evaluating situations and giving practical advice. And I’ve lost track of the number of times that a senior manager has attempted to influence the contents of those reports or ask me to soften the advice given. That influence has varied from the subtle to the most gob-smackingly direct — I was recently ‘instructed’ in an email, copied to all and sundry, to change the conclusion of my accident investigation. It didn’t happen.
There’s an important lesson for our profession here on how we deal with the daily “Challenges” we receive. This is my standard operating procedure for such situations:
Looking back on my career I’m aware that it was much more difficult when I was younger, to stand up to the challengers. When you’re working in-house and relying on a good reference to get your next job, you could be risking everything to hold your integrity.
With those thoughts in mind, it would be interesting to read others’ coping strategies.
I always find, Stuart, that it’s best to do a little research before posting a comment on a site such as this. It’s also rather rude of you to assume that the people who write articles like this one have not done their own research. The Head Protection Regulations were revoked (not ‘repealed’) from 6 April last year and so were certainly in force in 2011. At this time, the PPE Regulations specifically did not apply where the Head Protection Regs applied. I’m a little surprised that the HSE (and yourself) refer to the Personal Protective Equipment Regulations 1992 since… Read more »
I was contemplating, Tom, the common factor here of people disagreeing with your professional view and placing pressure on you to change it, whether you’re a site manager dealing with a VIP who won’t follow the rules or a safety adviser whose boss doesn’t want you to express your opinion in writing. Both scenarios at their extreme could be described as bullying. In our role we often get challenged, but we have to find a fair and equal way to deal with those challenges, and ultimately perhaps be prepared to fall on our sword. As an aside, the code of… Read more »
I am not familiar with the details of this particular case but as an architect I have in the past had to ask why it was necessary for the carpet fitter to be wearing a hard hat at the end of a construction project. It had been a ‘site rule’, but as I was ‘snagging’, it was frustrating to keep writing ‘make good damaged plaster at low level and redecorate’, as a result of the carpet fitter bumping his head on the wall as he tried to pull the carpet up tight. So, if it was safe for the councilor… Read more »
A few interesting points , particularly the 3rd point. When I was younger and less experienced my manager changed a reports wording . I didn’t know enough then about the consequences of this until I was torn apart in court. One mistake I learned from.
From the HSE Website: Does the law require head protection on construction sites? Yes. On almost all construction sites there are situations where head injuries could happen. The work should be organised to minimise this risk, for example: preventing objects falling by using scaffolds with toe boards and, if necessary, brickguards. But if even after doing this, risks of head injury will normally still remain and you should: Ensure all workers are provided with, and wear, suitable head protection. This is necessary to comply with the personal Protective Equipment Regulations 1992 which, from 6 April applies to the provision and… Read more »
Is this not two very different situations? I certainly have a very different response to the hard hat issue compared to management trying to influence the contents of safety reports.