Factors influencing Local Authority health and safety interventions and enforcement activity. Part One : Interventions

Transcription

1 Factors influencing Local Authority health and safety interventions and enforcement activity Part One : Interventions Prepared by Michael Howard and Alastair Galbraith King s College London August

2 Contents Abstract 3 Executive summary 4 Introduction 9 Methods 10 Results 14 Overview 15 The interventions 21 Partnership 21 Motivating senior managers 27 Supply chain 31 Design & supply 35 Sector & industry wide initiatives 39 Working with those at risk 42 Education & awareness 45 Earned autonomy 49 Inspection & enforcement 59 Intermediaries 62 Best practice 65 Incident & ill health investigation 68 Dealing with issues of concern that are raised & complaints 70 Conclusions 71 Page Appendix 1 Questionnaire 76 Appendix 2 List of interventions strategies and definitions 118 This report and the work it describes were funded by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) Its contents, including any opinions and / or conclusions expressed, are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect HSE policy. Crown copyright

3 REPORT: Part One FACTORS INFLUENCING LOCAL AUTHORITY (LA) HEALTH AND SAFETY INTERVENTION AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY Dr Michael Howard and Mr Alastair Galbraith. King s College London. Abstract Local Authorities (LAs) have a responsibility for enforcement of health and safety law in particular premises defined in the Health and Safety (Enforcing Authority) Regulations This study into the factors influencing LA health and safety interventions and enforcement activity is in two parts. This report is on the interventions and a second report will follow on the enforcement activity in the autumn of 2004 and is not reported here. Whilst approaches such as carrying out routine inspection and engaging in formal enforcement activity have been traditionally the most common methods of ensuring health and safety standards are being met and maintained there are many other approaches that may be used. The full range of interventions examined are partnership, motivating senior managers, supply chain, design & supply, sector & industry wide initiatives, working with those at risk, education & awareness, earned autonomy, inspection & enforcement, intermediaries, best practice, incident & ill health investigation and dealing with issues of concern that are raised and complaints. The research found that there is consistent support for extended use of all the interventions examined. The greatest support is for education & awareness, earned autonomy, design & supply, partnership, motivating senior managers, sector & industry wide initiatives, intermediaries and best practice. The interventions inspection & enforcement, incident & ill health investigation and dealing with issues of concern raised and complaints were favoured by LAs both in terms of current use and feasibility for future use. They were seen as having less scope for increased use due to their already high usage. At the bottom of the list supply chain was seen as less feasible for LAs as was working with those at risk because safety representatives are rare in the LA enforced sector. It is thought that the interventions partnership, intermediaries, supply chain and working with those at risk would be easier to apply to medium and larger organisations in terms of arrangements and efficient resource use. There are more of these sizes of organisation in the HSE enforced sectors. LAs would be willing to be involved in implementing these interventions, perhaps in programmes led by HSE. 3

4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction Local Authorities (LAs) have a responsibility for enforcement of health and safety law in particular premises defined in the Health and Safety (Enforcing Authority) Regulations This study into the factors influencing LA health and safety interventions and enforcement activity is in two parts. This report is on the interventions and a second report will follow on the enforcement activity in the autumn of 2004 and is not reported here. Whilst approaches such as carrying out routine inspection and engaging in formal enforcement activity have traditionally been the most common methods of ensuring health and safety standards are being met and maintained, there are many other approaches that may be used. HSE has already sponsored research to identify the range of interventions that are undertaken by its own staff. This research with LAs uses the 13 intervention definitions identified by the HSE research to recognise any evaluations of the impact of the whole range of intervention strategies used by LAs with the aim of supporting the production of a joint HSE/LA interventions strategy The research This report is compiled from the results of 103 questionnaires and information gathered from interviews with 24 participants. The participants represented 14 LAs in the UK. Results The questionnaire offered tick box responses on current use and feasibility of each intervention. The intervention strategies are listed at 3 points of opportunity before and at the creation of risk, at and during exposure to risk and when the consequences of exposure to risk arise. Table 1 below summarises the findings. Table 1. Mean scores for intervention strategies, current use and feasibility Intervention Current use Feasibility Before & at the point of creation of risk Partnership Motivating senior managers

5 Supply chain Design & supply Sector & industry wide initiatives Working with those at risk Education & awareness Earned autonomy At and during exposure to risk Inspection & enforcement Intermediaries Best practice When the consequences of exposure to risk arise Incident & ill health investigation Dealing with issues of concern that are raised and complaints Partnership The vast majority of businesses that come under the enforcement of LAs are small to medium enterprises (SMEs). It was recognised that SMEs have limited resources and would not become involved in partnership arrangements. Most respondents believed that partnership was a more workable intervention strategy for larger businesses. There was mixed enthusiasm for the effectiveness of local authority partnership schemes (LAPS). They were often seen as resource intensive but were felt to have proven benefits in promoting consistency of enforcement. It was claimed that LAPS was designed for use with larger organisations but it was thought that a model should be devised which could be applied to smaller businesses. Examples of successful LA partnership working include LAPS, intra authority partnerships and partnerships with other organisations such as a community safety strategy group and manual handling in residential care homes. Motivating senior managers Most respondents judged this intervention to be more appropriate with a larger business and would be a useful strategy to meet with senior managers who could agree company policies. This was felt to be an unlikely proposition at a local level because of the types of businesses for which LAs have responsibility. Examples of successful use of this intervention included a forum with local businesses. Supply chain There were parallels seen between this intervention and current regulations imposed by food safety law. It was considered a successful practice in the building trade where health and safety policies of contractors are reviewed to ensure they reach certain standards. It was felt that this intervention would be more effective with large organisations particularly at a national level; SMEs were thought not to have the necessary spending power to have any real influence 5

6 Design & supply Many LAs found this to be an attractive intervention in terms of design and have managed to improve health and safety standards at source by acting in an advisory capacity on planning applications. The general feeling was that if resource is available from an LA point of view then many would be enthusiastic in engaging in such an activity. Sector & industry wide initiatives Of the various strategies this was thought to be most effective in terms of reaching as many businesses as possible, stimulating interest through the business and effecting improvements in health and safety standards. It allows a consistent approach to be observed with an increased sense of fairness on the business as it is clear they are all being treated the same. It was thought to be a resource intensive intervention but if resource were available then LAs would engage in it much more often. Examples of successful use of this intervention included a newspaper delivery initiative. Working with those at risk Most participants recognised the value of taking a bottom up approach to health and safety promotion. However, the vast majority of LA enforced businesses do not have unions or safety representatives, which limits the applicability of this intervention at the LA level. Large organisations with representation would be approached. One successful initiative under this intervention is where LAs approached employees directly and helped them train for CIEH certified qualifications. Education & awareness The general assertion was that this initiative would be unlikely to be effective in isolation. It would need participant ownership and would be weak unless some form of enforcement action accompanied it. Earned autonomy Views on this intervention are diverse. Many respondents noted that a degree of earned autonomy already exists. This is based on risk rated inspections where those categorised as C can to all intents and purposes be removed from inspection. There was uncertainty about this scheme being introduced as a sector wide initiative. Whether a particular industry is inherently low risk or not there will always continue to be good and bad businesses operating within it. Many LAs felt they may be more comfortable with earned autonomy being granted on an individual basis. Further questions on earned autonomy were asked as part of the study to produce proposals for criteria for areas where HSE and LAs will not proactively intervene. Inspection and enforcement This was the only intervention strategy that did not produce significantly different responses for current use and feasibility. The current use score is extremely high and for feasibility this seems to suggest that this is a key strategy and there is little opportunity to increase or decrease its dominance. Inspection is widely understood and appreciated by the majority of businesses. Small businesses in particular are very much in favour of being informed of specific 6

7 requirements and objectives they much reach in order to improve their standards. The inspection process permits the opportunity for one to one contact with duty holders and allows specific advice to be given in response to specific problems encountered. For larger business it was felt that other forms of intervention could sometimes be put to greater use. It was also felt that this intervention was not always as effective in identifying health risks as opposed to safety risks. These are not necessarily visible and are unlikely to be volunteered by management and may therefore be more effectively addressed by some other form of intervention. Intermediaries This intervention was considered to be more effective when tackled at a national level as this would help promote consistency. It was felt that there were similar underlying principles for this and the partnership intervention. Most respondents singled out insurance companies as the single most important group in this equation. Successful work under this intervention includes the workwell initiative, which involved LAs, HSE, Business Link, a Strategic Health Authority, local businesses etc. in promoting and improving health management. Best practice This intervention was said to be used informally on inspections and it was felt this was more realistic approach to this strategy than expecting high performing companies to reveal their trade secrets. Many respondents mentioned the beneficial role which various existing websites could play in this (e.g. HSE information on slips and trips and LACoRS training and coordination website). The production of industry agreed good practice documents was thought to be a potentially useful resource. Incident and ill health investigation This is an intervention that the vast majority of respondents stated that they undertake regularly and it is a cornerstone of health and safety enforcement. There is a public perception that Inspectors should examine serious accidents in greater detail and public confidence would be dented if LAs were not to fulfil this role. Many respondents proposed that learning from an independent investigation is a very important experience for businesses. The message that health and safety is and should be a concern is much more easily understood when learning from a real incident. Dealing with issues of concern raised and complaints There is little to elaborate on here except that this intervention is utilised as a matter of policy. Like accident and ill health investigation, there is a public expectation that this is an area that LAs should be dealing with. It can help identify issues in premises between planned inspections. Conclusions There was consistent support for extended use of all the interventions examined. 7

8 The greatest support being for education & awareness, earned autonomy, design & supply, partnership, motivating senior managers, sector & industry wide initiatives, intermediaries and best practice. The interventions inspection and enforcement, incident and ill health investigation and dealing with issues of concern raised and complaints were favoured by LAs both in terms of current use and feasibility for future use. They were seen as having less scope for increased use due to their already high usage. At the bottom of the list, supply chain was seen as less feasible for LAs as was working with those at risk because safety representatives are rare in the LA enforced sector. It is thought that the interventions partnership, intermediaries, supply chain and working with those at risk would be easier to apply to medium and larger organisations in terms of arrangements and efficient resource use. There are more of these sizes of organisation in the HSE enforced sectors. LAs would be willing to be involved in implementing these interventions, perhaps in programmes led by HSE. The general conclusion is that there is potential for increasing the use of all of the interventions. In many cases this may be by LAs being aware of and supporting HSE led programmes for use of the intervention. This will require better and more focussed communication between HSE and LAs. To be cost effective many of the interventions require central co-ordination whether at a regional or national level. In future close working by HSE and LAs may make joint implementation of a wider range of interventions possible. 8

9 Introduction Local authorities (LAs) have a responsibility for enforcement of health and safety law in particular premises as defined in the Health and Safety (Enforcing Authority) Regulations As regards enforcing health and safety law, local authorities are not formally instructed on how to go about this, however, the Health and Safety at Work Act states that local authorities should, make adequate arrangements for the enforcement within their area of the relevant statutory provisions [Section 18(4)]. Whilst approaches such as carrying out routine inspections and engaging in formal enforcement activity have traditionally been the most common methods of ensuring health and safety standards are met and maintained, there are many other approaches which may be used. It appears that The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and LAs each use a different mix of these approaches or interventions. Within this research a number of intervention strategies will be examined in detail to assess their use within the local authority setting. This will ask how practical the use of such interventions are seen to be and will act as a counterpart to work already carried looking at the Health and Safety Executive (HSE). The HSE has already sponsored research to identify the range of interventions that are undertaken by its own staff and the perceptions of those staff of the efficacy of each intervention. This research will use the 13 intervention definitions identified by that research and the HSE Interventions Strategy steering group (referred to later as Appendix 2). The objective of this part of the work is to identify any evaluations of the impact of the whole range of intervention strategies used by Local Authorities (LAs) with the aim of supporting the production of a joint HSE/LA interventions strategy. The purpose of the exercise is to be able to ensure that the strategy finally adopted has fully considered the use of the full range of intervention strategies. 9

10 Methods Participants The participants were members of health and safety enforcement teams from local authorities throughout the UK. The exact number of participants invited to contribute to the study cannot be precisely gauged as there were several enforcement officers in each LA that we contacted and more than one officer may have responded from each LA. Similarly the number of individual participants who contributed to the study cannot be accurately judged questionnaires were returned to the researchers in sufficient time to be incorporated into analysis for this report. To date interview data have been gathered from 24 participants. These participants represented 14 local authorities in the UK with 7 English West Midlands local authorities represented, 3 Welsh and 4 Scottish. Materials Questionnaire The questionnaire (displayed in appendix one) was based largely upon (a) the intervention strategies outlined in the Interventions Strategy project brief with items designed to elicit local authority views on the practical use of the strategies and (b) items specifically requested by HSE/LAU (Local authority Unit). Part (b) was for the second phase of this research (not reported here). Its development and final content was heavily influenced by the active contributions of a number of HSE personnel from the HSE Interventions Strategy Steering Group. After the inclusion of a substantial number of additions specifically requested by HSE, the questionnaire became very comprehensive and substantial. We were aware that the length of the questionnaire might serve to reduce the number of responses received but decided, in consultation with HSE, to accept this weakness. Efforts were made to create a uniform battery of set questions which were applicable to inquiry into each intervention strategy and the LA enforcement issues. This was intended to achieve two main objectives. Firstly, as the questionnaire had grown substantially in length it was hoped that uniformly arranged questions would reduce fatigue on the part of the respondents and the format of questions quickly became familiar to participants thus reducing any undue 1 Participants were encouraged to complete and return the questionnaires individually so that the return of one questionnaire would signify the participation of one person. However, a number of questionnaires were returned which had been completed jointly for example by a health and safety liaison group encompassing several local authorities. Participants were also given the option of returning the questionnaire anonymously. It was therefore not possible to judge the precise number of participants. 10

11 effort expended on interpreting ambiguous questions. Secondly the set format with its inclusion of Likert scales allows for easy comparison between items on the questionnaire. Piloting of the questionnaire with a number of local authority employees and other EHPs thought to be representative of the target participants took place. Specific suggestions for improvements to the questionnaire were incorporated into the final draft although more general criticisms (such as the overall length of the questionnaire) were largely outwith the control of the researchers. Considerable thought went into the introductory page of the questionnaire. This page made it clear to respondents that, whilst the questionnaire was very long, it was very much hoped that they would try to find the time to complete and return it. In the further explanatory text of the questionnaire definitions of common terms, which would be found throughout the questionnaire, were made. For example, concerning the concept of feasibility, respondents were instructed when making their judgements that they should, take account of all information you think necessary (e.g. Resources available to you, the structure of your department, the types of business found in your district, the views of members or portfolio holders etc). Interview schedule Interviews were carried out on a carefully designed loosely structured basis. Interviewees were presented with the list of intervention strategies and related explanations / examples (displayed in appendix two). The issues addressed in each interview varied and tended to be interviewee led after the initial questions. The aim of this was to avoid coercing participants into discussing strategies which they tended not to use or force them into coming up with poor examples of each strategy. Each strategy was discussed at least to some degree in most interviews, with the interviewer interjecting questions where appropriate to steer the discussion towards why or why not each particular strategy was used. By adopting this format of questioning it allowed certain important issues and themes to be identified in the earlier interviews. Greater focus on these themes was made in later interviews with the most recent interviews conducted focusing on key issues surrounding certain remaining interventions issues. Procedure Substantial warm up activity was undertaken to prepare local authorities and make them aware that this research would soon be taking place; particular emphasis was placed upon the importance of the research and the value that would be placed on respondents opinions in this matter. An article was prepared for the Environmental Health News (EHN). s were then sent by LACORS to heads of environmental services departments (or those in which the health and safety enforcement function was known to be based) at local authorities throughout the country on the 11 th June

12 Because of LACORS data protection concerns the researchers have limited knowledge as to how many individuals or local authorities were reached by these s. The referred to above alerted recipients to the fact that the research was in progress and provided an internet link which took the recipient to a page of the LACORS website where the questionnaire was posted in a suitable format for downloading. Recipients of the questionnaire were told that they had two options for the return of the questionnaire. First they could send a hard copy of the questionnaire by post to the researchers. Secondly the researchers had set up a dedicated account specifically for returns of the questionnaire. This was so participants also had the option to return the questionnaire electronically thus respecting many individuals green concerns over the excessive use of paper products. Postal returns could also be made anonymously. The initial stated deadline for returns of the questionnaire was 18 th June. This was an extremely tight deadline and effectively allowed only one week at most for completion. It had been chosen as it allowed telephone chase up to be undertaken quickly. In response to a series of complaints and objections raised in relation to the short time to the deadline a follow up was sent by LACORS. This stated that questionnaires would be accepted up to and including the 2 nd July allowing a further two weeks on the original deadline. In effect, however, the actual deadline was very loosely observed by a number of respondents with some questionnaires being returned as late as the 21 st July. Due to the time and effort which had been spent by respondents in completing the questionnaires the researchers felt that to exclude those received after the deadline would be both unfair to the respondents and counterproductive to the objectives of this research. All responses were eventually considered. Great efforts were made to chase up local authorities that had not submitted the questionnaire with phone calls being made to 345 local authorities. Difficulties were encountered in this activity, as the researchers had no direct access to the LACORS database, which was used as the initial contact for local authorities. An independent database was therefore developed based upon web research, phone calls to central Council switchboards and reliance on directory enquiries. Analysis of the data was made using quantitative and qualitative methods. As regards the questionnaire, the responses to the Likert scale formatted questions (using a scale of 1 to 10) were all recorded and analysed descriptively with the use of mean values and standard deviations. More detailed interpretation was achieved by a series of t-test analyses. The quantitative items relating to earned autonomy were interpreted largely by calculating the frequency of particular responses to questions. 12

13 The free response areas from the questionnaire and the data gathered through interviews were interpreted in a broadly similar fashion to each other. Content analyses were made to discover regularities of the opinions, themes and dimensions which were representative of responses as a whole. Interpretation of the results was based upon these analyses. Quantitative description of the data provided an account of the responses of participants then qualitative descriptions were examined affording more detailed explanations of why such responses had been made by those participating in the study. 13

14 RESULTS Introduction The results will be discussed by reference to both quantitative and qualitative data gathered throughout the investigation. As regards the former, attention will be focused on scores recorded by respondents in their indications of current use and feasibility of each intervention strategy (both recorded on a scale of 1-10). The qualitative data gathered through freeresponse items on the questionnaire and interview data will be utilised to provide further insight and explanation of these figures. In addition specific examples of each intervention in use will be described with reference to interview data (interview transcriptions are presented in appendices 3 to 17). Responses concerning each intervention strategy will be discussed in turn (in the order prescribed in the Interventions Strategy) later in this section of the report but first an overview of the quantitative data will be made. As noted earlier 103 questionnaires were returned 2 and, of these, 97 were suitable for quantitative analysis. The remaining 6 questionnaires had been reformatted independently by respondents such that their replies no longer conformed to the structure of the original questionnaire. The qualitative data from this group of respondents was noted in the interpretation of results. 2 This figure was lower than initially thought as an unforeseen difficulty with the return of questionnaires was that some respondents made returns both by mail and . This was later detected by the researchers and duplicate questionnaires were removed from the final analysis. Incidentally most participants preferred to return the questionnaire electronically with 76 of the 103 questions returned via . 14

15 Overview The graph below shows the proportion of respondents who answered the questions on each of the intervention strategies (1-13) in the questionnaire. Each of the 13 interventions asked for 4 main items of information: an assessment of the local authority s current use of that strategy, an assessment of the feasibility of use of that strategy, further explanation of their judgement and details of any implications they thought that strategy had for smaller, locally based businesses 3. Graph 1: Proportion of responses by intervention strategy Percentages of responses Current use Feasibility Explanation Implication As can be seen the proportion of respondents offering information fluctuated throughout the interventions but, as a general rule, decreased as the questionnaire progressed. For the tick-box responses of current use and feasibility, the proportion of responses remained relatively stable across intervention at between 80% and 98%. For the free response sections, however, the information offered varied more widely across interventions with from between 63% and 98% for further explanation and 39% and 81% for implications. The data gathered relating to each intervention strategy therefore varied and analysis of certain intervention strategies from questionnaire data was resultantly more limited in some instances than others. The graph illustrates a time-series in terms of responses as the order of responses corresponds to that used in the questionnaire. It provides some evidence of fatigue as the respondents answer fewer questions as time goes on. This will have resulted in less data being available for the later interventions. 3 The intervention strategy of earned autonomy (no 8) did not request additional information about implications for smaller businesses hence the missing value in the graph. 15

16 Table one displays mean calculations for both current use and feasibility. These are arranged in the order specified by the Interventions Strategy document. It can be seen that all means for feasibility are greater than those recorded for current use suggesting that local authorities recognise the potential, which the various strategies have to promote health and safety. Table one: Mean scores for intervention strategies, current use and feasibility (sorted in Interventions Strategy order) Mean calculations Intervention strategy Current Use Feasibility Partnership Motivating senior managers Supply chain Design and supply Sector and industry wide initiatives Working with those at risk Education and awareness Earned autonomy Inspection and enforcement Intermediaries Best practice Incident and ill health investigation Dealing with issues of concern that are raised and complaints

17 Table two contains the same data as table one but displays the calculations in descending order of the mean score attained for current use. Table two: Mean calculations for intervention strategies current use and feasibility (sorted in descendancy of current use) Mean calculations Intervention strategy Current Use Feasibility Inspection and enforcement Incident and ill health investigation Dealing with issues of concern that are raised and complaints Education and awareness Design and supply Earned autonomy Sector and industry wide initiatives Partnership Motivating senior managers Best practice Intermediaries Supply chain Working with those at risk It can be seen that working with those at risk is rated the lowest (mean of 2.22) whilst inspection and enforcement (mean of 8.58) is rated most highly. What might be termed the traditional methods of intervention for health and safety are all located at the higher end of the scale (dealing with issues of concern that are raised and complaints, incident and ill health investigation and inspection and enforcement). It can also be seen that two of these most highly rated strategies are reactive strategies where intervention is made when the consequences of risk have already arisen. It may be indicative of local authorities traditional working practices and the characteristics of businesses within their enforcement responsibility that these strategies are so highly rated. On a similar theme it should also be noted that the vast majority of interventions (10 of 13) were rated below 5 giving rise to the conjecture that many of the less traditional strategies are not widely used. 17

18 Table three again contains the same data as the previous table but this time displays the calculations in descending order of the mean score attained for feasibility. Table three: Mean calculations of intervention strategies current use and feasibility (sorted in descendancy of feasibility) Mean calculations Intervention strategy Current Use Feasibility Inspection and enforcement Incident and ill health investigation Dealing with issues of concern that are raised and complaints Education and awareness Sector and industry wide initiatives Design and supply Earned autonomy Partnership Motivating senior managers Intermediaries Best practice Supply chain Working with those at risk The order of the interventions does not differ hugely from the previous table and those towards the ends of the scale are relatively unchanged in their position. More encouraging however, is that 11 of the 13 strategies were rated above 5 (as compared to just 3 for the corresponding current use calculations). Of similar interest are the differences in value between each score for current use and feasibility. These range from the fairly negligible of inspection and enforcement, where an increase of 0.13 was calculated for feasibility, to the much larger value increase of 3.10 calculated for intermediaries. These values can be taken as a crude indication of which strategies local authorities feel they are capable of employing to a greater extent. The greater the difference between the two mean calculations here suggests a greater acknowledgement of the benefits to be gained from adopting this approach more frequently. More formal methods of assessing this relationship will be reviewed in the later part of this section where each intervention strategy is discussed in turn. 18

19 Finally in this section it is useful to look briefly at standard deviation calculations obtained for each of the mean calculations. Table four displays the values obtained when calculating the standard deviation from the means in the previous tables. The standard deviation here can be taken to indicate the overall consensus of the sampled population. Many local authorities are fairly distinctive in their approaches to health and safety and, for example, on account of the nature of their district (i.e. rural or urban authority) they may prioritise strategies differently. The above analyses investigate the degree of variation in this. Table four: Standard deviation of mean calculations for current use and feasibility. Standard deviation of mean calculations Intervention strategy Current Use Feasibility Partnership Motivating senior managers Supply chain Design and supply Sector and industry wide initiatives Working with those at risk Education and awareness Earned autonomy Inspection and enforcement Intermediaries Best practice Incident and ill health investigation Dealing with issues of concern that are raised and complaints Whilst no formal controls were built in to the research methods to analyse this factor it may be useful to bear in mind these deviations when considering other results to be discussed later in the report. By way of explanation, standard deviations of 1.60 and 1.58 were calculated for inspection and enforcement s current use and feasibility. These were the lowest figures calculated indicating that, of the local authorities sampled in this project, there would be little debate about the mean score and that the general consensus about this intervention strategy is very strong. The mean for earned autonomy resulted in a higher standard deviation of 2.68 for current use suggesting that there is more variation in how much each individual authority uses this strategy. Similarly the standard deviation score for 19

20 feasibility on best practice was 2.55 giving the impression that the benefits of its potential application in all local authorities produced a wider spread of scores The impression which can be built up from this initial analysis is that the majority of intervention strategies listed are not currently used to any great degree by local authorities. Despite this, participants recorded much more favourable respondents for the strategies feasibility. In the following sections the researchers hope to provide information to explain this further paying particular attention to factors such as where and when a particular strategy might be useful, taking into account how practical the intervention might be at the local level and whether there are any particular conditions which would facilitate greater use of particular strategies. 20

21 THE INTERVENTIONS When giving an explanation as to why each strategy was or was not used, or could be put to greater use, respondents tended to offer a varied range of explanations. These explanations can be broadly categorised under the headings of perspective of the business, perspective of the local authority and potential of the intervention / conditions for potential actualisation. Within these broad headings came a number of related points. This report will make an evaluation of each intervention with reference to the above broad headings and explain them further using related sub headings. In addition (where appropriate) towards the end of each section on a particular strategy, specific examples drawn from interview data will be cited. These examples aim to give a more detailed account of interventions working in practice and illustrate some of the points already drawn out. Partnership As we noted in the previous section, the mean score for current use for the strategy of partnership was 3.81 whilst for feasibility it was This represented an increase in value of This was shown to be a significant difference through further analysis where t (95) = 24.33; p < Perspective of the business Small businesses The vast majority of businesses which come under the enforcement of local authorities fall into the category of small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs). From the perspective of a small business there are a number of key issues which might limit how involved an organisation may become in a partnership arrangement. It was recognised by respondents that many SMEs have very limited resources. Their primary aim is to keep the business running and health and safety issues tend to take a lower priority than other business objectives. This tends to manifest itself as a lack of interest or desire to become involved in partnership. Most SMEs, it was often noted, much preferred a prescriptive form of intervention where they are given clear instructions by the local authority on what standards need to be met. Their time is necessarily limited and engaging in protracted partnership arrangements tends to sap this limited resource further. 21

22 Large businesses Most respondents believed that partnership was a more workable intervention strategy for larger businesses. These, it was said, tend to have more resources and availability of personnel to attend meetings for example. Potential partnership schemes were viewed as being much more successful with the larger companies. Unfortunately, there was reported something of a paradox here where the larger businesses tend to already have a health and safety framework in place and so the partnership arrangement does not benefit them as greatly as it might do small businesses. In partnership schemes local authorities therefore sometimes find themselves preaching to the converted. The aim of partnerships is, as with all pro-active interventions, to raise awareness and commitment to health and safety standards but it would appear that those who have lower standards (often SMEs) are very difficult to influence using this intervention. Perception of the enforcing authority Another stumbling block in forming partnerships is the suspicion with which the enforcing authority is sometimes viewed. It was felt that it is sometimes difficult to create a true partnership with organisations where the enforcer is present. Perspective of the local authority Local authority partnership schemes Responses from local authorities indicated mixed enthusiasm for the effectiveness of local authority partnership schemes (LAPS). When properly administered such schemes were felt to have exhibited proven benefits in promoting consistency of enforcement although the effectiveness of this arrangement was thought to be largely dependant on the lead authority (and, to a varying degree, the corresponding organisation s commitment) and there were thought to be several pitfalls which prevented effective administration of a LAPS. One of these is the resource demanded of a local authority to effectively run a LAPS. In local authorities where resources are limited, LAPS tended not to be viewed as the most efficient use of resources as they consume a large proportion of officers time. Indeed many respondents seemed reluctant to act as a lead authority on account of the time involved. 22

23 Sometimes it was claimed that the lead authorities role in LAPS degenerates into acting purely in the defence of their organisation. It was considered that, in some circumstances, the lead authority can get drawn into legislative wrangling rather than remaining purely objective. The aim of a LAPS, noted some respondents, was of use to one employer alone and, through professional defensiveness on the part of the lead authority, disproportionate resources can be placed into improving that employer s health and safety to the detriment of others. For some, the entire guidelines for LAPS were considered very unclear resulting in some schemes being a LAPS in name only. On the one hand, a particular lead authority might be very knowledgeable about their company s systems, procedures and current issues whilst, on the other, another lead authority may have very patchy information to offer. It was claimed by several respondents that very few lead authorities have completed documented safety management reviews in accordance with LAC44/3. It is noted by the researchers that the LAPS guidelines have recently been relaxed to encourage a greater number of schemes to be developed. It is also of note however, that it would seem some of the respondents were not aware of these changes. Related to this was the situation where sometimes the commitment of the organisation in question is lacking. Some respondents felt that employers perceived entering into the partnership as a way to keep local authorities off their back and, once the partnership had been set up, the lead authority were left with little input from the company involved. LAPS is designed, it was claimed by some, for use with larger organisations. As previously noted however, most larger organisations tend to have better standards and hence require less attention than the comparably poorly informed SMEs. Potential of the intervention / conditions for potential actualisation. The resource level required to run LAPS was often considered as a major inhibiting factor. Many local authorities are encouraged to focus on carrying out set number of inspections to the point where pro-active intervention becomes perceived as an indulgence. One suggestion to remedy this was for companies to pay an annual subsistence fee toward partnership schemes. As previously mentioned, many respondents questioned the clarity of guidelines set out for the administration of partnership schemes (in particular LAPS) and consider them unclear. Some claimed that they would be much more enthusiastic about involving themselves in such arrangements if tried and tested models of guidance were available. Similarly it was thought that a model of LAPS should be devised which is applicable to working with smaller businesses as any current guidelines were considered too complex and unwieldy for smaller local businesses. 23

24 SPECIFIC EXAMPLES Local authority partnership schemes One local authority acts as the lead authority for the National Association of Steel Stockholders (NASS). In addition, the HSE are involved in this as steel stockholders can fall to either HSE or local authorities. It was felt that with this particular LAPS, it doe not necessarily work as it should as the interviewee felt that other local authorities sometimes failed to contact him/her in instances where they should. It was also thought in this particular example that the lead authority were having to deal with a lot of individual enforcers different prejudices about a company. In responding to this the lead authority have, in some cases, ended up acting as an advocate or defence mechanism for the Association and finding themselves forced into acting less objectively than they would like. Another interviewee talked of their authority s role as the lead authority for the Association of British Climbers. This was considered to be highly effective. Intra authority partnerships There were many examples stated by interviewees of partnership arrangements which they have in operation with other departments within their local authority. For instance, one interviewee pointed out a useful link with the LA regeneration and transportation department. This arrangement allowed the interviewee to comment upon and make recommendations on issues relating to building control and, sometimes, approval of planning applications. Business partnerships One of the interviewees was heavily involved in a safety forum for local businesses. Certain managers of shops within a local shopping arcade were invited to attend a briefing on slips and trips. This proved very effective in making the managers aware that the prevention of slips and trips can be achieved by less drastic measures than replacing a floor for example. Resultantly the arcade s managers have adopted other preventative measures such as trebling the amount of matting in existence throughout the arcade and developing cleaning crews who are cleaning the floors in a manner designed to minimise the potential for slip or trip incidents. Partnerships with other organisations One interviewee described a partnership, which the local authority has with a community safety strategy group. This also involves organisations such as the police, the local primary care trust, the ambulance service and the fire service and was developed in response to a spate of hold ups and robberies from small premises, which had occurred recently. 24

25 In this partnership the local authority offers what advice and information it can to minimise the safety risks which might be experienced in such instances. Trade union consultation One interviewee recounted how they had been involved in an exhibition with the Transport and General Workers Union (TGWU). Transport companies from across the country attended this exhibition which placed a major emphasis on the importance of transport safety. It was felt that this was an excellent initiative as the TGWU has a very powerful influence and are capable of exerting considerable influence on businesses. This could also be viewed as an intervention under Working with those at risk. It was added though that the interviewee felt a reluctance to become too involved in working with unions on account of the fact that they are political organisations. Clearly the local authority has a degree of political affiliation and the borough in which the respondent works, for example, will be under the control of a particular political party. To have allegiances with other political groups was therefore felt to be something that should be approached with great caution. Workwell Workwell is an initiative which many of the authorities in the West Midlands are involved in. It can be described as a multi-disciplinary team that aims to improve the health and safety of the local working population and is funded through the Regional Development Agency and the local NHS. Workwell operates by advising local businesses in methods to improve their health and safety conditions. The local authorities involvement with this partnership varied from one authority to another. At the very least though, the authorities have identified certain premises that they feel might benefit from what Workwell have to offer and, individual interviewees hoped, that this partnership would evolve to allow local authorities a more active role. Further details of this project can be seen at the following website: Wellbeing at work A similar initiative to Workwell above, Wellbeing at work takes a similar approach and provides in depth advice to local businesses. In addition they charge a fee for this service. The local authorities have worked with this organisation in the past t, for example, to hold seminars and educational talks with the unions. Further details of this project can be seen the following website: 25

26 Manual handling in residential care homes A major multi-authority initiative to tackle manual handling issues in residential care homes is currently getting under way in Wales. This is being undertaken in conjunction with the HSE (nursing homes as opposed to residential homes are enforced by the HSE). This initiative intends to, firstly, ask managers about what procedures they have in place for manual handling. Following on from that staff members will be asked similar questions to ascertain if the two views marry up. This is an ongoing initiative which is still in its infancy but, with contributions across the country and the focus on both HSE and local authority sectors, this would appear to be a very comprehensive study which is likely to produce excellent recommendations for reducing the incidence of injury caused through manual handling issues. 26