Making Companies Safe - what works? (CCA ... - Unite the Union

“old-fashioned, unnecessarily bureaucratic and prescriptive and [were] likely to
result in considerable burdens on business.” 22
Once again, these arguments are contradicted by the available evidence, which indicates that
one of the problems with the 1996 Regulations is the wide discretion left to employers on
how to consult their workforce (see above). Presumably the prescriptive detail contained in
the draft regulations was an attempt to address this problem. In addition, evidence from the
offshore oil industry – where employers have successfully resisted regulatory requirements to
consult with and provide for the participation of the workforce – suggests that measures
which rely on voluntarism fail to deliver genuine workforce involvement and may be met with
scepticism and low levels of participation by workers themselves. 23
In conclusion, there is strong evidence that concerns of the CBI and certain Government
Departments that the regulatory extension and strengthening of workers’ rights to
consultation, participation and enforcement would be unnecessarily prescriptive and
burdensome are erroneous. In fact, the evidence strongly suggests that there are potential
benefits (most importantly in terms of improved workplace health and safety, but also in terms
of lifting burdens on the HSE) to be gained from allowing safety representatives a tool that
would allow them to enforce OHS requirements within their workplaces. The HSC’s current
voluntary approach to these issues is, therefore, not based on ‘strong arguments’.
1 James and Walters (2002). See also Walters and Frick (2000) and references therein.
2 Reilly et al. (1995); Alder et al. (2000); Litwin (2000); Walters (2001); Stone and Holder (2003).
3 Reilly et al. (1995).
4 Litwin (2000).
5 Horbury et al. (2002).
6 Stone and Holder (2003: 16, 19) and Wright et al. (2004: 61).
7 Employee consultation and involvement in health and safety (DDE12).
8 Hillage et al. (2000).
9 Health and Safety Commission (2003d: 2).
10 Health and Safety Commission (2000).
11 Health and Safety Commission (2003d: Annex C).
12 Health and Safety Commission (2003d: 3). See also the website of the Hazards magazine
http://www.hazards.org/notices/index.htm for further information on and arguments for the use of PINs by
UK safety representatives.
13 Hazards 80, Oct/Dec 2002 pp14-15.
14 Page (2002: paragraphs 120, 142 and 144).
15 Health and Safety Commission (2000).
16 Health and Safety Commission (2003d: 3).
17 Page (2002: paragraph 145).
18 Page (2002: paragraphs 66-67).
19 Page (2202: 113).
20 Health and Safety Commission (2003c: paragraph 7.1).
21 Health and Safety Commission (2003c: paragraph 7.3).
22 Health and Safety Commission (2003d: 2).
23 Woolfson (2004 forthcoming). 31