Register | Login | Set as Home Page | Bookmark | General Enquiries | Help | Friday, 10th of February 2012
HSS Logo
hsssearch.com
Search 
Magazine 
Register for our ENewsletter
Click to visit http://www.toyota-forklifts.co.uk/EN/resources/Pages/default.aspx

Coming up in H&SS February: Counterbalance Trucks; Heavy Duty Lifting & Moving; The Cold Store; Warehouse Flooring; Pallets & Pallet Handling; Bespoke Structures

Click to visit http://www.windsorkomatsu.co.uk

HSDGuide.com

Prevention best policy
March 1st 2010

As the first trial of a company director for gross negligence manslaughter hits the

headlines, James Tillyer of the Freight Transport Association says directors or owners

of companies need to ensure they lessen the risks

In April 2008, the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate

Homicide Act created a new offence of Corporate

Manslaughter in England,Wales and Northern Ireland,

(Corporate Homicide in Scotland). This was the result of over ten

years of campaigning to make it easier to prosecute large

organisations where death has resulted from the gross failings of

corporate management to adhere to their duty of care.

After all, owing to their ability to absorb modest financial

penalties without breaking into a sweat, large, affluent companies

should be given large, 'punitive' fines comparable with their size;

the logic being that tougher penalties will boost health and safety

standards. New sentencing guidelines now mean that convicted

companies are likely to face fines of £500,000 and upwards.

The law will make it easier for grossly negligent individuals to

be punished too, as it ties in with existing laws that mean

company directors and senior managers can be prosecuted under

the offence of Gross Negligence Manslaughter (with both

company director and company responsible for health and safety

offences).With the odds stacked higher than ever, all eyes will be

fixed on the outcome of the first corporate manslaughter trial,

which began on 23 February.

If convicted, this particular company director could be handed

a maximum sentence of life imprisonment having been charged

under Gross Negligence Manslaughter law. The accusation being

made in this particular case is of a 'gross breach' of duty following

the death of a junior employee when the sidewall of an excavated

pit collapsed while he was taking soil samples during a site survey.

The company director has also been charged with an offence

contrary to Section 37 of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974.

The organisation itself has been charged with failing to discharge

a duty contrary to Section 33 of the HSW Act.

Although this is the first trial of its kind, it is important to

understand that it does not impose any new obligations or duties

on organisations. Organisations whose senior management

already properly manage their duties of care have nothing to fear.

In terms of health and safety offences, the Health and Safety

Executive (HSE) will only prosecute individuals in the most

serious of cases, and more often than not the HSE will focus on

the whole management chain rather than an individual.

The offence of Corporate Manslaughter only applies to

organisations; therefore a penalty of imprisonment is not

relevant. If found guilty an organisation can face an unlimited

fine, a remedial order, and a publicity order which compels

companies to publish statements about corporate manslaughter

convictions

However, Gross Negligence Manslaughter is more onerous and

a conviction could bring a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.

There are two key questions that determine whether an act of

corporate manslaughter and gross negligence manslaughter has

been committed. First, has there been a gross breach of a duty of

care? Secondly, did the way in which activities were managed or

organised by senior management represent a substantial element

of the breach. A duty of care is an obligation requiring an

organisation to take reasonable steps to protect a person's safety.

A breach is considered as being 'gross' if the alleged conduct falls

far below what can reasonably be expected of the organisation in

the circumstances.

In trying to reduce instances of corporate fatalities, the Health

and Safety Executive and the Crown Prosecution Service will be

focusing on higher risk industries, so, those in the transport and

warehousing sectors should take particular notice. However,

organisations which already properly organise and manage their

duty of care obligations should have nothing to fear from this

legislation.

Prevention is better than cure so it is a good idea to carry out a

review of your whole operation from the top down to check that

systems and processes are

considered best practice.

More articles from Freight Transport Association: