Facilities Management Handbook

Frank Booty

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2009
• ISBN:
  9781136440076
• Edition: 4
• Topic: Technology & Engineering
• Subtopic: Construction & Architectural Engineering
• Index: Technology & Engineering

Now in this fourth edition, the Facilities Management Handbook has been fully updated from the acclaimed previous editions, continuing its status as an invaluable resource to those working in facilities management, whether just starting out or as seasoned campaigners and practitioners.

Information is presented in a clear and logical way, offering easy-to-find advice and best practice information that's essential in guaranteeing the safe, efficient and cost-effective running of any facilities function.

Many sections have been completely revised, such as the chapters on complying with health and safety and property law. Other information on workplace facilities has been brought completely up to date in line with legal compliance and strategic policies to create a reliable and accurate overview of the role of today's facilities manager.

This up-to-date and revised handbook will be a key guide for the changing times that are ahead.

Part 1

Complying with the Law

Chapter 1

Complying with Safety, Health, Fire and Environment Law

Pat Perry

Prosecutions under criminal law and compensation under civil law are the tip of the iceberg when it comes to working out what poor health and safety costs employers. Health and Safety Executive (HSE) studies suggest that for every pound in costs covered by employers’ liability insurance, organisations must pay another £8 to £36 in uninsured costs. The message is that safe, healthy workplaces save money, not only in obvious ways such as reducing absenteeism, but also by making organisations more efficient and productive. By improving workplace design and ensuring that workstations are ergonomically suited to the individual worker, for example, facilities managers play a crucial role in this process of improving staff morale and well-being.

The 2006/07 HSE survey of self-reported work-related illness estimated that 2.2 million employees were made ill by their work that year. Overone millionpeoplesuffered musculoskeletal disorders, and over 400,000 suffered stress, anxiety or depression. Over 10.5 million working days were lost owing to stress, anxiety or depression in 2005/06. Overall, the total number of working days lost during 2005/06 was reputed to be over 30 million. The Confederation of British Industry (CBI) has estimated that the annual cost of absenteeism to UK plc is £10 billion, rising to £20 billion if indirect costs are counted.

As for accidents, 241 people were killed at work in 2006/07, and there were approximately 300,000 non-fatal injuries to employees. HSE estimates that injuries cost UK businesses £0.9 billion a year, illnesses £1.6 billion, and non-injury accidents between £1.4 billion and £4.5 billion. The total represents between 4 and 8 per cent of companies’ gross trading profits.

On average, the cost of an injury or serious accident to an employer is approximately £8000 per incident.

Despite many health and safety awareness campaigns, and stricter law enforcement, accident rates have not significantly reduced. The construction industry in particular has much improvement to make.

Cost of Poor Health and Safety

Costs imposed by ill-health and accidents include:

• sick pay
• lost production
• damaged equipment and materials
• extra administration
• losing skilled staff
• training replacement staff
• increased insurance premiums
• loss of staff morale
• bad publicity (which may put off job candidates and investors)
• compensation, fines and court costs.

Enforcement

The cornerstone of health and safety legislation is the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 (HSW Act). It is an ‘enabling’ Act, under which detailed regulations on particular work-related risks are made.

These regulations are supported by Approved Codes of Practice (ACoPs) and guidance. ACoPs have a special legal status like the Highway Code. If a court proves that an organisation failed to comply with a relevant ACoP, it will be found guilty unless it demonstrates that it complied with the law in another way. Following guidance is not compulsory, and employers are free to take other action. But by following it, they will usually be doing enough to comply with the law.

The Health and Safety Commission and the Health and Safety Executive

The Health and Safety Commission (HSC) is the agency with overall responsibility for developing workplace health and safety and deciding on new legislation to lay before parliament. Its commissioners are drawn from employers’ organisations, trade unions and local authorities. Its executive arm was the HSE, but in April 2008 the two divisions merged into one regulatory body which will be known as the Health and Safety Executive.

Responsibility for enforcing the law is shared between the HSE and local authorities. The HSE inspects factories, chemical firms and construction sites, while local authority environmental health officers (EHOs) inspect offices, shops, warehouses, hotels and leisure sites. Inspectors may issue an improvement notice if they find a breach of statutory duty, or a prohibition notice stopping an activity which involves a risk of serious injury. Immediate prosecutions can be instigated for severe or gross contravention of any health and safety legislation and may often be a route taken by inspectors after accident investigations.

Regulations

Modern health and safety law in the UK is ‘goal setting’ rather than prescriptive. The responsibility is on employers actively to apply these broad legal principles to suit their particular organisation, rather than following fixed rules which may not be appropriate to their circumstances.

Goal-setting regulations can cause much anxiety among employers as they have no prescribed solutions giving a definitive approach to compliance. A common question raised by employers and others who are responsible for complying with the law is ‘how do I know that I’ve done enough to comply with the law?’ The answer is often in the ACoP, or in the term ‘suitable and sufficient’. No one is expected to achieve perfection all of the time, but any compliance must be appropriate for the hazards and risks associated with the task or work environment.

The Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974

The HSW Act imposes a duty of care on employers, employees and suppliers.

Employers’ Duties (s. 2)

Employers should, ‘so far as is reasonably practicable’, ensure the health, safety and welfare at work of all employees by:

• providing safe equipment and working practices
• ensuring safe handling, storage and transportation of goods and substances
• providing information, training and supervision
• providing a safe place of work with safe access and egress
• providing a safe working environment and facilities.

Safety Policy [s. 2(3)]

Organisations with five or more employees must:

• prepare a written health and safety policy, listing the hazards present in the workplace
• provide details of arrangements for carrying out the policy & make employees aware of the policy and arrangements &update the policy as necessary.

Duties to Non-Employees (s. 3)

Employers should ensure ‘so far as is reasonably practicable’ that they do not put anyone not in their employment (e.g. members of the public, contractors and agency staff) at risk from their activities. This duty can extend to trespassers, so facilities managers need to ensure that high-risk workplaces have adequate security and fencing.

‘So far as is reasonably practicable’ means that if the cost of removing a risk (in terms of time and trouble as well as financial cost) outweighs the possible benefit to employees and the public, an employer does not have to act. The burden of proof rests with the employer, meaning that, if prosecuted, it has to prove why a safety measure was not reasonably practicable.

Suppliers’ Duties (s. 6)

Those who design, manufacture, import or supply goods or substances for use at work must ensure that they are safe when used properly and provide instructions on how to use them safely.

Employees’ Duties (s. 7)

Employees must:

• take reasonable care for their own health and safety and that of anyone else affected by their work
• co-operate with their employer in ensuring it meets its legal obligations [by wearing personal protective equipment (PPE) or reporting accidents, for example].

Personal Liability (s. 37)

Company directors and managers may be personally liable for a health and safety offence committed with their consent or connivance. They face being fined and disqualified from being a director for up to two years.

The Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007

This Act came into force on 6 April 2008 and applies in:

• England
• Wales
• Northern Ireland
• Scotland, where the offence will be known as corporate homicide.

The new Act was needed because prosecutions of organisations (corporate bodies) were almost impossible under former legislation unless a single individual, identifiable as the controlling mind of the company, has been personally guilty of gross negligence or manslaughter. The new Act removes the need to identify the ‘controlling mind’ of an organisation.

The Act applies to:

• companies incorporated under companies legislation or overseas
• other corporations including:

• public bodies incorporated by statute, for example, local authorities, NHS bodies and a wide range of non-departmental public bodies
• organisations incorporated by Royal Charter
• limited liability partnerships

• all other partnerships, trade unions and employers, associations, if the organisation concerned is the employer
• crown bodies such as government departments
• police forces.

The offence is concerned with the corporate liability of the organisation itself and does not apply to individual directors, senior managers or other individuals, but individuals can already be prosecuted for gross negligence manslaughter/culpable homicide and for health and safety offences.

The Act creates a new offence for convicting an organisation where a gross failure in the way activities were managed or organised results in a person’s death. An organisation will be guilty of the new offence if the way in which its activities are managed or organised causes a death and amounts to a gross breach of a duty of care to the deceased.

Courts will look at management systems and practices across the organisation. Organisations must take the opportunity to review current management systems for health and safety to ensure that they are complying with current legal duties. The new Act does not create new legal duties. It provides the opportunity for organisations that disregard the safety of others at work, with fatal consequences, to face serious criminal charges.

Juries will consider how the fatal activity was managed or organised throughout the organisation, including any systems and processes for managing safety and how these were operated in practice.

A substantial part of any management failure must have been at senior level, which means the people who make significant decisions about the organisation or substantial parts of it. This includes both centralised headquarters’ functions as well as those in operational management roles.

The organisation’s conduct must have fallen far below what could have been reasonably expected; for example, breaches of specific health and safety duties would indicate gross breach, as would being advised of a safety hazard/risk and doing nothing about it.

Duty of care exists in respect of an employer’s duty to provide a safe working environment for his or her employees and others, to provide safe and suitabl...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Half Title Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• Foreword
• About the Authors
• Introduction
• Part 1 Complying with the Law
• Part 2 Managing Your Business Effectively
• Part 3 The Built Environment
• Appendix Facilities service cost benchmarking protocol
• Index