RESEARCH REPORT 139 - HSE: Information about …

1 HSE Health & Safety Executive Sample analysis of construction accidents reported to HSE Prepared by BOMEL LIMITED for the Health and Safety Executive 2003 RESEARCH REPORT 139 HSE Health & Safety Executive Sample analysis of construction accidents reported to HSE BOMEL LIMITED Ledger House Forest Green Road Fifield Maidenhead Berkshire SL6 2NR This REPORT presents results of a telephone survey, conducted by BOMEL Limited (BOMEL) on behalf of the Health & Safety Executive (HSE), of some 1000 notifiers of major and over-3-day injury construction accidents that occurred between 19 December 2001 and 31 March 2002. The accidents were representative of the kind and severity notified to HSE throughout the 2001/2 year. Around three quarters of the cases examined were associated with property, split almost equally between new build and refurbishment (including maintenance & repair).

2 In both cases, almost half the accidents were associated with domestic housing, the remainder being industrial or commercial properties or public buildings. The remaining quarter of accident cases examined were linked largely to civil engineering works (predominantly new build), roadworks (predominantly refurbishment/maintenance & repair) and demolition. about two-thirds of construction clients were in the private sector and one third in the public sector. 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. HSE BOOKS Crown copyright 2003 First published 2003 ISBN 0 7176 2724 1 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise) without the prior written permission of the copyright owner.

3 Applications for reproduction should be made in writing to: Licensing Division, Her Majesty's Stationery Office, St Clements House, 2-16 Colegate, Norwich NR3 1BQ or by e-mail to ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This REPORT presents results of a telephone survey, conducted by BOMEL Limited (BOMEL) on behalf of the Health & Safety Executive (HSE), of some 1000 notifiers of major and over-3-day injury construction accidents that occurred between 19 December 2001 and 31 March 2002. The accidents were representative of the kind and severity notified to HSE throughout the 2001/2 year. Some 39% of notified accidents were associated with refurbishment of buildings (including maintenance & repair) with 45% of those cases associated with domestic premises. An almost equal number (36%) of notified accidents concerned new build properties, 47% of these cases being for domestic housing with the remainder largely commercial and industrial.

4 In 63% of cases notifiers said CDM applied at the site. Some notifiers did not know but of the 287 cases where CDM was said not to apply, evidence related to duration, number of workers etc suggested CDM should have been applied in 29%. construction clients were split 56% private sector (64% including domestic clients), 33% public sector and 3% unknown. Asked about other pressures on the job, only 13% of notifier thought the job was more demanding than average from a schedule perspective and 8% that financial rewards were poorer than average. In all but 5% of cases notifiers said method statements and risk assessments were available and up to date but these were sometimes described as generic . In 80% of cases, notifiers said a safety induction had been given. Only 14% of notified accidents involved the self employed.

5 However, based on answers to questions regarding the form of contract, payment terms, line management etc under which they were working, it appeared that all were effectively working as employees. There was evidence of uncertainty in this area with 97 self-employed notifications in the ICC database increasing to 136 on the basis of notifiers responses (a 40% increase). Whilst trades such as carpentry (13%), bricklaying (8%), electrical (7%) contributed definable proportions to the accident level, less easily classified craft and manual workers constitute over 20% of the injured persons. However, when comparing the overall task they were undertaking with the specific activity at the time of the accident, relatively few workers were exercising their core skills. Instead, ancillary activities such as traversing the site, loading or unloading a vehicle, accessing / leaving the workface etc dominate.

6 Comparison was made between the composition of the sample of 1004 major and over-3-day injury accidents and corresponding Information for the smaller set of 77 fatal accidents through the 2001/2 year. Whereas the private / public sector split was similar there was a shift towards proportionally more notified accidents from large sites (15 or more people), from sites where CDM applied and particularly from large contractors (employing 15 or more) as the responsible party. In the latter case, it appears that the large to small contractor ratio changes from 42:58 for fatalities to 75:25 for notified major and over-3-day injury accidents. It is considered that reporting of fatal accidents is universal but major and over-3-day injuries are under-reported to different extents depending on industry sector as recorded in the Labour Force Survey.

7 It is therefore important that good reporting from large companies, major sites and those where formal CDM controls are addressed are not interpreted as poorer safety levels than smaller enterprises where under-reporting is greater. This survey deals only with the profile of notified accidents. In general, the responses to the survey were positive and notifiers particularly offered suggestions for preventing similar accidents to the one they had reported in the future. Mapping the findings to the Influence Network, revealed a similar pattern of key influences to those emerging in construction workshops in parallel HSE RESEARCH . For example, better Situational Awareness / Risk Perception and Compliance were often associated with calls for greater care and attention and adherence to site rules, iii method statements and procedures amongst the workforce.

8 The Operational Equipment deficiencies observed in response to this question generally related to use, with (correct) footing of ladders being a frequent example. Similarly, in relation to PPE, recommendations generally centre on wearing equipment provided, with typical references to eye protection or gloves and only occasional mention of hard hats, perhaps suggesting their use is generally accepted. Patterns emerging in relation to the Internal Working Environment, frequently relate to the covering of temporary openings, housekeeping, and maintenance of clearly defined walkways. Use of common sense and care and attention are frequent suggestions to aid Competence and Situational Awareness. Where Training is called for it is notable how frequently manual handling training is suggested specifically.

9 Together issues raised under Procedures and Planning, confirm that pre-thought and more effective safety management controls could have prevented the hazardous situations arising. Within Communications, at the organisational level, one frequent call was for toolbox talks and for them specifically to address cross-trade/-contractor issues. Whilst the depth of insight gained from the survey is considerable, obtaining notifier details and establishing contact were extremely time consuming processes. However, by comparing the consistency in response profiles emerging at intervals through the project, it has been shown that containing the survey to around 1000 notifiers gives a robust and stable picture. It is therefore recommended that the knowledge from the survey be used to inform a smaller survey to be conducted for a subset of construction notifiers alongside the original notification in future.

10 Iv CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION 1 BACKGROUND 1 SURVEY PROFILE 2 DATASET 3 REPORT LAYOUT 8 2 GENERAL SITE Information 11 QUESTION 1 TYPE OF PROJECT 11 QUESTION 2 CDM 14 QUESTION 3 CLIENT S BUSINESS 16 QUESTION 4 SIZE OF THE PROJECT 20 QUESTION 5 OTHER COMPANIES INVOLVED 24 3 NOTIFIER S ROLE / POSITION 29 QUESTION 6 COMPANY S ROLE 29 QUESTION 7 CONDITIONS OF JOB 33 QUESTION 8 METHOD STATEMENTS AND RISK ASSESSMENTS 37 QUESTION 9 NOTIFYING COMPANY SIZE 39 QUESTION 10 NUMBER OF PEOPLE ON SITE 41 QUESTION 11 SAFETY INDUCTIONS 42 QUESTION 12 SIZE OF SITE 43 4 THE INJURED PARTY 45 QUESTION 13 LENGTH OF IP EMPLOYMENT 45 QUESTION 14 EMPLOYMENT STATUS AND CONDITIONS 47 QUESTION 15 TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT WORK 51 QUESTION 16 IP TRADE 52 QUESTION 17 LENGTH OF TIME IN TRADE 53 QUESTION 18 TRAINING QUALIFICATIONS 55 5 THE ACCIDENT 57 QUESTION 19 LENGTH OF TIME ON SITE 57 QUESTION 20 HOURS WORKED 59 QUESTION 21 TASK INVOLVED 60 v QUESTION 22 SPECIFIC ACTIVITY INVOLVED 61 QUESTION 23 SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENTS 65 6 QUESTIONNAIRE FEEDBACK 75 RATING OF RESPONSES 75 FEEDBACK 76 7 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS 79 TYPE OF PROJECT 79 SIZE OF SITE 82 PUBLIC OR PRIVATE SECTOR 86 EMPLOYER SIZE 87 APPLICATION OF CDM 89 VALIDATION OF