• Robert Spicer

Recent Bristol Health and Safety prosecution

CR Construction (SW) Ltd, a Bristol building firm, has been fined after HSE inspectors found inadequate hygiene facilities at its site in Pembroke Road, Clifton, Bristol.

Significant points of the case

  • In June 2011 HSE inspectors visited the site. They found that the company had failed to provide basic welfare and washing facilities for workers, despite enforcement action by the HSE at another of its sites.

  • The company knew what the requirements for hygiene facilities were, because an improvement notice had been cerved in relation to the company’s site at Thornbury, near Bristol.

  • Up to sixteen people worked at the Clifton site. Facilities had been far below the minimum required for the whole of the year for which the site had been operative.

CR Construction (SW) Ltd was fined £2000 plus £2000 costs for a breach of regulation 22 (1) ( c ) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 (CDM).

Bristol magistrates’ court, January 2012

An HSE inspector made the following points:

  • Workers on construction sites need access to clean and working toilets and hand washing facilities with hot and cold running water, soap and towels, because many materials used on site can cause skin problems.

  • It is a legal requirement to have a heated room on site where workers can change, rest, and make hot drinks and food if required.

Regulation 22 (1) ( c ) of CDM states, in summary, that the principal contractor shall ensure that welfare facilities sufficient to comply with Schedule 2 are provided throughout the construction phase.

0 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

COMPARATIVE HEALTH AND SAFETY

COMPARATIVE HEALTH AND SAFETY I have now completed more than 20 international health and safety topics for publication. These have covered individual countries from the richest to the poorest in the w

Health and safety and automatically unfair dismissal

UNFAIR DISMISSAL: Automatically unfair: Health and safety activities In the recent case of Sinclair v Trackwork Ltd, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) gave guidance on these issues. The facts, in s

ELF ‘N’ SAFETY: THE REALITY

Those who ridicule health and safety as “Elf ‘n’ Safety” and who argue for deregulation and a reduction in red tape, need to be aware of the horrific consequences of breaches of health and safety law