A first point of reference for risk-conscious companies

“Tackling occupational road risk should be a significant part of the HSE‘s workload”

Education, encouragement, persuasion and assistance are four of the key levers used by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) in its bid to reduce work-related road crashes, but I would like a fifth to be added – enforcement. More than two years ago, the HSE issued detailed guidance to businesses on managing occupational road safety with the September 2003 publication of “Driving at work: managing work-related road safety” (www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg382.pdf). It should be one of the first points of reference for all companies seeking to introduce a comprehensive at-work risk management strategy.

Since then, a whole raft of publications and leaflets has been produced detailing various aspects of workplace road safety (see www.hse.gov.uk), with the most recent being publicity produced in conjunction with the Department for Transport’s Think! campaign (see www.thinkroadsafety.gov.uk ). But guidance and advice alone is not enough. Unfortunately, the HSE says that due to limited resources, work-related road safety is not a “frontline priority” (RoadSafe: Summer 2005). It should be. At least twice as many people die and are injured on the road in the course of their work than in work accidents, which are reportable to enforcing authorities.

The HSE is tasked with improving safety at work and, therefore, tackling occupational road risk should be a significant part of its workload. Instead of hiding behind the excuse of few resources, the HSE should be knocking on the door of government asking for additional assistance to enable teams of inspectors to extend their remit nationwide and work with companies to put in place comprehensive occupational road risk management strategies.

Issuing guidance via a website is important, but it must be followed up. Health and safety inspectors should be charged with visiting companies to ensure not only that the guidance is being acted upon, but companies are, importantly, compliant with the law. They could quite easily extend their current initiatives and visits on site transport safety to also cover on-road safety.

It is a fact that while we are not asking businesses to do any more than they should be doing under a whole variety of legislation, including the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, an estimated 75% of companies are unnecessarily exposing their at-work drivers to unacceptable risk. Employers can increase risk on the road by asking employees to drive too far, too fast, or when they are unfit, tired or distracted, or when they lack the skills to cope with vehicles and journey tasks. They are also responsible for ensuring that vehicles used are properly maintained and fit for purpose. Conversely, they can have a major effect on road safety by creating a positive road safety culture.

Having once visited a business as part of normal inspection work and studied the policies and procedures in place, inspectors should either give a clean bill of health or prioritise the organisation for follow-up to ensure that recommended additional guidance has been acted upon. Where companies have failed to put in place any constructive occupational road risk strategy, HSE inspectors should make recommendations or if necessary use their notice powers and again follow up with a later visit. If the company continues to be complacent then enforcement should follow. By hiding behind a lack of resource, the HSE is missing a major opportunity to claim the moral high ground. It is also failing to respond to the demands of the changing world of work. As the workforce is becoming ever-more road mobile in a largely service-based economy, occupational road risk is the safety issue that sits alongside modern occupational health problems such as stress disorders.

By continuing to argue that occupational road safety is not a health and safety at work issue and just a road traffic problem, the HSE is seriously undermining its credibility as a serious prevention agency. I agree with the HSE that the police have a responsibility to enforce the law following a crash. Indeed the Association of Chief Police Officers’ Road Death Investigation Manual makes specific provision to involve the HSE where work issues may have contributed to a crash. But the HSE should be taking action to deter companies from allowing their staff to find themselves in situations where they are more likely to be involved in a crash – possibly as a result of breaking the law, but frequently with tragic consequences and at a significant cost to themselves, business and the wider community.

Employers can increase risk on the road by asking employers to drive too far or too fast

“By hiding behind a lack of resource, the HSE is missing a major opportunity to claim the moral high ground”

Meanwhile, the Health and Safety Commission (HSC) is currently analysing responses by many organisations and commentators to its consultation on the review of the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations (RIDDOR). The government-appointed Work-related Road Safety Task Group recommended in 2001 that RIDDOR should be extended to include the reporting to the enforcing authorities of at-work road traffic accidents involving fatalities, major and over three-day injuries. This would bring the reporting of at-work road traffic crashes into line with other serious incidents occurring at work. It seems clear to me that at-work road traffic incidents should be reported in exactly the same way as all other work-place accidents. Indeed, it is perfectly normal to report work-related road traffic accidents to the authorities in most other parts of the world, including many European countries, Australia, the US and the Middle East.

The indications that we have received from the HSC are not sympathetic to our call. However, responsible managers that I have spoken to would welcome the reporting of all work-related accidents whether they occur in the office, the factory, on the farm or on the road. In fact, the most responsible companies, such as many oil and pharmaceutical companies, report their progress in reducing the number of casualties suffered at work in their annual reports and on their websites. They view it as good corporate social responsibility to do so. The government is leading the drive towards improving occupational road risk through a balanced approach with road safety initiatives involving engineering, education and enforcement. However, it is no good making progress on two avenues – engineering and education – if we are stalled on enforcement.

Industry is making genuine strides to improve vehicle technology and engineers are introducing measures to make our roads safer. The government has taken on the leadership role, but the HSE has failed to respond in terms of enforcement. It must respond to the challenge and not wait for the toll of victims of at-work driving crashes to increase.

For a wide range of information on occupational road risk, visit: www.orsa.org.uk/home.htm