Further memorandum from IOSH
The Institution of Occupational Safety and Health
(IOSH) was pleased to submit written evidence to the Defence Committee
Inquiry into the Duty of Care in the Armed Forces on 19 April
2004 and also to provide oral evidence on 16 June 2004. Further
to this oral evidence, members of the Committee requested further
information from us, which we are now pleased to submit on three
subjects: IOSH members in the Armed Forces; Current Armed Forces
uptake of IOSH health and safety awareness training and CPD courses;
and Possible sources of information on the effectiveness of initial
assessment of recruits before training.
1. IOSH MEMBERS
IN THE
ARMED FORCES
In response to question 173 by Mr Hancock, who
expressed an interest in knowing how many members of the Armed
Forces are also members of IOSH, we provide the following information:
|
| IOSH MEMBERS IN ARMED FORCES JUNE 2004
|
|
| IOSH membership category | Army
| RAF | RN
| Totals |
| FIOSH, RSP | 1
| 0 | 2
| 3 |
| MIOSH, RSP | 6
| 5 | 9
| 20 |
| FIOSH | 0 |
0 | 2
| 2 |
| MIOSH | 45
| 7 | 39
| 91 |
| TechSP | 33
| 27 | 21
| 81 |
| Total IOSH members | 85
| 39 | 73
| 197 |
| Total forces employees | 112,000
| 55,000 | 43,000
| 210,000 |
| General ratio | 1 : 1,300
| 1 : 1,400 | 1 : 590
| |
| RSP ratio | 1 : 16,000
| 1 : 11,000 | 1 : 3,900
| |
|
Key:
Fellow (FIOSH)—the most senior category of IOSH membership,
granted to those who have achieved recognition by their peers
as being a senior professional in health and safety.
Member (MIOSH)—a person who is a member of IOSH and
holds an accredited higher-level qualification and has at least
three years' experience as a safety professional. Some members
who have degrees in subjects related to safety and health, and
who practice in specialised areas, may also hold this grade. Members
are also eligible to apply for registration as safety practitioners
(RSP).
The Register of Safety Practitioners (RSP) is a competence
register for Members and Fellows who can demonstrate that they
satisfy a broad spectrum of competences and who are assessed by
their peers as having done so. These people can operate across
the whole range of health and safety competences and are required
to undertake mandatory Continuing Professional Development (CPD).
Technician Safety Practitioners (TechSP)—are generally
people who operate in lower risk environments or are reporting
to more highly qualified practitioners. In some cases they are
working towards the higher-level qualifications to gain IOSH membership.
A TechSP holds a lower-level qualification and at least two years'
experience in safety and health issues.
2. CURRENT ARMED
FORCES UPTAKE
OF IOSH HEALTH
AND SAFETY
AWARENESS TRAINING
AND CPD COURSES
In response to questions 168 and 169 by Mr Hancock, IOSH
briefly referred to RAF and RN use of IOSH training courses and
we are pleased to provide the following additional information
on this:
(a) Outline of awareness course content
IOSH Managing Safely is designed to be tailored
to meet individual organisation requirements and embraces units
of the Employment National Training Organisation standards. It
trains all those required to manage safely and effectively in
compliance with both their organisation's policy and best practice
in Health and Safety. Managing Safely comprises seven core modules,
plus an organisation—specific module if appropriate and
requires at least 24 hours training plus assessment time, with
delivery over a convenient time span.
IOSH Working Safely trains all non-management personnel
to ensure that their actions contribute to Health and Safety in
the workplace and that individual responsibilities are clearly
understood. Ideally the course should be delivered as part of
an induction programme, but it can also form part of ongoing training.
Taking at least six hours to complete, the format is modified
to suit each organisation's needs.
An IOSH Managing Safely or Working Safely certificate
is awarded to all those who attend the courses and successfully
complete the written and practical assessments.
(b) Currently, there are three RN, one RAF and one MoD
establishments licensed to deliver IOSH H&S awareness training
courses
1. HM Naval Base Clyde—Safety Training
Group (5 courses)
Directing Safely; Managing Client/contractor
relationships; Managing Safely Re-certification; Working Safely;
and Working Safely Re-certification
2. HM Naval Base Portsmouth (2 courses)
Managing Safely and Health and Safety for
Middle Managers
3. HMS Drake—Devonport and Western Area
Health and Safety
Introduction to Managing Safely (tailored
2-day course)
4. MoD London (2 courses)
Managing Safely and Working Safely
(c) Training Support Services available from IOSH Commercial
Affairs Department
1. Packaged Training Products: IOSH provides
professionally authored and presented packaged training products
for appropriately qualified health and safety/training experts
to deliver. The package is updated on a regular basis and in order
to be able to deliver the package applicants need to become approved
by our licensing process to deliver the course.
2. IOSH Approved Courses: This service offers
those course providers who prefer to author their own packages
to send them to IOSH for approval which ensures that the package
meets appropriate health and safety standards both in terms of
legislation and best practice, is trainer and trainee friendly
and, if the package does not meet these criteria, IOSH works with
the training author to endeavour to meet these goals.
3. Key Accounts: Often for larger organisations
IOSH can offer one-off bespoke arrangements which are agreed through
a contractual process to get us involved or as uninvolved as the
client requires in the delivery of health and safety training
from, for example, the provision of distance learning packs to
the quality control of assessment and accreditation processes.
IOSH endeavours to be as flexible as possible in this service
and the solutions offered are often appropriate for organisations
who have larger volumes of staff to train and for whom financial
concerns are an issue.
(d) Additionally, five RN and one RAF establishments run
IOSH accredited CPD courses as follows
1. HMS Clyde; HMS Collingwood; and HMS Sultan
Work Place Risk Assessors Course
2. HMS Devonport (3 courses)
Accident Investigation Reporting; COSHH; and
Work Place Risk Assessors Course
3. HMS Nelson (2 courses)
COSHH and Work Place Assessment Course
4. RAF Halton health and safety (2 courses)
Manual Handling Instructional Techniques and
Risk Assessors Course
RAF Halton environmental (10 courses)
Air & Noise; Conservation; EMS Foundation;
EMS Implementation; Introduction to Environmental Protection;
Land & Water; Law & Policy; Practical Pollution Prevention
Training; Utilities Management; and Waste Management
3. Possible sources of information on the effectiveness
of initial assessment of recruits before training: in response
to questions 166 / 167 by Mr Hancock and 180 / 181 by Mr Gapes
on the subject of psychological testing, IOSH explained that we
do not have particular expertise in this area, but believed that
the committee had access to appropriate experts. Subsequent to
our oral evidence, we received an enquiry seeking guidance and
advice on where to obtain information on the effectiveness of
psychological testing. With the caveat that this subject is not
within our area of competence, we have provided the following
response and are pleased to offer the same possible avenues for
you and your advisers to explore, though we do not suggest that
these are comprehensive or necessarily the best:
(a) The British Psychological Society (www.bps.org.uk)
is the representative body for psychologists and psychology. The
BPS has a psychological testing centre which can be accessed on
www.psychtesting.org.uk/ where they present the results and effectiveness
of various testing methods and charge for access to the full reports.
One summary report which may possibly deal with the general subject
area and so be of interest to you, can be found on the BPS psychological
testing website at: www.psychtesting.org.uk/summary.asp?id=101
However, we have not subscribed to this site and have not read
the full report, so cannot be specific as to its relevance to
a military situation.
(b) The Institute of Psychiatry (www.iop.kcl.ac.uk/) provides
post-graduate education and carries out research in psychiatry,
psychology, and allied disciplines. The website provides access
to research papers, some of which you may wish to have reviewed
by your experts for their applicability and significance to your
research. An example might be a 2003 paper titled Deliberate self-harm
in a non-clinical population: prevalence and psychological correlates,
which examined over 1,900 US military recruits and compared the
personality traits of those reporting self-harm, with those who
did not. The full paper can be accessed on: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&
list—uids=12900314, again, not having read this paper, we
cannot comment on its possible usefulness to you.
(c) The Royal College of Psychiatrists (www.rcpsych.ac.uk/index.htm)
is the professional and educational body for psychiatrists in
the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland. The college produces
the British Journal of Psychiatry (http://bjp.rcpsych.org/)
which publishes papers from both the UK and around the world and
includes editorials, review articles, commentaries and short reports.
(d) The UK Parliament website provides access to a 1996
"Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology" technical
report (POST Technical Report 87), titled Psychological evaluation
and gun control (www.parliament.uk/post/pn087.pdf), examining
the testing of members of the general public prior to issuing
"firearm" or "shotgun" certificates. The report
indicated that the validity of the testing criteria was being
investigated in an American study comparing risk factors and violent
behaviour in almost 1,000 psychiatric patients following discharge
from hospital, with those of a control population of 500 members
of the general public living in the same area (www.macarthur.virginia.edu/risk.html).
Other work in this area is also reported in the British Journal
of Psychiatry (http://bjp.rcpsych.org/cgi/content/full/176/4/312).
(e) We believe that the US police and US military use
psychological testing, but we have no information on its effectiveness
(an internet search has produced the following examples of use,
which may be of interest: North Carolina police training provider
regime www.rccc.cc.nc.us/continuing—ed/blet.html; the California
State police recruitment guidelines www.calstate.edu/HRAdm/pdf2003/HR2003-06.pdf;
The Virtual Naval Hospital Project www.vnh.org/Admin/DODInst6490.4/DoDInstr2.html,
a service of the U.S. Navy Bureau of Medicine and Surgery; and
the California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training
[POST] www.post.ca.gov/regulations/doc/section—c.doc).
(f) Further reading: though we have not read any of these
reference books and cannot pass an opinion on them, we hope they
represent a body of knowledge on the subject you are researching,
though some are quite old:
— Dillon, R. F. (1997). Handbook on testing.
Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. The Handbook on Testing highlights
major work in educational, psychological, technical, and occupational
testing in public and private sectors. Theoretical issues in measurement
are discussed. Standards for tests and testing professionals are
described. A range of test environments, testing programs, and
groups of examinees are included. A variety of suggestions for
improving the use of tests for selection and classification are
given. Examples of programs linking testing with training are
provided, and the use of tests to promote learning is described.
— Driskell, J E, & Olmstead, B (1989). Psychology
and the military: Research applications and trends. American
Psychologist, 44, 43-54.
— Gal, R, & Mangelsdorff, A D (Eds) (1991).
Handbook of military psychology. New York: Wiley.
— O'Brien, T G, & Charlton, S G (Eds) (1995).
Handbook of human factors testing and evaluation. New Jersey:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
— Rumsey, M G, Walker, C B, & Harris, J
H (Eds) (1994). Personnel selection and classification.
New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
— Wiskoff, M F, & Rampton, G L (Eds) (1989).
Military personnel measurement: Testing, assignment, evaluation.
New York: Praeger.
July 2004
Memorandum from the Chartered Institute of Personnel
and Development (CIPD)
CIPD is the largest body in Europe concerned with people
management and development, with over 100,000 members in the United
Kingdom. Many of our members have responsibility at senior levels
for people management and development in both public and private
sectors.
Why does the duty of care matter?
Research undertaken on behalf of the CIPD has confirmed the
link between a wide range of HR practices and business performance.
Issues about health and safety need to be seen as part of a spectrum
of people management practice that will have a direct impact on
employee attitudes and behaviour. In other words, the issue is
not only one of legal compliance or indeed "good practice":
it will have a direct effect on organisational performance.
What is the legal duty of care?
The common law duty of care on employers in respect of their
employees has been highlighted in a number of cases going back
to Wilsons and Clyde Coal Company Ltd v English (1938) AC 57.
The duty extends to ensuring competent and safe fellow employees,
with a corresponding duty to remove dangerous employees, and paying
attention to employee complaints about unsafe work equipment or
methods. The extent of guidance from decided cases is relatively
limited and has been developed primarily in relation to claims
of unfair dismissal. Nevertheless the general principle is well
established and underpins employers' statutory duties in respect
of health and safety, which require them to carry out risk assessments
and put in place appropriate measures to guard against risks.
Specific obligations apply in respect of vulnerable employees
and particularly dangerous workplaces or activities.
What is the impact on the employment relationship?
The duty of care should however not be interpreted narrowly
or simply in relation to physical security. The employment relationship
can be seen in terms of a psychological contract between employer
and employee, the state of which can be described as a broad measure
of employee satisfaction or morale. Research which the Institute
has undertaken in recent years supports a model which links the
psychological contract to employees' perceptions of fairness,
trust and the extent to which the employer has delivered on the
implicit "deal" between them. The duty of care on employers
might be seen to extend to their respect for individual employees,
as reflected for example in diversity policies and practice and
a management style that relies on team-building, communications
and employee support.
Should armed forces training establishments apply the same
standards?
The Institute believes that employing organisations in the
armed forces should in principle accept the same obligations in
respect of their employees as other employers. Clearly precisely
identical standards cannot be applied in all circumstances and
service personnel must be assumed to have accepted a higher degree
of risk to life and limb while on active service than those in
civil employment. However there is no obvious reason why service
personnel in training establishments should be thought to have
accepted the risk of negligence on the part of their employer,
or of assault by colleagues.
What does the duty of care amount to in practice?
Standard advice on implementing effective policies towards
health and safety focuses on the need to undertake proper risk
assessments and take appropriate action to control risks by, for
example, ensuring that personnel are properly trained, qualified
and informed and that installations, appliances and equipment
are up to standard and safe to use. Useful general advice on dealing
with the specific issues of bullying and harassment is contained
in the attached fact sheet prepared by the Institute, which focuses
on the need to undertake a thorough investigation of allegations
and provide advice and counselling for individuals outside the
direct management line. Training may be needed for those responsible
for the health and safety of trainees, and disciplinary action
taken in respect of individuals who may over a period fail to
meet the required standards of behaviour. Private sector employers
that are most successful in tackling these issues are those that
have established a "safety culture" and this needs to
be championed from the top of the organisation.
How will the armed forces benefit from effective implementation?
The benefits to the armed forces of following good practice
will be substantial. The fabric of military discipline rests on
trust and confidence on the part of service personnel that they
will be professionally managed and led. Looking after the interests
of employees is important to maintaining motivation, loyalty and
commitment and to reducing ill-health (including stress). Armed
forces personnel on active service will expect their safety and
health to be in the forefront of the minds of their senior officers
and there seems no reason why less should be expected of officers
in training establishments. The ability of the armed forces to
demonstrate publicly that it takes its responsibilities as an
employer seriously, and that it is prepared to take effective
action to protect trainees, will affect its reputation and its
ability to recruit and retain high quality people.
April 2004
|
