Order this Assignment Now: £215

Calculate the payback period for this investment.

KNOW - WORKPLACE HEALTH AND SAFETY PRINCIPLES

UNIT DN1 / DI1:

For: NEBOSH Level 6 Diploma for Occupational Health and Safety Management Professionals & Interview Preparation

PAPER 1 OF 2

PAPER 2 AVAILABLE

SCENARIO

Strebend Construction (SC) is a construction company. It specialises in building and refurbishing small to medium-sized factories and warehouses. SC usually engages other specialised contractors to help with this work. SC has a reputation for delivering good quality work on its projects, and with minimal delays. The managing director (MD) attributes this success to ‘structured processes and helping to ensure everyone knows their role’.

The construction industry is notorious for small profit margins, and SC makes a relatively standard 3% profit on its £15 million turnover. The cost of labour and materials rise annually, but there is resistance from clients to pay the higher prices needed to cover these, hence the low margins.

Construction also attracts high insurance premiums, as the safety regulator tends to fine organisations disproportionately for offences against the complex regulations.

Profits are slightly better when working for government authorities on public buildings such as schools and medical centres; the MD wishes to grow their business into this market. Government work is very competitive and subject to strict criteria. Organisations must demonstrate a commitment to equal opportunities and workforce diversity, as well as a solid understanding of health and safety practices. The construction industry has often failed to demonstrate diversity, and there is increasing pressure to demonstrate environmental, economic, and social benefits in national infrastructure projects. While competition is fierce, organisations that secure local government work tend to thrive, because clients prefer continuity with trusted contractors.

SC employs 10 full-time construction workers, including two as site managers (SMs). Both SMs have worked for the organisation for over 10 years; each of them starting out as general labourers sweeping floors, clearing up, and moving materials. Neither of the SMs have any formal health and safety training or qualifications. They are willing to implement any control measures directed by the MD. When necessary, up to 12 temporary workers are employed, often sourced internationally and paid at a lower rate for comparable work. Recruiting local workers has been challenging due to demanding site conditions.

GET FULL ANSWER HERE

The MD believes that close supervision and keeping to well-established clear routines of working is what keeps risks under control. Changes to ways of working are introduced cautiously and slowly, usually after external pressure or clear evidence of need. The MD also believes SC’s good health and safety record of no serious incidents in the past five years is proof that control measures are effective. However, they acknowledge there may still be issues. For example, SC lost 100 days of production last year due to workers unable to work because of back injuries; a rate substantially higher than similar industries. Each day of lost production costs SC £450. One worker claimed compensation for a back injury that ended their construction career, leaving them reliant on personal savings, because there is no industry support scheme for long-term illness. In that instance, the worker had been clearing up some bags of cement that had fallen from a tower scaffold that had been knocked over. The MD knows that all of this lost production is having a direct effect on SC’s profitability.

It appears that SC’s workers do not consistently use personal protective equipment, such as gloves, hard hats, and boots. You regularly notice that hard hats are placed on benches outside. When speaking to workers, they tell you that the type of hat supplied is unvented and makes the workers uncomfortably hot. The gloves supplied also tear easily and provide little grip.

Additionally, the on-site first-aid kits frequently require re-stocking with bandages. Despite only a few entries in the accident book, the MD suspects that workers may be taking bandages for personal use outside the workplace.
The MD has decided to employ you as the health and safety officer. For the first few weeks, the MD recommends that you learn everything about the organisation, its ethics, its processes, and most importantly, the type and level of control measures in place to prevent harm to workers. The MD has asked you to agree every decision you make about safety with them first.

SC uses sub-contractors for specialist trades such as electricians, roofers, and glaziers. Sub- contractors are selected by price and location, depending on where SC happen to be working at the time. Due to labour shortages, many sub-contractors also employ foreign-language-speaking workers, or apprentices who are paid less than their fully-trained colleagues. The sub-contractors are responsible for their own health and safety, although the workers themselves are managed by the SMs from SC. The sub-contractors are also responsible for keeping their own work areas clean and tidy. However, this is not always done well and often causes friction with the SMs.

As part of your initial work, you speak with the two SMs. They are both loyal to SC and focused on efficiency. They receive bonuses linked to project success and understand the financial pressures in construction. They are always looking for ways to spend time and money more efficiently. Over the years, both of them have seen all types of shortcuts and mistakes that workers make on site. They do not think that training for tasks such as work involving ladders or lifting materials is necessary, as they believe that experience is sufficient. Ultimately, they view construction workers as tough and dependable.

You review the risk assessments written by the MD for the tasks that SC perform on site. There are plenty of entries about risks like creating dust and carrying materials, but you do not see any entries for tasks such as fitting drainage pipes or assembling steel structures. The risk assessments also appear to be identical for each project, except for the address and date. The MD keeps an electronic file of all of the construction regulations and guidance, as well as periodic bulletins from the safety regulator.

Two years ago, the MD read an article on construction safety which noted that simple slip and trip hazards were one of the main reasons for incidents on site. Believing that this could be an issue at SC’s sites, and that it could be resolved with minimum expense, the MD introduced some posters promoting good housekeeping. These posters were written in English, in bright colours, promising safer sites. The MD believed that these would highlight the issue without drastically changing the way people worked on site. The posters were put up in the welfare areas of all SC sites, although the risk assessments were not updated to reflect this. The MD also told the SMs to focus on site tidiness when conducting their weekly site inspections.

Three months later, the MD invested in tablet devices for the SMs to use to record their site inspections. This included noting any potential incidents relating to slips and trips that could be caused by materials left on the floor, or by the build-up of debris. The SMs were shown how to use the tablets and the proprietary software installed on them that generates a report. The software provides the user with a ‘yes/no’ response as to whether each item is compliant or not, and then generates a total compliance score. A reward scheme for workers promised bonuses for sites achieving 95% or more on housekeeping compliance. An additional bonus for workers is also available for sites that record the fewest incidents. The site inspections are scheduled to take place on the same day every week, and the tablets’ software is linked to the SMs’ email addresses; if an inspection is not carried out on the due date, the SM receives an email to remind them. The site inspection reports are then sent directly to the MD, who always shares a selection of them with you. The selection of reports the MD sends to you has a housekeeping compliance score of 98%.

After a year, reported slips and trips have reduced by 20%, and the MD declares the initiative a ‘great success’. During your review of the initiative, you discover that the number of reported incidents, including slips and trips, did not match the number of reports in the various accident books kept at each site. Also, while walking around the sites you see hazards, such as scaffolding leaning to one side due to uneven ground, stacks of bricks perched on pallets, and electrical cabling trailing across walkways.

From a conversation with one of the SMs, you discover that the weekly inspections are conducted at the end of the work day when the site workers have tidied up at the end of their work. Workers are often heard joking about ‘inspection day’ as they rush to tidy up. The SMs have said that they are too busy during the day to carry out the inspections. The inspection results are not usually shared with the site workers, except when there have been failings, leading to workers being reprimanded the following day. You also notice that the date on some of the inspection reports is a Saturday, when the sites are not open. Some inspection notes are very similar, if not the same as the previous ones, even when projects change. Workers tell you that their routines around safety are structured, and things rarely change. You discover that the SMs are rewarded by the MD simply for completing the reports, whereas the workers are paid for a compliance result of 95% or more.

During the housekeeping initiative, the MD read about the hidden cost of musculoskeletal disorders. The costs included time off work for injured workers and having to hire more workers to replace them, as well as possible compensation. Posters on manual handling appeared overnight showing good manual handling techniques. Six months later, some additional lifting equipment costing £20 000 also appeared. Although specifically designed for lifting in warehouses, this equipment was strong enough to cope with the weights likely to be carried on a construction site. After the lifting equipment arrived, the workers told you that the equipment would not fit through the doorways; using it would therefore take longer. Some workers simply stated that carrying heavy loads is part of what construction work is all about. Other workers had suggestions for modifying the equipment to fit through narrow doorways, but did not share their suggestions.

Attendance records indicate that sickness absence has increased after the manual handling posters were introduced. Three quarters (75%) of the sickness absence is noted as ‘bad back’ and the length of time off work ranges from two to six days. The MD blames workers for stubborn habits, ignoring posters, and misusing equipment. The MD admits to you that SC received two simple cautions from enforcement officers about musculoskeletal risks, prior to investing in the lifting equipment. The MD is concerned about the financial losses because of a reduction in production, and wants you to create an action plan to reduce sickness absence due to these risks. You suggest a manual handling training programme, but the MD rejects this suggestion saying, “We have managed without expensive training for years, and we do not need the disruption”. When you ask the SMs about ideas for reducing manual handling injuries, they shrug and say, “That’s the MD’s decision, we just do what we are told”.

You calculate that the investment required for the correct equipment to be provided for every site location, as well as training all workers in the use of the equipment, will be £105 000. This should eliminate production losses caused by musculoskeletal disorders. The MD dismisses this as being too expensive. They also state that, as some lifting equipment has already been provided, it is your responsibility to make sure that the workers know how to operate it.

Incident

LIVE NEBOSH EXPERT

---

Task 1: Measuring and monitoring

1

The MD believes that the reduction in incident frequency rate clearly shows the success of the ‘slips and trips’ initiative. (a) Explain why this belief may be incorrect. Note: You should support your answer, where applicable, using relevant information from the scenario. (b) Comment on the potential disadvantages of relying on this belief. Note:

(12)   (5)

 

Task 2: Hazard perception and reducing risk-taking behaviour

2

(a) Explain what may have affected how the sub-contractor’s apprentice perceived the hazards of using the power barrow. Note: You should support your answer, where applicable, using relevant information from the scenario. (b) What could be done to reduce risk-taking behaviour at SC? Note: You should support your answer, where applicable, using relevant information from the scenario.

(10)   (12)

 

Task 3: Financial justification to aid decision making

3

(a) The MD has refused to purchase appropriate lifting equipment because they think that it is too expensive. You calculate that this investment will reduce overall losses to the organisation by £60 000 per year. Calculate the payback period for this investment. Notes: You must show your workings. Your answer must be based on the scenario only. (b) Assuming that the costs of lost production days due to back injuries are ongoing, calculate what turnover SC needs, to maintain profit at 3% to cover these losses. Notes: You must show your workings. Your answer must be based on the scenario only. (c) Using financial reasons, explain why SC should invest in the correct lifting equipment. Note: Your answer must be based on the scenario only.

(2)       (5)   (8)

 

Task 4: Social factors

4

How are the following societal factors influencing SC’s health and safety priorities? (a) Economic climate. (b) Government policies / initiatives.  (c) Migrant workers Note: For parts (a), (b) and (c), your answers must be based on the scenario only.

(2) (4) (3)

 

Task 5: Sensible risk management

5

Discuss whether SC has chosen control measures that are sensible and proportionate. Note: Your answer must be based on the scenario only.

(15)

 

Task 6: Leadership

6

Workers at different levels in SC believe that the MD adopts a mainly ‘transactional’ leadership style. Give examples that support this belief. Note: Your answer must be based on the scenario only.

(7)

 

Task 7: EPS principles and enforcement action

7

The regional health and safety competent authority has investigated the events leading up to the incident. Based on their findings, they decide to prosecute SC using the principles of the ‘Enforcement Policy Statement’ (EPS) produced by the British Health and Safety Executive (HSE). Based on the following EPS principles, what will the competent authority have considered when deciding on this enforcement action? (a) Proportionally. (b) Targeting. Note: You should support your answers to (a) and (b), where applicable, using relevant information from the scenario.

(8) (7)

 

End of assessment

---

For NEBOSH Learners & HSE Professionals: DN1 & DI1 answers. Evidently AI-free, plagiarism-free, on time. 94%+ pass rate

---