CONTENTS
1. Part I - Occupational Health and Safety Law 3
1.1. The UK Approach to Regulating Occupational Health and Safety 4
1.1.1. The Role of Legislation (Civil, Criminal and Administrative), other sources of law and recommendations 4
1.1.2. The Role of Law Enforcement and Specialized Agency 6
1.1.3. The Role of Courts 7
1.2. Comparison between the UK and the Brazilian approaches to OSH regulation 8
2. Part II – Management and its Impact on OSH 8
2.1. Administrative approach to management 9
2.2. Scientific management 9
2.3. Behavioral approach to management 10
2.4. Co-operative social systems approach 11
Conclusions 12
References 14
Having one of the most developed economies in the world, the United Kingdom has always prioritized the importance of various comprehensive occupational health and safety laws and regulations (Gearey & Morrson, 2011). In fact, the practice strongly demonstrates that the legal approach to regulating various occupational health and safety issues in the United Kingdom is one of the most effective worldwide (EU, 2015; Labour Standards, 2013,) and many notable commentators highlight that the average number of healthcare-related incidents in the United Kingdom is considerably lower than in other countries worldwide. Even the countries with more powerful economies, such as Germany or the United States, have higher average aggregate number of the reported workplace incidents ( Health and Safety Executive, 2011).
The key aspect in this regard is that the system, which is used in the United Kingdom, is based on the synergy of the various private and public institution (A Short Guide to the British Political System, 2016). Specifically, it involves close cooperation between the private and the public institutions (Stranks, 2005), as well as it prioritizes the importance of strong public awareness programs aimed at raising familiarity of the private sector with the existing regulatory requirements (Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, 2012).
This essay pursues several objectives. Firstly, it aims at identifying the role of the UK legal system in monitoring, evaluating and analyzing the state of compliance with occupational health and safety laws in the UK business segment . Secondly, this work analyzes the main components of the UK legal system and discusses their importance in relation to the development and enforcement of the Occupational Health and Safety Laws. Finally, this part of the research provides a brief comparative analysis between the UK and the Brazilian approaches to developing the regulatory frameworks of Occupational Health and Safety systems and assuring their respective enforcement.
The UK Approach to Regulating Occupational Health and Safety
Despite the fact that the system of the OSHA principles regulation and enforcement in the United Kingdom is particularly effective, some commentators suggest that it is somewhat simplistic. In fact, it includes four components, which are legislation, the courts, the general law enforcement authorities and the special agencies, which are specifically empowered to monitor compliance and enforce it whenever necessary by imposing different penalties.
The Role of Legislation (Civil, Criminal and Administrative), other sources of law and recommendations
Legislation is the foundation of order in all social settings (Dietz, 2010). Occupational Health and Safety is not an exception to this idea. Yet, before the analysis is advanced further, it is relevant emphasizing that the laws can be broadly classified into the three basic groups, which are the civil law, the criminal law and the administrative law (A Short Guide to the British Political System, 2016). Civil law outlines the main obligations owed by the employers to ensure adequate safety coverage, as well as they specify the scope of responsibilities of the employees, which should be followed (Kloss, 2005). The government is more resourceful than the companies in terms of analyzing the most common sources of industrial hazards, as well as it has sufficient human and financial resources for monitoring and ensuring compliance (Stranks, 2005; The Structures of the Courts)). To illustrate, an ordinary British businessperson may not be aware of the main causes of fire, or the reasons of specific occupational diseases. Thus, in order to prepare his workplaces accordingly and to minimize the negative impacts of chore, the business consultants should carefully analyze the provisions of the relevant OSH in this regard. Some safety practitioners describe OSH laws and regulations as the compilation of ‘the best and obligatory practices’ in this regard. Because they are collected, analyzed and codified by the state, it is reasonable believing that they are more authoritative and reliable than the reports and recommendations issued by the private institutions.
The focal law in this regard is the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulation 1992 (Understanding UK Case Law) .This document provides a comprehensive coverage of all major requirements on developing and implementing labor standards for the workers and employers, engaged in the different industries across the country. Other relevant legislation in this regard includes the following statutory instruments (sometimes referred to as ‘the six pack’ regulatory framework):
Health and Safety (Display Screen Equipment) Regulation 1992
Personal Protective Equipment at work regulation 1992
Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulation 1998
Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999
Manual Handling Operations Regulations 1992
These documents compose a backbone of the contemporary UK OSH system (Health and Safety Executive, 2009). At the same time, it is important emphasizing that the penalties for violating these laws are governed by both the civil and the criminal legislation. To be more specific, several statutory provisions stipulate the workers and employees, who were damaged by the violations of the OSH laws, are entitled to compensation (though the type and the amount of these compensations are determined by the courts). In contrast to other jurisdictions where different breaches of the OSH guidelines are torts, violating these legal rules in the majority of cases in the UK are crimes. The penalties vary from fines to a summary conviction (IOSH, E., 2007). Both the individuals and the corporations are subject to criminal liability. Furthermore, in addition to the penalties imposed on the violators, the aggrieved parties are entitled to seeking monetary and other damages in the course of civil proceedings.
In addition to that, there are various rules of non-binding nature, which, nevertheless, are useful for informational and development purposes. One of the most notable examples in this regard are the approved codes of practice (ACOPs) – guidance published by the Health and Safety Executive, which provide detailed orientations and explanations to the business owners on how to comply with the requirements of the law. Although they are non-binding on the employers, they provide comprehensive lists of the most effective methods in this regard. The key message sent by the Health and Safety Executive is that following the recommendations outlined in the ACOPs is sufficient to be compliant with the law. Yet, in some way, the ACOPs have a certain legal status. For instance, if an employer is charged with violation of the OSH legislation, it his burden of proof to demonstrate why he decided not to follow the method described in the ACOP, as well as why he considered that the reliance on his own method of compliance was reasonable (Stranks, 2005).
Finally, administrative law stipulates the procedures, which should be followed by the law enforcement officials and other public bodies in the course of monitoring compliance and investigating incidents (Gearey & Morrison, 2012). The existence of these regulations helps to protect the businesses from abusive intrusion into their legitimate operations, harmonize and systematize the process.
The Role of Law Enforcement and Specialized Agency
The key agency responsible for monitoring and ensuring compliance in OSH sphere in the United Kingdom is Health and Safety Executive (HSE). This organization is vested with various responsibilities, but mainly its focus pursues four basic missions:
It is responsible for encouraging the concerned persons and corporations to make their operations consistent with the requirements of the OSH legislation.
It encourages and promotes research in this area.
It keeps the policymakers and the law enforcement institutions informed about the current situation in the OSH sphere.
Finally, it proposes relevant regulations and modifications to the existing rules.
At the same time, while the organization is entitled to investigate industrial accidents, it is not entitled to impose penalties and prosecute those, who are responsible. For this purpose, the relevant reports are sent to the Crown Prosecution Service (Kloss, 2005). If the violation is substantial (.g. when an employee suffered serious physical injury or death), the prosecution will make a formal indictment and initiate the court proceedings.
The Role of Courts
While HSE and the law enforcement authorities are responsible for monitoring and investigating the incidents, only the courts can decide whether the charged party is criminally guilty and civilly liable or not. In addition to that, the courts also determine the amount of compensation owed to the aggrieved party (Understanding UK Case Law).
Furthermore, the courts also provide interpretation to the existing laws. In accordance with the stare decisis doctrine, their understanding of a particular legal phenomenon should be followed in other disputes (Law Reports, 2012;Abrams, 2001). Furthermore, in some cases, the power of judicial review enables them to invalidate the acts of parliament, which do not correspond to the constitutional pillars of the society (Chaturvedi, 2006).
Because of these powers, the judicial institutions are particularly important element within the system of OSH regulation and enforcement (Pun, Yam, R.C.M. & Lewis, W.G. (2003). Not only they resolve various disputes between the state authorities and the private corporations, but also they serve as effective appeal institutions against the abusive intrusions of the supervisory and regulatory bodies (LaDou, 2007).
Comparison between the UK and the Brazilian approaches to OSH regulation
As far as the differences between the UK and the Brazilian systems of OSH regulations are concerned, several primary distinctive characteristics of the both should be revealed (Robson et. al, 2005).
Thus, the UK mainly relies on the courts as the primary mechanisms of determining whether a company violates a particular provision of the OSH legislation, while in Brazil the Labor Commission is vested with this power (Mendeloff, 2015). In other words, while in the UK the process is judicial, Brazil adheres to the old-fashioned inquisitorial method of investigating labor incidents, which is a remnant of its Roman-based legal system (Buchanan, 2014).
Furthermore, the status of presumptions is different in the country. To be more specific, in Brazil a business executive, who is charged with violating the OSH framework should prove that his actions were consistent with the legislative prescriptions (Frumkin & Camara, 1991), while in the UK it is the responsibility of the government officials to prove that a violation really took place (Turnock, 2009).
Generally, the practice shows that the British approach to dealing with this problem is conspicuously more effective.
In spite of the advent of technology, the business communities across the United Kingdom continue using different managerial approaches (Stewart, 2012). As a result, different methods of managing companies lead to the different degrees of compliance, and, most importantly, to the different efficiency ratios (Henderson, 2008). The purpose of this section of the research is to discuss the effectiveness of the most prevalent approaches to business management in terms of meeting the OSH requirements and legal compliance.
Administrative approach to management
The practice also shows that this approach to management is excessively formalized, i.e. the employees are always bound to follow the written rules (Papworth, 2015). However, contemporary HSE regulations emphasize that in many cases the company is more focused on increasing its revenues, while staying compliant with the OSH framework is often viewed as a secondary and non-essential activity (Pardee, 2010). In other words, the organizations, which use this approach to management, deploy only those safety measures, which are reasonably justified in their view, not those, which are recommended by the HSE in the approved codes of practice and other sources (Robson, 2005),
Scientific management
Developed by Frederick Taylor in the early twentieth century, the core objective behind scientific management is improvement of economic efficiency in general and productivity of the workers in particular. The commentators describe scientific management as one of the first documented attempts to synchronize applied sciences and management processes (Mullins, 2011). Scientific management has several distinctive features, which impact OSH compliance of an organization.
Similarly to the administrative approach to managing an organization, scientific management places emphasizes the importance of results. People are viewed as replaceable and exhaustible resources. Because of this orientation on results only, it the company goals that determine whether the company will meet the OSH criteria developed by the HSE (Parworth, 2015).
In addition to that, one of the foundations of scientific management is hierarchical style of corporate governance. Thus, if chief executive of a company perceives the importance of adhering to the OSH principles, such company is likely to meet the standards. In contrast, when the most senior executive believes that studying OSH compliance regulations and implementing them is not important for a company, such recommendations are likely to be ignored.
Finally, ‘soldiering’ and ‘drilling’ of employees is one of the chief distinctive features of scientific management (Stewart, 2012). The managers become prone to monitoring and controlling all aspects of the employees’ chore, who, in their turn, are expected to carry out their professional duties only (Capability and poor performance, 2015). Thus, all initiatives, as well as ‘upward’ attempts to implement OSH regulations are suppressed by the managers, if they are not consistent with the company development doctrine.
Behavioral approach to management
The key theoretical foundation of behavioral management theory is the importance of the human component. This feature has been traditionally ignored by the proponents of the classical theoretical approach. The adherents of this approach ague that a business organization should be viewed from the point of view of each individual, and the combination of these viewpoints should result in a development of the customized management policies, which should reflect the interests of the organization in the most effective way (Deal, Carlson, Victor & Montemurro).
The development and implementation of the various OSH policies are easier under this approach than under the classical systems for several reasons. Firstly, if proper workshops and explanations are conducted, each employee becomes individually interested in solidifying compliance of the organization with the existing OSH framework. Secondly, this approach minimizes the chances of managerial abuses, because each employee becomes answerable and accountable for his personal compliance. In other words, if a manager fails to notice that some of the employees do not act in accordance with the requirements of the OSH regulatory instruments, then, these employees will act on their own initiative.
Despite the fact that the use of behavioral approach to management is often useful of achieving specific purposes of the organization, the key disadvantage of this system is that it is poorly integrated with other managerial techniques, which may be concurrently used by the organization (Roughton & Mercurio, 2002). In addition to that, if the employees are not professional and responsible enough, this approach may lead to the opposite outcomes. Organizational anarchy is one of the most frequent results in this regard.
Furthermore, behaviorists believe that the conduct of employees is mainly dependent on the environment in which they work (Chaturvedu, 2006). Thus, not their individual psychological features, but the working conditions, organizational culture and other aspects of their employment determine their scopes of individual responsibility and accountability. As a result, by modifying the business environment, the company owners can indirectly control compliance with the OSH standards.
Co-operative social systems approach
The main theoretical rational behind this system of management is the fusion between interpersonal behavioral characteristics and the group ones (Pardee, 2010). In practice, the managers who focus on using this style believe that the best performance results are achieved when different members of the organization cooperate and synchronize their efforts and interests for the achievement of a common objective (Papworth, 2015). The proponents of this theory argue that the organization should set the goals, which will be congruent with the individual interests of the team members, as well as with the team interests of the entire company, otherwise failures are imminent (Stewart, 2012).
Provided that the value of OSH compliance is perceived by the teams of the organization in general, as well as by the individual staff members in particular, it is reasonable to believe that the development and implementation of these programs will be successful. Otherwise, striving to achieve other results, OSH objectives and priorities will be neglected by the employees, and the violations of OSH regulatory instruments become unavoidable.
The practice also demonstrates that in today’s economic systems, the use of co-operative approach to management becomes especially popular among the business owners, who try to give their employees realistic opportunity to achieve their personal goals within the company. Therefore, in order to ensure that such system is effective in terms of compliance with the different occupational health and safety regulations, the business community should primarily ensure that the objectives of OSH policies harmonize with the individual interests of the employees (Mullins, 2011).
Conclusions
In addition to that, the research demonstrates that the effectiveness and efficacy of the OHS policies are heavily dependent on a specific managerial style used by the organization. In particular, the practice demonstrated that co-operative and behavioral approaches to management are more effective in this regard, although they have their disadvantages as well. Administrative and scientific management are less effective if the employees are not adequately motivated, yet these methods are productive, when the company management prioritizes development and implementation of the OHS initiatives. In general, it can be concluded that each organization requires its own, ‘customized’ approach to OHS compliance, and the managers should take into consideration all relevant aspects of the organization’s business processes.
References
A Short Guide to the British Political System. (2016). The UK Government. Web. Retrieved from http://www.rogerdarlington.me.uk/Britishpoliticalsystem.html#Government
Abrams, Herbert K. (2001). "A Short History of Occupational Health" (PDF). Journal of Public Health Policy 22 (1): 34–80.
Buchanan, K. (2015) ‘FALQs: New Brazilian code of civil procedure’, New Brazilian Code of Civil Procedure. Web. Retrieved from: http://blogs.loc.gov/law/2015/09/falqs-new-brazilian-code-of-civil-procedure
Capability and Poor Performance Procedure. (2015). Available at: https://www.gre.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/663738/Capability-and-Poor-Performance-Procedure-January-2015.pdf
Chaturvedi, P. (2006). Challenges of occupational safety and health : thrust : safety in transportation. New Delhi: Published for Safety and Quality Forum, Quality Council of India by Concept Pub. Co.
Deal, B. &, Carlson, P., Victor, A. and Montemurro (no date) Frederick Taylor’s principles of scientific management and the multiple frames for viewing work organizations offered by. Web. Retrieved from: http://www.cassie-memorial.org/sjuweb/Coursework%20Web/EDU%205571/PDF/Taylor/Taylor%20Essay.pdf
Dietz, G. (2010). Organizational trust: A cultural perspective. Edited by Mark N. K. Saunders, Roy J. Lewicki, and Denise Skinner. New York: Cambridge University Press.
EU. (2015). Null - employment, social affairs & inclusion: EU occupational safety and health (OSH) strategic framework 2014-2020. Web. Retrieved from: http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=151&langId=en
Frumkin, H. & Camara, V. (1991). ‘Occupational health and safety in brazil’, 81(12).
Garrett, L. (2000). Betrayal of trust : the collapse of global public health. New York: Hyperion.
Gearey, A., & Morrison, W. (2012). Common law reasoning and institutions. Web. Retrieved from http://www.londoninternational.ac.uk/sites/default/files/programme_resources/laws/ug_subject_guides/common_law_reasoning_and_inst-subjectguide4chapters.pdf
Health and Safety Executive (HSE).(2009). Reducing error and influencing behaviour HSG48. Web. Retrieved from: http://www.hseni.gov.uk/hsg_48_reducing_error_and_influencing_behaviour.pdf
Health and Safety Executive. (2011). Health and Safety Annual Statistics Report 2010-2011. Web. Retrieved from http://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/overall/hssh1011.pdf
Health and Safety Executive. (n.d.) A guide to health and safety regulation in Great Britain. Web. Retrieved from http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/hse49.pdf
Henderson, D. (2008). The concise encyclopedia of economics. Indianapolis, Ind: Liberty Fund.
IOSH, E. (2007) ‘Report on the UK’ s practical implementation of European OSH directives during 2007-12 ". Web. Retrieved from: http://www.iosh.co.uk/~/media/Documents/Books%20and%20resources/Archived%20Consultations/IOSH%20submission%20to%20HSE%20for%20EU%20law%20review%20311212.pdf
Kloss, D. (2005). Occupational health law. Oxford: Blackwell Science.
Labour Standards, B. O. (2013) Occupational health & safety - human rights and business country guide. Available at: http://hrbcountryguide.org/countries/brazil/labour-issues/occupational-health-safety/
LaDou, J. (2007). Current occupational & environmental medicine. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Law Reports. (2012). Understanding UK case law SOAS. Web. Retrieved from: http://www.soas.ac.uk/library/subjects/law/research/file70250.pdf
Mendeloff, J. (2015) Occupational safety and health in Brazil risks and policies. Web. Retrieved from: https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/working_papers/WR1100/WR1105/RAND_WR1105.pdf
Mullins, L. J. (2011) Essentials of organisational behaviour. 3rd edn. Harlow, England: Financial Times Prentice Hall/Pearson
Papworth, T. (2015) SMEs and health & safety. Web. Retrieved from: http://www.centreforum.org/assets/pubs/smes-and-health-and-safety.pdf
Pardee, R. L. (2010). A literature review of selected theories dealing with job satisfaction and motivation: A review of classical literature and recent theory on motivation reveals four major theory areas. Web. Retrieved from: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED316767.pdf
Pun K., Yam R.C.M.; Lewis W.G. (2003). «Safety management system registration ". International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 20 (6): 704–721
Robson L, Clarke J, Cullen K, Bielecky A, Severin C, Bigelow P, Irvin E, Culyer AJ and Mahood Q (2005) The effectiveness of occupational health and safety management systems: A systematic review. Web. Retrieved from: http://www.iwh.on.ca/sys-reviews/the-effectiveness-of-occupational-health-and-safety-management-systems-a-systematic-review
Roughton, J. & Mercurio, J. (2002). Developing an effective safety culture : a leadership approach. Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Stewart, R. (2012) The reality of management. 3 edition edn. United States: Routledge
Stranks, J. (2005). Health and safety law. Harlow: Prentice Hall.
The Structures of the Courts. (n.a.). The Structure of the Courts. Web. Retrieved from https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/courts-structure-0715.pdf
Turnock, B. (2009). Public health : what it is and how it works. Sudbury, Mass: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.
Understanding UK Case Law.(n.d.) Web. Retrieved from http://www.soas.ac.uk/library/subjects/law/research/file70250.pdf
