PO
BOX 199 SHEFFIELD S1 4YL ENGLAND WWW.HAZARDS.ORG
|
|
|
|
PO
BOX 199 SHEFFIELD S1 4YL ENGLAND WWW.HAZARDS.ORG
|
|
|
|
VICTIMISATION
5 August 2005 Memo to endangered workers: Workers are winning tribunals for safety victimisation at a rate of one a week. Latest government figures, obtained by Hazards magazine, show 49 workers won employment tribunals in 2004/5 in a category covering those who “suffer a detriment, dismissal or redundancy for health and safety reasons.” A total of 896 claims were made under this heading in 2004/5, with 440 cases either won at tribunal or settled at ACAS in the year – about two every working day. Throughout the year 381 claims were settled at ACAS, 314 were either withdrawn or settled privately and 160 were either unsuccessful or dismissed at hearing [see note 1]. Hazards editor Rory O’Neill commented: “It shouldn’t be a firing offence to object to unsafe work. The money-or-your-life option is neither civilised nor sensible and should be replaced with a legal system that protects safety whistleblowers, not rewards them with their cards. “In Britain we have kinda-sorta rights, which mean you can be fired for being a safety whistleblower and have the right to complain about it afterwards. This amounts to a great big incentive to shut your eyes and shut your mouth.” He called for urgent government action, including the introduction of larger penalties on employers for victimisation of anyone raising safety concerns, including ASBOs on guilty directors, a right to reinstatement for any worker fired for raising safety concerns, the right for unions to appoint “roving safety reps” with legal access to non-union workplaces, and a right to refuse dangerous work. “Health and Safety Executive statistics released last week show official safety action in the most dangerous construction, agriculture and manufacturing sectors is failing to have any real impact [note 2]. It would be a fatal mistake not to take full advantage of the union safety effect. “Giving union safety reps more rights in more workplaces is the ultimate win-win. It provides skilled, trained on-the-ground union safety advisers at absolutely no cost to the government, complementing the work of the Health and Safety Executive and saving lives in the process.” The real extent of safety victimisation may be much worse than the employment tribunal statistics suggest. The TUC in July 2005 called for an investigation into a dramatic drop off in the number of employment tribunal cases after the introduction of new rules. Latest Employment Tribunals Service figures show there was a 25 per cent drop in the number of tribunals in 2004/5 compared to the previous year. 1. Tribunal breakdown for 2004/5 is as follows.
2. The overall fatality level for 2004/05 is down by 15 to 220, from 235 in 2003/04. However, the difference can be explained largely by a drop in service sector deaths, down by 18 from 81 to 63. The number of deaths in the construction and manufacturing sectors were both up, to 72 (from 71) and 41 (from 30) respectively. The number of deaths in agriculture fell only slightly, from 44 to 42, despite the 2003/04 figures including the 21 cockler deaths in Morecambe Bay. 3. Tribunals are the major route of redress for a number of workplace safety issues, including where union reps are victimised for their safety activities or barred from performing their inspection, investigation and other functions, or where workers raise safety concerns. A tribunal is also where employers are held accountable if they deny workers time off for union safety training. 4. Further information on victimisation for workplace safety offences can be obtained from the Hazards website 5. The Hazards ‘In the firing line” guide is available free online 6. Further information on the union safety effect can be obtained from the Hazards website Media enquiries: Rory O’Neill,
Hazards magazine, editor@hazards.org
Tel: 01535 210462.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
HAZARDS MAGAZINE • WORKERS' HEALTH INTERNATIONAL NEWS |
