Manual handling at work and risk assessments

All employers must comply with the risk assessment requirements set out in the Manual Handling Operations Regulations 1992. These regulations require employers to apply control measures to prevent or reduce the risk of injury to their employees from manual handling. Manual handling relates to the moving of items either by lifting, lowering, carrying, pushing or pulling.

Assessing and reducing the risk of injury

Article by Nazmin Chowdhury

Risks can be found in all work sectors and employers will be asked by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) to provide copies of all risk assessments carried out. This will then be assessed by a safety representative to ensure that the employer is preventing and controlling hazards. If a safety representative thinks that there is a risk of injury then under Regulation 4 the employer must take reasonable steps to reduce the risk by: 

• Avoiding hazardous manual handling operations so far as is reasonably practicable

• Making a suitable and sufficient assessment of the risk of injury from any hazardous manual handling operations that cannot be avoided

• Reducing the risk of injury from those operations so far as is reasonably practicable 

• Avoiding hazardous manual handling operations so far as is reasonably practicable.

• Making a suitable and sufficient assessment of the risk of injury from any hazardous manual handling operations that cannot be avoided.

• Reducing the risk of injury from those operations so far as is reasonably practicable.

How do we value a claim for personal injury?

Despite the best medical developments it is highly unlikely that a sum of money can put one back to their pre-accident state, free of injuries. So how do we decide what you should accept in compensation for the injury that you have suffered?



Article by Nidhi Chopra

The law provides for compensation to an injured claimant for the pain, suffering and loss of amenity that has been caused as a result of the accident. How do we know what pain suffering and loss of amenity that has been caused to the Claimant following an accident? We do this by obtaining independent reports that are accepted by the Court from appropriate medical expert witnesses. The experts provide their opinions as to what the Claimant has suffered as a result of the incident, what further treatment they could need to get them in a better state and what their long term prognosis is likely to be.

Security Staff

There are many different types of doorman and security staff employed within the UK. With numerous nightclubs, bars and pubs opening up every year, it is often a sensible choice for managers of such establishments to employ door staff and security personnel in order to protect the physical safety of their patrons, reputation, business and financial interests.

Within the UK today there are in excess of 200,000 nightclubs, bars and pubs who are fully licensed to serve alcohol to the general public. Where the law imposes strict laws under the Licensing Act 2003, it does not actually provide companies with any requirements as to the extent of security required. So what are the risks posed to an establishment that employs untrained or unskilled doormen?

Accidents at Work

Article by
Dave Koon Koon

In yet another blow to the genuinely injured individual the laws which cover many of the aspects of an employer’s liability to their employee, should an accident happen at work, are changing from October 2013.

There will be many changes that will affect the prospects of success of claims being made by those injured at work and one of these changes is the removal of the requirement that the employer must prove that they have taken steps that are ‘reasonably practicable’ to ensure that their employee is not injured at work.

At present it is for the employer to prove that they have taken all reasonably practicable steps to reduce the risk of injury to its lowest level in compliance with whichever regulation or statute is relevant to the circumstances. It is not for the injured employee to do this.

Following the changes in October 2013 it will be more than likely up to the injured employee to prove that the employer failed to take all reasonably practicable steps to reduce that risk to its lowest level in order to comply with the relevant regulation or statute. This will in turn lead to increased expense for the injured party as additional expert evidence will be required to prove their case.

Another particularly significant change is the removal of ‘strict liability’ from the various Health & Safety regulations. An example of how this works is that at present, if an employee is injured at work, through no fault of their own, whilst using machinery or tools, which are defective or faulty and that work equipment has been provided by their employer then their employer will be liable to compensate the injured employee for their injury, regardless of whether the employer had knowledge of any problem with the equipment.

Following the changes to the Health & Safety regulations in October 2013 ‘strict liability’ will have been removed which means that should an employee be injured at work by defective or faulty equipment, provided by their employer, then the employee will have to prove that their employer was negligent in providing that equipment. This change will therefore shift the burden of proving the case to the injured employee who has done nothing wrong.   

If you have been involved in an accident at work please contact me on 01992 422 128 or at dave@gardenhousesolicitors.co.uk for further advice and assistance.     

www.gardenhousesolicitors.co.uk

---

Tel: 01992 422 128

---

Email: info@gardenhousesolicitors.co.uk
The contents of this article are intended for general information purposes only and shall not be deemed to be, or constitute legal advice. We cannot accept responsibility for any loss as a result of acts or omissions taken in respect of this article.