Reference no: EM133334618

Case Study: You are a Health and Safety consultant and have been telephoned by an organisation called MSL, who are a large pharmaceutical distribution company. MSL procure, store, and distribute pharmaceutical products across Europe. The organisation has been operating from a new warehousing site, that includes office space, for two years. The site is on a busy junction that provides excellent access to the motorways. The workforce is made up of 1 200 workers which includes order pickers, team leaders, distribution drivers, and sales representatives. Office workers include Human Resources (HR) and a Health and Safety Manager (HSM) who has just started their NEBOSH Diploma.
Recently, there has been an accident where a worker was hit by a reversing truck. Several other workers witnessed this accident and have been traumatised by what they saw. However, this is not the only accident that has happened in the last 12 months. Previously, an automated order-picking cart collided with a worker, resulting in a broken ankle. This accident led to the organisation being issued with an enforcement notice. The organisation is expecting another visit from an enforcement officer. As a result, they have asked you to carry out a full review of their health and safety.
Before you start looking around the site you are introduced to the Managing Director (MD). The MD tells you about the two accidents and the expected visit from an enforcement officer. They add that both the accidents were due to 'worker error'. They also want you to produce a report demonstrating that the management of health and safety at MSL has nothing to do with the accidents.
The MD introduces you to the HSM and leaves to attend a Directors' meeting. The HSM escorts you to the goods-outwards warehouse. During the walk, they immediately disclose that the Directors believe that there are no risks if common sense is used. The Directors are more interested in making as much money as possible. An annual bonus is offered to all workers to incentivise this.
You watch workers picking products to fulfil orders and notice two, small forklift trucks are being used for restocking the racking. You see fire extinguishers and fire notices at various points around the warehouse, along with call points near to the doors. There is a first-aid kit located near to a desk at one end of the warehouse.
You speak to the warehouse manager (WM) who explains that there are three temporary order pickers starting today. One of the team leaders is presenting an induction training session and the WM invites you to observe. You accept this offer and follow the team leader.
On the way to the training room the team leader tells you that there is a high turnover of workers, so they are used to delivering the induction training. You are told that the induction will cover site rules and fire arrangements. You ask if the nominated first-aiders list is shared at the induction. The team leader tells you that it is not shared, but that all warehouse managers and team leaders have received first-aid training. You find out that the induction is the same for all new workers, whether they are temporary or permanent. You question how the workers will know about risks they are exposed to in their roles. The team leader insists that if the workers do the job as instructed there will not be any risks. You also learn that no written job description is provided to new workers. Once they are put into their teams, their team leader will tell them how to do the job.
After the induction you speak to the HSM and ask to see all of the health and safety documentation. The HSM shows you the fire procedure and the goods-outwards warehouse risk assessment. You are also shown the risk assessment and guidance for working from home, which the sales team are familiar with. You ask to see the fire risk assessment; the HSM explains that it does not exist because they do not know what to include in it.
You read through the fire procedure, which includes alarm recognition. You notice that a fire drill was last carried out in 2018. You meet up with the MD and explain why fire drills should be practised. The MD says that "Everyone has been told that the assembly point is in the car park at the back of the building". Although the MD believes that fire drills disrupt work, they reluctantly agree that they should be practised, and speak to the HSM about organising this.
IG1_IGC1-0020-ENG-OBE-QP-V1 Dec22 © NEBOSH 2022 page 3 of 5
The next day you continue your review of the documentation and look at the generic goods-outwards warehouse risk assessment. You notice that this was also carried out in 2018. The HSM tells you that they developed the last risk assessment alone. The findings were fed back to the workers by the team leaders. You intend to revise this risk assessment.
You now look at the documentation about working from home, which relates directly to the sales team. The Sales Manager (SM) has previously noticed that more than one of the sales team workers has poor posture in their chair during online meetings. The guidance document includes advice for workstation assessment for long-term working from home. The SM has regular 1-2-1's online with the individual team members and twice-weekly sales team meetings. At the team meeting each member gives an update on what they are doing, and among other things, the wellbeing of the team is discussed. There is also the opportunity for them to chat with colleagues.
Moving on from this, you ask the HSM if sickness absence is recorded. The HSM replies that HR record this.
You learn that the HSM carried out an audit about six months ago. The Directors seemed to think it was a good idea and showed some interest in reviewing the findings. The Directors were not interested in a plan or scope, because they were convinced by the HSM that they knew what they were doing. Although, the HSM had previously carried out inspections, they had never done an audit before. The HSM analysed documentation such as risk assessments, spoke to workers and recorded their feedback.
When you speak to the HSM about the audit you ask about the audit team and the plan. The HSM says it only took a couple of days and they did not have anyone to help them. You ask if there were any significant findings and if the Directors had seen them. The HSM replies that the Directors were not interested and said they were too busy. The significant findings were that many risks were not assessed. These included stress and DSE use. Other risk assessments and procedures needed revising. These significant findings were presented in a report.
You move on to accident investigations. The HSM explains that the details of any accidents and incidents are recorded, if they are reported. Various statistics are produced from these records. The HSM doubts that all accidents and incidents are reported.
Training and inspection records are kept, although training has not resumed since the site move.
The fire drill starts at 10.00 the following day. You notice that some workers appear to be taking on the role of fire marshal, even though they have not been officially appointed. As you leave the building you look at the front of the building where a few people have gathered. At the nominated assembly point there is chaos. Some workers are trying to work out if everyone is there.

Task 4: Monitoring and measuring (audits)

Question: Based on the scenario only, what is negative about the Directors' response to the audit?