Joint Health and Safety Committees:. The Senior Management Role
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/eb057240 |
| Pages | 20-23 |
| Date | 01 March 1982 |
| Published date | 01 March 1982 |
| Author | P.B. Beaumont,J.W. Leopold |
| Subject Matter | Economics,Information & knowledge management,Management science & operations |
Joint Health and Safety Committees:
The Senior Management Role*
by P. B. Beaumont, Department of Social and Economic Research, University of Glasgow
and J. W. Leopold, Centre for Research in Industrial Democracy and Participation, University of Glasgow
Introduction
In recent years a major theme in the organisational
development and change literature has been the need to
produce improved models of the change process
[1].
A ma-
jor source of the need for such improved models is the long
overdue recognition of the fact that, although pressures
for change occur in both union and non-union
establishments, "OD has had little to say about the role of
unions and the part they play in OD" [2]. This particular
deficiency is especially unsatisfactory in view of the many
longstanding examples of union-management problem
solving structures and arrangements, most notably joint
health and safety committees. Moreover, the unsatisfac-
tory state of the organisational development and change
literature with regard to the position and implications of
the union role is likely to become even more acute as a
number of commentators have pointed to such joint pro-
blem solving structures as being very much the wave of the
future [3].
Reduction of accidents can best be
secured by obtaining the interest
and co-operation of operatives and
officials through safety committees
The purpose of this contribution is not to evaluate fully
the worth of the traditional organisational development
and change models for understanding the workings of
joint health and safety committees, nor does it seek to add
to or adapt such models so that they are more appropriate
to an understanding of the operation of such committees in
a unionised work setting
[4].
The aim is rather to assess the
potential value of arguably the central theme in the
organisational development and change literature, namely
the need to obtain the commitment of senior mangement in
any organisation before a change effort can be successfully
initiated, in assessing the effective operation of joint health
and safety committees. In this task we use some of the
results of a recently completed study of the workings of
such committees in some 50 manufacturing plants in Bri-
tain. However, before turning to this material we present
in the next section a brief background history of joint
health and safety committees in Britain.
The Place of Joint Health and Safety Committees
The attempt of various public bodies to encourage the
voluntary establishment of such committees dates back at
least to the early decades of this century. The Factory In-
spectorate, for example, argued as early as 1913 that [5]:
... the experience of several British and American firms
show that, in addition to legal safeguards, reduction of
accidents can best be secured by obtaining the interest
and co-operation of operatives and officials through
safety committees. The number and constitution of such
committees will depend on the size of the factory and the
nature of the industry. The duties of these committees
are to study the causes of accidents, to suggest and
devise suitable means for preventing them, to keep
careful records, to make frequent inspection of
machinery and plant, and to note any defects and
dangers. After some experience the principal safety
committee usually drafts a code of safety rules ap-
plicable to the particular factory . . .
In addition to the continual urging of the Factory Inspec-
torate, the TUC and the central employer body at the par-
ticular time have also issued joint statements in favour of
the voluntary establishment of such committees. However,
despite all this verbal encouragement the extent of progress
in the voluntary establishment of joint health and safety
committees was for long considered unsatisfactory. For ex-
ample, a report by the National Joint Advisory Council at
the Ministry of Labour in the mid-1950s revealed the
limited and uneven establishment of such committees:
there were "... committees of some kind with functions
covering safety in about 60 per cent of factories with more
than 500 employees, in about 25 per cent of factories with
between 250 and 500 workers, in less than 10 per cent of
factories employing between 100 and 250 workers, and
were almost non-existent in factories with less than 100
employees" [6].
This evidence of the lack of progress in establishing such
committees, combined with a rising accident rate over the
period 1963-69, led to union and parliamentary demands
for changes to the Factories Acts which would provide for
statutory based joint health and safety committees. These
demands did not lead to any immediate legislative changes,
although they did result in two surveys by the Factory In-
spectorate in 1967 and 1969 which were designed to pro-
vide detailed information on the extent of committee
establishment [7]. The latter survey, for example, revealed
that in total only 27 per cent of the plants surveyed had a
joint health and safety committee, although a further 20
per cent did have a general consultative committee that
discussed health and safety matters. There was also found
to be considerable inter-industry variation in the extent to
which joint health and safety committees had been
established; the range being from a low of 9 per cent of
plants in clothing and footwear to a high of 56 per cent of
establishments in gas, electricity and water.
*This article is based on on-going research being funded by the
Leverhulme Foundation
20 INDUSTRIAL MANAGEMENT + DATA SYSTEMS
To continue reading
Request your trial