• Higher Safety Higher Safety Chipmunk Data Chipmunk Data

    REVIEW OF CDM REGULATIONS RESEARCH FINDINGS

    Positive results for CDM 2007 despite bureaucracy, complexity and ambiguity

    Following introduction of the CDM Regulations in 2007 HSE agreed to undertake external and internal research to determine the extent to which the regulations met the HSE objectives and the cost implications for the construction industry.

    On Wednesday 13th July 2011 the Construction Industry Advisory Committee (CONIAC) will consider a paper summarising the main findings. The paper concludes there is “broad agreement” between the two pieces of research.  The main findings are reproduced verbatim below.

    External evaluation main findings 

    The methodology included a large-scale survey of some 350 duty holders across all dutyholder groups and sizes of business, face-to-face interviews with small clients and small contractors, key stakeholder interviews, influence network workshops, open forums and interviews with HSE Inspectors. The main findings were:

    1. Respondents’ level of agreement to statements relating to HSE’s five objectives for CDM was far more positive for CDM 2007 than for CDM 1994. 

    2. CDM 2007 has substantially met its objectives, but there are still concerns about how the principles underpinning the regulations are put into practice. In particular, more needs to be done to ensure that the industry does not generate unnecessary paperwork in its attempts to comply. This is a particular problem for stage 1 competence assessments.

    3. The interpretation of the ACoP rather than the regulations themselves can cause problems: the ACoP was found to be unwieldy and difficult to interpret and apply in practice.

    4. Respondents’ level of agreement with statements relating to construction design, management and site practices were significantly more positive in 2010 than they were in 2006.

    5. Whilst there was a cost impact of CDM 2007, respondents rated the benefits as being higher than the costs.

    6. Industry practice has a significant influence on how the construction industry implements CDM 2007.

    CONIAC Working Group main findings

    The CONIAC CDM Evaluation WG was established in November 2009 to provide a forum to collectively represent the views of the UK construction industry. It brought together a broad range of interests and worked collaboratively to provide a wide perspective on CDM 2007. The main findings of were:

    1. CDM 2007 represents a significant improvement on CDM 1994, but the industry wants more guidance which better meets their needs to clarify not only their duties but the limits of those duties.

    2. Competence emerges as a strong theme – there is still a great deal more to be done to address the shortcomings of multiple accreditation schemes with lack of mutual recognition. The confusion, cost and bureaucracy arising from multiple card schemes for individuals with different standards is of great concern, particularly to sub-contractors. There was a consensus that more needed to be done to explain to clients in particular the role of prequalification schemes, in particular on the practical competences of organisations and individuals.

    3. Bureaucracy is still problematic and a primary source of dissatisfaction to the industry. For those who favour it, often as a way of transferring the risk of non-compliance to others, there is little within the existing CDM portfolio to clearly identify it as bad practice. This is an issue which polarises the industry, with some dutyholders having a clear vision of when documentation is needed, with others seemingly incapable of bearing down on what they see as an unstoppable flow of paperwork.

    4. There is still more to be done to embed the co-ordination requirements of CDM and to ensure that these are delivered effectively. The WG made a number of recommendations to improve co-ordination through design, procurement and construction. In particular the WG acknowledged the benefits of integrated team working, but went on to acknowledge that there is not a single model for such working across the different industry sectors.

    5. The role of designers in the influencing of health and safety outcomes has improved under CDM 2007 compared with CDM 1994. However, there is a worrying level of divergence of opinion within the design profession as to how they should discharge their duties and what the limits of those duties are.

    6. There was broad consensus from the members of the working group on these matters. However, it is understandable that each of the dutyholder groups represented on the group would have views which were not necessarily shared by – or of particular relevance to – the others represented.

    7. The WG did not feel that the case was supported for fundamental changes to CDM 2007 but that more needs to be done to spread understanding across industry generally (they reported that two thirds of occasional clients are unaware of CDM 2007, for example). This matches the main findings of the Frontline research and they made the case that improvements can be delivered by communication and clearer HSE and industry guidance. They felt that this would help to address industry misconceptions/misinterpretation and related costs associated with unnecessary bureaucracy.

    Comment

    We await the full report with interest. The findings above suggests we can expect little pressure for change to CDM 2007 other that by way of revisions to the ACOP / Guidance to produce greater clarity and simplicity. This will be further driven by the current Government Löfstedt review of health and safety legislation and the Red Tape Challenge.

    More controversial developments may be prompted by Europe. The paper states that: “The European Commission is taking an active interest in how Members States have implemented this directive and there is a suggestion that the UK currently under-implements certain areas of the Directive.”  This relates to the duties of non-business (i.e.’domestic’) clients under CDM 2007. Watch this space….

    Latest Construction Health and Safety News

    CONTRACTS MANAGER HANDED TWO YEAR PRISON TERM

    Safety fall arrest netting would have saved life of deceased workman

    Read the rest of this article »

    Posted on 15th January 2020

    WORKER FATALLY INJURED BY CONCRETE BEAM

    Lifting operation not properly planned, managed and supervised

    Read the rest of this article »

    Posted on 15th January 2020

    TREE FELLING OPERATIONS LACKED DEFINED COMMS

    Workman struck by falling tree inside “normal” exclusion zone

    Read the rest of this article »

    Posted on 14th January 2020

    CONTRACTOR ARRESTED OVER WELFARE FAILINGS

    Recalcitrant sole trader failed to attend court hearing

    Read the rest of this article »

    Posted on 14th January 2020

    MAJOR DEMOLITION CONTRACTOR FINED £500,000

    Collapse of concrete slab caused death of worker and excavator fall

    Read the rest of this article »

    Posted on 14th January 2020

    FALL FROM LADDER WHILST CARRYING BUCKET

    Contractor failed to provide basic safe lifting aids

    Read the rest of this article »

    Posted on 14th January 2020

    FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH HSE NOTICE PROVES COSTLY

    Director given suspended jail term and company fined £60,000

    Read the rest of this article »

    Posted on 14th January 2020

    DEVELOPER FAILED TO PLAN AND CHECK COMPETENCE

    Fall caused by ad-hoc working methods and lack of monitoring

    Read the rest of this article »

    Posted on 14th January 2020

    CYLINDER LEAK TEST CAUSED FATAL INJURIES

    Corrosion inhibitor triggered failure and shrapnel ejection

    Read the rest of this article »

    Posted on 14th January 2020

    FESTIVE GREETINGS TO ALL OUR READERS

    Read the rest of this article »

    Posted on 20th December 2019

    JAIL TERM FOLLOWS ROUTINE HSE SPOT CHECK

    Director of a roofing firm handed a suspended prison sentence

    Read the rest of this article »

    Posted on 19th December 2019

    TEENAGER FELL 3M DURING BLOCK AND BEAM WORK

    Workers uninstructed and left to devise own safe system of work

    Read the rest of this article »

    Posted on 19th December 2019

    PARCEL CARRIER FINED HEAVILY OVER FLT INCIDENT

    Reversing fork lift lacked segregation from pedestrians

    Read the rest of this article »

    Posted on 18th December 2019

    CONTRACTOR FINED OVER FLOOR OPENING FALL

    Thorough risk assessment and edge protection were both inadequate

    Read the rest of this article »

    Posted on 18th December 2019

    THREE WORKERS “CARRIED ALONG” IN SEWER INCIDENT

    Mentally affected and one man treated for long-term traumatic stress

    Read the rest of this article »

    Posted on 11th December 2019

    SOLAR FIRM AND DIRECTOR SENTENCED OVER DEATH

    Brother of business owner died in fall during panel installation

    Read the rest of this article »

    Posted on 10th December 2019

    DIRECTOR AND COMPANY FINED FOR ASBESTOS RISK

    HSE refurbishment campaign inspection revealed asbestos offences

    Read the rest of this article »

    Posted on 10th December 2019

    BULK BAG COLLAPSE CAUSED BY UNSAFE STACKING

    Bulk bag collapsed onto workman when struck by fork lift

    Read the rest of this article »

    Posted on 9th December 2019

    INTERLOCKED GUARD NOT WORKING TO ISOLATE POWER

    Two workmen seriously injured when plant started unexpectedly

    Read the rest of this article »

    Posted on 9th December 2019

    STREET FURNITURE RISK TO PUBLIC FINED £1.4M

    Council prosecuted following injury to child playing on hinged bollard

    Read the rest of this article »

    Posted on 9th December 2019

    WORKMEN SUFFER SERIOUS BURNS FROM CABLE STRIKE

    Assessment and system of work failed to appreciate electrical risk

    Read the rest of this article »

    Posted on 29th November 2019

    LADDERS WERE INAPPROPRIATE FOR WORK ON ROOF

    Workman paralysed after falling whilst installing roof ladder

    Read the rest of this article »

    Posted on 28th November 2019

    FIRM FAILED TO MANAGE EXHAUST VENTILATION

    HSE enforcement notices on wood dust and welding fume ignored

    Read the rest of this article »

    Posted on 27th November 2019

    RECALCITRANT DIRECTOR BARRED FROM OFFICE

    Dangerous telehandler used despite earlier fatality and enforcement

    Read the rest of this article »

    Posted on 25th November 2019

    DIRECTOR HID UNSAFE WORKING PRACTICES FROM HSE

    Workers exposed to sprayed paints containing asthma causing isocyantes

    Read the rest of this article »

    Posted on 25th November 2019
  • Higher Safety Higher Safety Chipmunk Data Chipmunk Data

    3 Responses to “REVIEW OF CDM REGULATIONS RESEARCH FINDINGS”

    1. ACTION TO END COMPETENCE CARD SHORTCOMINGS | PP Construction Safety News Desk Says:

      […] is echoed in the emerging findings of the evaluation of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 which suggests […]

    2. HSE REVISITS UNSUCCESSFUL STRATEGY FOR SMALLER PROJECTS | PP Construction Safety News Desk Says:

      […] HSE Working Group reviewing CDM has reported that ”two thirds of occasional clients are unaware of CDM 2007″. It is […]

    3. REVIEW OF CDM REGULATIONS 2007 NOW PUBLISHED | PP Construction Safety News Desk Says:

      […] reported the upcoming results of this research in July […]