JOINT STATEMENT BETWEEN PARCELFORCE WORLDWIDE AND THE CWU IN RELATION TO THE PILOT INTRODUCTION OF DELIVERY OF PERISHABLE ITEMS FOR ACCOUNT CUSTOMERS

Branches and representatives will be aware that our agreed Table of Success processes with Parcelforce have established a structure that strengthens the partnership approach and involves the CWU in the widest set of business issues.

Recently, the business approached the department to advise that it was their intention to re-introduce the delivery of perishable items due to the potential for growth and indications that customer demand exists.  The product offering had been available previously, but was ceased in 2019 due to operational challenges.

The business proposal for the reintroduction of the product offering was to allow drivers to leave items in the ‘safest place’ in order to ensure first time delivery, minimise waste and items being returned to the depot, which created some concerns for the department due to the potential for members to be held responsible for missing or damaged items.

In the view of the department, the proposal for drivers to be given the autonomy to select a ‘safest place’, differed significantly from the use of ‘safe place’, where a customer designates where they wish the item to be left.

Therefore, extensive discussions have taken place with the business in relation to the product offering, delivery specifications, what is considered a ‘safest place’ and, most importantly, ensuring that our members are protected. A Joint Statement has now been concluded and endorsed by the Postal Executive, a copy of which is attached for your information.

The department believes that the protections achieved in the Joint Statement are both crucial and far-reaching. It was only on the basis of the words below that the document was concluded:

Both parties accept there is a mutual obligation of confidence and trust applied to every contract of employment.  In line with this principle it is accepted that where a driver has made an informed decision on a safest place this has been done in good faith and that no responsibility will be placed on the driver for damaged or missing items.

It is accepted that a driver could unintentionally make an incorrect assessment of a safest place, and it is therefore agreed that in such circumstances the driver will not be held responsible but will, where necessary, be offered further training.

Colleagues will note that the Joint Statement also outlines that the delivery specification will be dependent on the posting customer either designating a nominated safe place or accepting a level of risk and liability where a driver will have authority to select a ‘safest place’, should the customer choose not to nominate. This will be a contractual commitment that the customer will be required to sign up to.

The product offering will be available from July 2022 to account customers only, who have been given operational concurrence and a process has been developed to ensure the following:

• that the customer is using appropriate packaging;
• that there is still the option to select a ‘safe place’;
• that customers will be notified by text that their item(s) are being delivered;
• that a new delivery option will be introduced giving Drivers the authority to leave item(s) in the ‘safest place’;
• that new labels will be used to identify that the item is perishable and a new report will be used to ensure that these items can be identified;
• a new process for managing waste that will include items being sent through to the National Hub.

The Joint Statement also contains an agreed process that will seek to maximise first time delivery through the application of Delivery Options that are included in the document.

For absolute clarity, the Joint Statement confirms that the use of ‘safest place’ is allowed for this perishable product offering only and will not be used in relation to any other item for delivery.

Operating procedures and Guidelines will be jointly developed and training will be supported by the Depot Trainer. 

The normal commitment in terms of H&S involvement has also been included in the Joint Statement.

The Table of Success Working Group will continue to monitor the deployment of the product offering and provide advice and support where necessary.

Any enquiries in relation to this LTB should be addressed to Davie Robertson, Assistant Secretary, email: dwyatt@cwu.org quoting reference: 114.23

Yours sincerely,

Davie Robertson
Assistant Secretary

304-22 PFW JS Perishable Items – 11.07.22

PFW JS Delivery of Perishable Items – 11.07.22

View Online

RMG Driver/Road Safety – ‘Vulnerable Road Users’ Campaign (RMG SHE Huddle/Briefing FY22 041):

The Royal Mail Group SHE Team are launching a ‘Vulnerable Road Users’ driver and road safety communications campaign and staff briefing during the week commencing 11 July with the issue of RMG SHE Huddle/Briefing FY22 041 (copy attached). Campaign slides/screen shots will also go out on the RMG plasma screens and on the RMG intranet.

Overview Message

Summer Driving – drive carefully around vulnerable road users.

What is a Vulnerable Road User?

Essentially, a vulnerable road user means anyone who isn’t protected inside a car, van, bus, lorry etc.

Cyclists, motorcyclists, horse riders and pedestrians are vulnerable road users. E-Scooters are rapidly growing in number and present both a familiar sight and present a new, growing hazard on UK roads, many of them illegal and not adequately policed. Currently, it is effectively illegal to use e-scooters on public roads, on pavements, in cycle lanes and in pedestrian-only areas. However, the use of electric scooters on public roads is set to be made legal under a new Transport Bill due to go through the Houses of Parliament and become law.

Important Highway Code Changes and Tougher Rules 

Significant Highway Code changes came into force on 28 January 2022 reinforcing the need to protect vulnerable road users. There is now a ‘hierarchy of responsibility’ for anybody using the roads, including motorists, cyclists, horse riders and walkers. This is a big change, especially when it comes to anybody driving a vehicle, as they will now have a greater overall responsibility for road safety than anyone walking, cycling or riding a horse because those driving a vehicle are capable of causing more damage. In effect, greater priority must be given to pedestrians at junctions and when crossing roads (instead of only giving way on a zebra crossing as in the past) and greater priority must be given to cyclists and horse riders.

Those drivers not following the Highway Code changes can face prosecution, heavy fines and prison. Sadly, many, many drivers are completely unaware of the Highway Code changes and their effect. A CWU Warning Poster was issued in January and sent out to the regions and branches (copy attached).

How to Keep People Safe

The SHE Huddle/Briefing FY22 041 gives advice to help avoid incidents and keep people safe (copy attached) and the following points are covered:

• Anticipate seeing vulnerable road users on and around the roads and take particular care.
• Be patient and don’t pass vulnerable road users until you can do so safely.
• Give space when passing and provide as much space as possible, minimum of 2m for horses and pedestrians, 1.5m for cyclists at 30mph and more above this speed.
• Pass slowly.
• Use the ‘Dutch-Reach’ method when getting out of the vehicle.
• Electric Vehicles – ensure that the Acoustic Vehicle Alerting System (AVAS) is always activated.

(Further details are in the attached SHE Huddle/Briefing FY22 041).

Actions:

• Keep a look out for vulnerable road users, be patient, pass wide and slowly, and use the ‘Dutch-Reach’ method.
• Always drive in accordance with the Highway Code and Royal Mail Driving SSOW.

The Aims and Benefits of the Campaign are:

• To increase awareness amongst drivers and managers and improve driving standards and highway code compliance.

CWU ASRs/WSRs

This campaign is supported by the CWU HQ Health, Safety & Environment Department. CWU ASR/WSR full support and participation is much appreciated by Royal Mail, Parcelforce Worldwide, RMSS, RMP&FS and CWU HQ.

ASRs/WSRs should ensure that the Briefing is delivered to drivers and ensure drivers are aware of the new Highway Code rules.

Attachments:

• SHE Huddle FY22 041 – Vulnerable Road Users
• TV Screenshots Materials
• CWU – New Highway Code Rules Warning Poster

Thanks for your support and assistance.

Yours sincerely

Dave Joyce
National Health, Safety & Environment Officer

22LTB303 RMG Driver Road Safety – ‘Vulnerable Road Users’ Campaign (RMG SHE Huddle Briefing FY22 041)

SHE Huddle FY22 041 Vulnerable Road Users

TV screen template Wk13 Summer VRUs

TV screen template Wkx Highway Code

CWU-2022-Highway-Code-Changes-Poster

View Online

New Report Published Finds Personal Safety is a Major Concern for Employees and that Employers Are Underestimating The Personal Safety Fears of Nearly 7 Million Workers:

A study into the perceptions of personal safety at work, published by ‘Peoplesafe’ has found that 6.8 million workers worry about their personal safety each week, while the majority of employers underestimate this level of concern.

The study, which was conducted with 2,100 non-vulnerable and potentially vulnerable workers, found that one in five employees worry about their safety at least once a week and that negative experiences involving safety issues often contribute to both their decisions to leave their job and their willingness to take on a similar job in the future.

22% of employees surveyed cited safety concerns as a reason they chose to leave their job and over a quarter would not take on a public facing role due to personal safety concerns.

The research report found that employees who feel unsafe at work are less satisfied in all aspects of their role and are more likely to leave their current position compared to workers who have not experienced a negative event. Whilst action is being taken to support other motivating factors for leaving a role, less has been done to address personal safety concerns.

Additionally, the study found that many businesses want to do more to protect their employees, but many struggle to know how they can help.

The report explores the issue of workplace safety and presents solutions for how employers and Government can work together to address these challenges. The report recommends that in order to better protect employees, regulators must give clearer guidance and Government should work with all parties to set out a standard of protection that employees can easily understand and access.

The overall message is that employers are not currently doing enough and 51% of the people surveyed agree that employers have a duty of care towards them outside of working hours and nearly a third believe their employer could be doing more to protect them. Most employees surveyed also supported the introduction of solutions that alerted people or called for help when they were at risk.

The study found that:

• Nearly 7 million workers worry about their safety each week.
• 57% of employers underestimate the level of concern felt by their staff.
• 57% of employees are concerned about facing aggression from the public.
• 22% of lone workers and frontline staff said safety concerns were among the reasons they chose to leave their job.
• One in four people do not want to take a role that involves face-to-face contact with the public, with 62% citing safety concerns among the reasons for that.

Attached:

• Copy of the Peoplesafe Report ‘Overcoming The Employee Safety Gap’.

Peoplesafe

Peoplesafe (formerly Skyguard and Guardian24) is a UK-based technology business, focused on providing and monitoring GPS personal safety alarms and applications for more than 150,000 at-risk and lone workers across both the public and private sectors. In addition to serving the NHS and police forces, the company has partnerships with government bodies including DEFRA, HMRC and The Forestry Commission, local authorities and housing associations across the UK, Yorkshire Water, Taylor Wimpey and Engie.

Yours sincerely

Dave Joyce
National Health, Safety & Environment Officer

22LTB302 New Report Published Finds Personal Safety is a Major Concern for Nearly 7 Million Workers

Overcoming_The_Employee_Safety_Gap

View Online

Royal Mail Group National Briefing, Tuesday 19^th July 2022 – Dispute Update and Pay Ballot Result

On Tuesday 19^th July 2022, a National Briefing/Press Conference will be held to provide Branches with an update on the latest position in regards to our dispute with Royal Mail Group and to announce the result of the ballot on pay.

The Briefing will be held at York Barbican, Paragon Street, York YO10 4AH beginning at 13:00 and concluding at 18:00.

To clarify, the following Representatives are invited to attend the Briefing:

• Postal Branch Secretaries and Branch Chairs (or their substitutes)
• Divisional Representatives (Including Technical Services)
• Parcelforce Regional Organisers
• Fleet Territorial Representatives
• Regional Secretaries
• Area Delivery Representatives
• Area Processing Representatives
• Area Distribution Representatives
• Area Safety Representatives
• Area Admin Representatives
• Customer Experience Representatives

From 16:00 the Briefing will become a Press Conference as we prepare to announce the pay ballot result.  At this point, we would encourage our local Representatives and members living in the surrounding areas to join us for the announcement.  We will liaise with the relevant Divisional Representatives on this matter.

Branches should note that in line with our proportionality requirements and previous attendance arrangements at National Briefings, it is requested that in addition to the above each Branch send two Unit Reps to the Briefing, one of which must be a woman.

All Branches are requested to make this a priority engagement.  If Branches wish, they may bring banners to decorate the hall.

Any enquiries in relation to the content of this LTB should be addressed to the DGS(P) Department or General Secretary’s Office.

Yours sincerely,                                                   Yours sincerely,

Terry Pullinger                                                           Dave Ward

Deputy General Secretary (Postal)              General Secretary  

22LTB301 – Royal Mail Group National Briefing – Ballot Results Tuesday 19th July 2022 (00000002)

View Online

CAPITA TVL: PAY 2022 – ACAS DISCUSSIONS: JOINT STATEMENT

Further to LTBs 250/22 and 290/22 dated 7^th and 29^th June respectively.  Branches are advised that the meeting at Acas in relation to the pay dispute took place on Monday 4^th July.  I was accompanied by Saf Khan, Postal Executive and Lorna Pearson, Policy Advisor.  The parties once again discussed in a constructive manner the key areas.  Another meeting has been arranged for Thursday 21^stJuly.

The following Joint Statement has been agreed:

Further to our previous Joint Statement dated 7th June, a pay meeting was held at Acas on Monday 4th July which was both cordial and constructive. Productive discussions took place around a number of areas including pay and terms & conditions. Both parties committed to take a number of issues away for further consideration and agreed to meet again at the earliest opportunity. Due to annual leave and Acas’ availability, the next available date for a joint meeting is Thursday 21st July.

We would like to thank you once again for your patience while we endeavour to find a mutually agreeable resolution to pay 2022 and will update you further following the next meeting at Acas.

Kind regards

Paul Johnston                                                     Andy Furey

Capita TVL Managing Director                              CWU Assistant Secretary

We also met with our Capita Reps on Tuesday 5^th July to update them on the Acas discussions and everyone was supportive of the approach we are taking as evidently the rejected pay offer is simply not good enough with today’s cost of living crisis.

Further developments will be reported.

Yours sincerely

Andy Furey
Assistant Secretary

22LTB300 Capita TVL – Pay 2022 – Acas Discussions – Joint Statement

View Online

A short update from DGSP Terry Pullinger on his meeting with Royal Mail Group CEO Simon Thompson.

Get the vote out #HomeToVote

Facebook https://fb.watch/e6Dv1hFiDA/

Twitter https://twitter.com/cwunews/status/1545042734355861504?s=21&t=YunoX3EoZwCS94x-L8aUYg

Royal Mail’s Position Regarding Year Two Productivity Targets & Revision Activity in Delivery

We have received a number of enquiries from Branches concerning Royal Mail’s position in regards to ‘Year-Two’ productivity targets for both Table Top and Structural Revision units which are being outlined by them as part of the Productivity Section of the Pathway to Change Agreement.

The purpose of this Letter to Branches is to advise Branches of these developments and to confirm the current position in terms of our agreement on productivity under the Pathway to Change.

Table Top Revision Units

The Pathway to Change Agreement set out a joint commitment around delivery revision activity for 2021. The bulk of these revisions were based on Table Top activity and a measured step change improvement on WIPWH (Weighted Items Per Work Hours) against an agreed reference period, or to maintain the current level if at or above standard performance (196 WIPWH).

Whilst Royal Mail wrote to the CWU with their position around the year-two improvement plans for table top revisions in May 2022, there has been no direct engagement or meaningful discussions with the CWU Nationally as Royal Mail have taken an arbitrary approach, which is reflective of the wider current industrial relations climate, along with their unacceptable stance towards the Union and our National Agreements.

Royal Mail’s year-two improvement plan is outlined as follows:

• Royal Mail have referred back to the 2019 original productivity reference starting point period (week’s 27-30) and have removed the unmeasured work hours.
• Royal Mail have also reviewed each delivery unit’s WIPWH performance level based on week 1- 52 of 2021/22, minus bank holidays and peak weeks.
• Royal Mail now want to establish a new year-two target for table top units that would be based on whatever of the two mechanisms (set out above) report as the highest productivity level.

Notwithstanding that this position by Royal Mail totally ignores that offices have made a year-one improvement target, it is now very clear that the impact of unmeasured hours being removed from the unit’s WIPWH performance will been significant. This confirms that for many years Royal Mail have seemingly been under reporting true productivity level within the delivery function.

In order to demonstrate the impact of removing unmeasured hours, in 2019 some 47 units had been reported as at or above 196 WIPWH. The removal of unmeasured hours has now resulted in 376 units being at or above 196 WIPWH, which is circa 42% of the delivery units that performed table top revisions.

Therefore, and to be clear for Branches and Representatives the main issues we have with Royal Mail’s proposals are as outlined (but not exhaustive):

That Royal Mail have ignored year-one targets and improvements made in delivery units and now seek to reset the original (weeks 27-30) 2019 reference period with the removal of unmeasured hours.

Royal Mail are now suggesting that for the most productive delivery units, that they must have a target set above that of standard performance, which is contrary to the Pathway to Change Agreement. However, for all remaining offices they have claimed that their target is standard performance of 196 WIPWH.

Over many years we have consistently pushed Royal Mail back on their mantra of “continuous improvement” and we have always maintained the position that if there is to be a standard level of productivity then that should be the end-state, and it is unacceptable and unsustainable for units to be expected to work beyond that. However, Royal Mail’s position is that there are 376 units above 196 standard performance and several over 240 WIPWH, and this will now be these units’ expected WIPWH levels to maintain going forward, contrary to the agreed level of standard performance set out in the Pathway to Change Agreement.

In addition to the above, the impact from the cost-of-living crisis and drop in traffic will have an impact on productivity, especially as the loss of larger parcels has a heavier ‘weighting’ impact on units WIPWH reported levels. Equally, Royal Mail’s unacceptable announcement to the CWU of executive action of their plans to deliver format 3 & 4 parcels in circa 346 Delivery Offices will also have a massive impact on the productivity of the remaining 940 units.

To confirm, the current position remains that units that underwent table top revisions in 2021 should only apply the agreed year-one WIPWH levels as set out in previous Joint Statements and Agreements.   

Structural Revisions units – Flightpath Calculator  

The Pathway to Change agreement set out a 2021 Structural Revision programme for some 400 units, over and above the Table Top revision activity.

It was anticipated that any unit that performs a structural revision in line with this revision programme was likely to see a difference in the hours generated from GeoRoute (the revision outdoor planning tool) to that of the unit’s Outdoor Workload Model (which is the current system used by Royal Mail to calculate the outdoor delivery workload and productivity under WIPWH).

To seek to address this anomaly between GeoRoute and the Outdoor Workload Model (OWM) the Flightpath Calculator was developed to ensure that the GeoRoute hours are used to define the units overall WIPWH level against the Model Week baseline for the outdoor and to ensure the unit’s local productivity target is ‘adjusted’ accordingly.

Additionally, the Flightpath Calculator was also designed in order to assist units that performed a structural revision to set out their ‘flightpath’ towards the local unit’s productivity target.

Whilst it was always understood that the initial Flightpath Calculator process issued alongside structural revisions would be subject to ongoing review in line with wider developments around WIPWH and further joint recommendations for the RM/CWU Productivity Joint Working Group, there are two major factors that have now developed.

Firstly, the Outdoor Department has received reports of units being presented with revised WIPWH targets which are not the same as that set out under the Flightpath Calculator (both for the flightpath and end-state WIPWH target).

These revised WIPWH targets are seemingly based on the same approach outlined for table top units. In that Royal Mail have re-run the 2019 original productivity reference starting point period based on the removed unmeasured work hours; and also reviewed each delivery unit’s WIPWH performance level based on reported levels from 2021/22. Again, whatever is the higher productivity level from the above two mechanisms is then being presented by Royal Mail as a new year-two level to replace the target from the revision’s Flightpath Calculator.

Additionally, there remains a jointly recognised outstanding issue in relation to the difference between how the Flightpath Calculator outlines a unit’s target to that of how WIPWH is currently reported weekly at local level.

In short, the Flightpath Calculator has already removed a number of unmeasured workload hours, (hours linked to Meal Reliefs, WTLL, Dedicated Collection Routes, Delivery Support etc.). Despite the wider joint recommendations for the Productivity JWP to remove these unmeasured hours from the weekly reported figure in April of this year, this has not happened and as such, there is a clear discrepancy between the two systems.

This means that a unit’s weekly reported WIPWH level will include these additional hours and therefore report a lower level of productivity against that set out in the Flightpath Calculator and relevant flightpath targets.

To confirm, there is no agreement in place to change a unit’s structural revision Flightpath WIPWH target (noting it is agreed that there is a need to review the Flightpath Calculator based on the outputs of the PJWG).  

Equally, weekly reported WIPWH levels are not reflective of how the Flightpath Calculator establishes a Unit’s structural revisions WIPWH level and any current highlighted gaps in reported productivity between the two will need to take account of this factor. 

We have already written to Royal Mail nationally on these wider points over the past few weeks and have made it clear that we expect our National agreements to be jointly honored and that these issues are part of the wider National Dispute Resolution Procedure. 

Branches and Representatives are advised to progress any savings or revision proposals which are not in line and consistent with our National Agreements through the IR Framework and the dispute resolution process. From a National CWU perspective and to be absolutely clear we have not agreed to any Revision proposals or programme of revisions activity, either through a structural or table top approach. Neither have we agreed on any year-two revised WIPWH productivity levels.

Any queries to the content of the above please contact the Outdoor Department reference 555, email address: njones@cwu.org

Yours sincerely,

Mark Baulch
CWU Assistant Secretary

LTB 299-22 – Two Year Productivity Targets – 07.07.22.

View Online

Update for Royal Mail Group members on managers strike, pay ballot and change negotiations. Please share as widely as possible.

https://fb.watch/e5owpzLJfq/

Health and Safety Executive (HSE) Publish New 10-Year Strategy 2022-2032 ‘Protecting People and Places’:

Introduction:

The HSE have published their new 10-year strategy entitled ‘Protecting people and places’. The strategy sets out HSE’s strategic direction for the next decade, stating that protecting people and places will be at the heart of everything it does as a regulator. The HSE describe the new 10-year strategy as one that reflects HSE’s role at its broadest. A role that goes beyond worker protection, to include public safety assurance on a range of issues. HSE state that their new strategy is designed to keep HSE focused on tackling both new and traditional risks, at the right time and in the right way by setting out clear objectives and themes, guiding their future interventions and regulatory activities.

The core principle of the new strategy remains to ensure that those who create risks take responsibility for controlling risks and those who fail to do so will be held to account and bear the cost. The new strategy sets out a refreshed set of priorities for HSE that also reflect the organisation’s added role and responsibilities, including establishing the Building Safety Regulator, extending its role in chemical regulation and supporting sustainable, healthy, workplace practices.

The strategy key objectives – overview

The core principle of the new strategy remains to ensure that those who create risk take responsibility for controlling risk; those who fail to do so will be held to account and bear the cost. The key strategic objectives are:

1. Reduce work-related ill health, with a specific focus on mental health and stress.
2. Increase and maintain trust to ensure people feel safe where they live, where they work and, in their environment.
3. Enable industry to innovate safely to prevent major incidents, supporting the move towards net zero.
4. Maintain Great Britain’s record as one of the safest countries to work in.
5. Ensure HSE is a great place to work, and that it attracts and retains exceptional people.

These objectives succeed those in the previous five-year strategy published in 2016, in which attention was given to promoting broader ownership of health and safety, supporting small employers, and sharing the success of Britain’s health and safety regime abroad. There was no mention of mental health or efforts to reach net-zero in the previous strategy, which clearly mark the new focus of the new strategy.

Addressing the mental health and work-stress crisis:

Building on past guidance for dealing with stress in the workplace, the HSE has identified mental health and stress as a distinct type of work-related ill health and has committed to focus on this in the next ten years. The strategy identifies that, in contrast to most other types of injury, work-related mental health issues are on the increase, with the most commonly reported causes of work-related ill health now being stress, depression, or anxiety. Every sector of society is impacted by this issue, and HSE analysis calculates that it may be costing the economy up to £11.4 billion per annum. The strategy indicates the HSE’s commitment to support businesses and employers to keep staff mentally healthy and focus its enforcement action on those who culpably fail to do so.

Physical health can be managed in ways that are far more tangible; mental ill health can be equally damaging but perhaps not so simple to manage. Businesses and employers also need to recognise that employees working from home still need to be protected against work-related harm. The risk of injury in a work premises may be reduced, but isolated workers in less regulated home offices may suffer from other harms which are equally the employer’s responsibility.

Clearly, employers, particularly those with high-stress workplaces will need to review work-stress policies and procedures to assess and determine which workers are at risk and consider employee support such as counselling, help-lines, mental health first-aiders as a first point of contact for those who need help and signposting etc. Mental health and stress policies will need to be implemented to document and evidence what the company does to help manage and support worker stress levels. The indication from this is that companies may face HSE prosecution and substantial fines for failing to take the required work-stress and mental health measures.

Supporting the transition to net-zero:

The HSE also identifies in the new strategy that it has an important role to play in the safe delivery of the government’s commitment to achieve net zero greenhouse gas by 2050. It is anticipated that new and potentially dangerous technologies will be crucial to making the transition.

The strategy is keen to highlight that the HSE will not unnecessarily impede innovation through its enforcement of health and safety legislation, though clearly this needs to be balanced against making sure these technologies are developed, tested and implemented in a way that does not put people in danger. This objective is a clear sign that the HSE want to work with developers of these technologies and suggests that its involvement should not be feared as government red-tape, but seen as a collaborative approach to help build public assurance in the safety of these products as they begin to transform society.

Becoming the Building Safety Regulator (BSR):

Alongside its considerable existing duties, the HSE will soon have additional responsibilities as the Building Safety Regulator (BSR) in England. The tragic Grenfell Tower fire disaster in 2017, and the Public Inquiry into it, has put fire safety at the forefront of discussion, and the government’s response has been to introduce the Fire Safety Act 2021 and the Building Safety Act 2022.  The latter piece of legislation will impact every stage of a higher-risk building’s life, and will be policed by the HSE as the designated BSR. The Building Safety Act heavily extends the scope of power to enforce compliance, and places much of that power in the hands of the HSE in its new role of BSR.

HSE Government Funding – A key issue:

Without substantial additional funding, it is hard to see how the HSE will commit sufficient resources to this significant expansion of its remit without directing focus away from some of its usual and limited health and safety inspection work. Since 2010 the budget of the HSE has been cut by over 50% in real terms. The HSE’s Business Plan for 2016/17 showed that HSE funding received from central government would be over £100 million less by 2019/20. To fund this expansion of the HSE’s role as the BSR, it will be requesting £201 million from the government, an increase of £28 million from the sum requested in 2020/21. This is alongside £100 million to be recovered through cost recovery and externally funded income which is up from £77 million in 2020/21. It is clear from the strategy that launching the BSR and enforcing the new requirements in the Building Safety Act will be a substantial and long-term project for the HSE; which is why it requires the attention of being a key objective in the 10-year strategy.

Conclusion:

As a broad set of objectives, the HSE 10-year strategy does not uproot any health and safety principles, but it does show the regulator’s direction of travel has changed to keep up with the biggest risks to health and safety in our society today.

Physical health has long been the focus of the HSE, now mental health will be taking more of the regulator’s attention. This will require engagement with employers and trade unions to understand how they can help protect workers from this different kind of harm. Duty holders under the Building Safety Act, will also need to review their working practices to ensure they are ready for the HSE’s new agenda.

Many workplaces have changed significantly over last decade and will continue to do so over the next 10 years covered by the HSE strategy. Businesses and employers need to continue to be vigilant in delivering their HSAW Act General Duties and how they protect the health of the workforce and those affected by their operations. HSE need to step up enforcement activities and inspector resources if the strategy’s objectives are to be fully realised and delivered effectively. Trade Union Safety Reps have a key role to play in this and the HSE need to fully embrace that aspect.

TUC and CIEH response:

Both the TUC on behalf of all UK Trade Unions and the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health (CIEH) which represents Environmental Health Officers have called on the HSE for more engagement, increased collaboration and joint working as more detailed plans are developed on the back of the new strategy.

Attached:

• Health and Safety Executive (HSE) Publish New 10-Year Strategy 2022-2032 ‘Protecting People and Places’

Yours sincerely

Dave Joyce
National Health, Safety & Environment Officer

22LTB298 Health and Safety Executive (HSE) Publish New 10-Year Strategy 2022-2032 ‘Protecting People and Places’

HSE-Strategy-2022-2032-Protecting-People-and-Places

View Online

RM/CWU National Dog Awareness Week, 4 – 10 July 2022 – RMG Dog Attack Statistics by Postcode and by Delivery Office:

The top 10 postcode areas for dog attacks 2021/22 Summary: 

The S (Sheffield) postcode area had the most incidents of reported dog attacks during the year, with 51 postmen/postwomen suffering dog attacks. This is a similar number to last year – 55 in 2020/21. The S postcode area has appeared in every one of the Top 10 Lists for dog attacks on postal workers since the inaugural Dog Awareness Week in 2013. There have been 557 recorded dog attacks since 2013/14.

The BT (Belfast- Northern Ireland)postcode area placed second this year with 50 attacks. The BT postcode area is another area that has appeared in every Top 10 List since Royal Mail began releasing Dog Awareness Week figures on yearly attacks in 2013/14. It has topped the list for attacks four times. 567 recorded dog attacks since 2013/14.

The TN (Tunbridge Wells) postcode area, with 44 attacks on postal workers, again made the top 10 in third place. The TN area recorded 39 dog attacks last year and placed sixth.  The TN postcode area has featured in the Top 10 List for dog attacks for eight consecutive years.  453 recorded dog attacks since 2013/14.

The BN (Brighton), NG (Nottingham) and SA (Swansea) postcode areas are in joint fourth spot this year with 37 dog attacks in each area on postal workers. This is the sixth consecutive year that the BN postcode has placed in the Top 10 List for dog attacks on postal staff. It’s the second consecutive year that the NG postcode area has appeared in the Top 10 and the SA postcode makes the Top 10 List for dog attacks for the first time. The SA area saw the number of dog attacks treble this last year. 456 recorded dog attacks since 2013/14.

The NE (Newcastle) and OX (Oxford) postcode areas are joint seventh place with 35 attacks. This is the first time since 2015/2016 that the NE postcode has appeared in the Top 10 and the first time the OX postcode has appeared in the Top 10 since Dog Awareness Week began and national stats were released in 2013. NE – 347 recorded dog attacks since 2013/14. OX – 264 recorded dog attacks since 2013/14.

The PO (Portsmouth) postcode area is in ninth place with 34 dog attacks. This is the fifth consecutive year the PO postcode are has featured in the Top 10. 406 recorded dog attacks since 2013/14.

In 10th place is the EX (Exeter)postcode area with 32 reports of attacks on Royal Mail staff. The EX postcode area last appeared in the Top 10 in 2019/2020, when it took fifth spot. 306 recorded dog attacks since 2013/14.

Highest Number of attacks by postcode area – Top 60 – All areas in double figures:PositionPOSTCODE

AREA2021/2022

No. of attacks1.    S512.    BT503.    TN444.    BN375.    NG376.    SA377.    NE358.    OX359.    PO3410. EX3211. PL3112. SN3013. GU2914. BS2715. DE2816. DN2617. GL2618. CM2419. CF2320. CO2321. ME2122. CT2123. NN2124. RG2125. NP2026. LS2027. LE2028. RH1929. IP1930. PE1831. G1832. CH1833. ST1834. EH1635. SY1536. SO1537. IV1538. HU1539. LN1540. TS1541. SG1442. CV1443. CB1444. LL1445. FK1346. KT1347. WF1348. SS1249. SE1250. KA1251. CW1252. DA1153. DD1154. LA1155. TR1156. YO1157. CA1058. L1059. PA1060. PH1061. TQ10

Find attached a full excel spreadsheet list of all delivery offices and all postcode areas with recorded dog attacks by unit and by postcode area.

IMPORTANT: The CWU HQ Health Safety & Environment Department estimates that around a thousand dog attacks go unreported each year, mostly minor attacks. Dog attacks are a criminal offence in public places and on private property. The CWU fought for and won the battle to make this the law in the UK through our ‘Bite-Back’ Campaign. Please give full support to Dog Awareness Week. Please ensure that all dog attacks are reported to the manager, and to the Police (obtaining a crime number) and to the Royal Mail Security Helpdesk – This is the only way to help stop future dog attacks happening.

Yours sincerely

Dave Joyce
National Health, Safety & Environment Officer

22LTB297 RM CWU National Dog Awareness Week 4 – 10 July 2022 – RMG Dog Attack Statistics by Postcode and by Delivery Office

Copy of Attacks by Postcode

View Online