Health & Safety for volunteers

[Ynot]

In my inimitable style, I usually try to define what may not be definable - at least in ink...

 

There are all sorts of rules and regs which apply to H & S at WORK, but I keep hearing statements referring to the fact that a voluntary organisation - eg local am-dram - are NOT classed as WORKING, and as such are not necessarily bound by the same - or as strict versions of - those regulations...

 

The blurriness of said 'line' could well be caused by many things.

 

An am-dram group producing a show in a pro venue with paid house techs working alongside unpaid volunteers.

The same am-dram group doing said show in a wholly volunteer run venue, though the venue is run on as businesslike fashion as possible/practical.

A combined outdoor festival where some of the acts are paid pros, and others are not, but appear on the same bill.

 

So the question up for discussion is where IS that line between HASW and, well, H & S for volunteers?

How much of the HASW Act is enforceable on volunteers and how much isn't?

 

Over to the forum.

However, again, as I often post as a caveat, I'm really only interested in REAL answers or questions from those in a position to either have a qualified or informed opinion or those with a vested interest in the outcome.

Please - NO vague wannabe answers based on harsay or wishful thinking, or any responses from anyone who just has an UN-informed opinion...

[paulears]

Tony - I can't say from an amateur point of view, but the situation with students working on a show in their own time in the evening would appear very similar.

 

One had an accident - a non-technical type attempting to help out, but he was where with hindsight, perhaps he shouldn't have been, and a piece of steeldeck on it's edge, having the legs removed 'fell on him'. This was on it's way top court, but at the last minute an insurance company rolled over and paid up. It was very clear that his council decided H&S at work did apply, because the even was public, and a fee was charged for entry. As the venue also had a mix of amateur and professional productions this was used to identify the venue as 'workplace'. Payment of staff and artistes didn't come into it. Work was being done. I'm no legal expert by any means, but the insurance company were holding out and were going to challenge the claim, and we'd all had lengthy depositions/statements taken and it was quite unpleasant. However, in the end, they must have thrown the towel in. I can't say exactly why. On educational premises, the schools and colleges claim exemption as the place is NOT a workplace, it's a training institution, where people are almost expected to get things wrong, but have people responsible for their care. This isn't the same in an amateur venue.

 

The other thing, and this is just a mind ramble - if people are members of a society, then even if the H&S at Work Act didn't apply - wouldn't the officers of the society be legally responsible anyway, and maybe adhering to the work rules could be a pretty good protective measure to save their backs?

[bruce]

The "official line" from the HSE is at http://www.hse.gov.uk/contact/faqs/charities.htm

 

It says

Where any organisation has at least one paid employee, it is considered to be an 'employer' for the purposes of the HSW Act and the regulations made under it.

 

The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 (ISBN 0717624889 - available from HSE Books) place a duty on both employers and the self-employed to assess the risks to employees and anyone else (e.g. voluntary workers, clients and customers) who may be affected by the work activities being undertaken. As a result of this assessment, appropriate preventive and protective measures have to be taken to reduce the risks identified if they are not being adequately controlled at present. Some of the regulations listed later describe specific protective and preventive measures that have to be taken in certain circumstances or when undertaking particular activities.

 

In general, the same health and safety standards should be applied to voluntary workers as they would to employees exposed to the same risks. However, if the risk assessment shows that the risks to voluntary workers are different, the preventive and protective measures taken should reflect the different risks.

HSE considers it good practice for a volunteer user to provide the same level of health and safety protection as they would in an employer/employee relationship, irrespective of whether there are strict legal duties.

 

The HSE has published a guidence publication, HSG192, Charity and voluntary workers : a guide to health and safety at work[1], (ISBN 0717624242 - available from HSE Books).

 

I think the key message here is:

In general, the same health and safety standards should be applied to voluntary workers as they would to employees exposed to the same risks.............HSE considers it good practice for a volunteer user to provide the same level of health and safety protection as they would in an employer/employee relationship, irrespective of whether there are strict legal duties

[Jivemaster]

HSAW makes no reference to remuneration only to work and place of work. If an amateur society produce a performance then would this not be the amateur (refering unpaid rather than a quality inference) version of pro theatre and still fully covered by the Act and all it's regulations.

 

Whether anyone would do a riddor report and get HSE notified...., Whether a recieving hospital would report an A&E admission as industrial injury or recreation.....,

 

This question is probably waiting for legal precedant to be set, but that needs a number of (expensive!) court cases. Without detailed knowledge of the law, and its codes and guidelines for prosecutions then I'd be in support of treating work done by amateurs in the same manner as work done by paid people. It's a LOT harder to establish competence among amateurs as some may not have all the pro qualifications but may have lots of experience.

 

In some cases the HSE will hold the venue responsible for H&S and the hire contract will have clauses relating to this and the hirer indemnifying the venue against costs. All of which should make Pro standard H&S compliance a necessity.

[lite_lad]

Even if there is no definite responsibility to ensure the health and safety of your volunteers don't you think it's your "moral" responsibility to make sure that they are safe, or at least understand the risks?

[scoutnetworker]

quick google for "health and safety at work act for volunteers" throws up this page (http://www.volunteering.org.uk/resources/goodpracticebank/Information/healthandsafetyofvolunteers.htm)!

 

when I did do volunteer work volunteer england where a good contact point!

[Ynot]

Interesting points raised so far, thanks for the contributions.

 

The question arose in conversation a while back and I've been meaning to post the query here for a while.

 

In my specific situation, we (my management committee) manage a small venue. ALL of the management team are volunteers, as are the technicians (raging in age from late teens to old farts like me). The ONLY people who get paid are the cleaners - a small local firm which supplies one or two cleaners on a varied basis, as disctated by the programme.

 

That said, we have (and have had for some years now) many of the required policies published like proforma RAs for each show, WAH, COSSHH, working with electrics, fire safety, pyro safety, etc etc. In fact we had many policies before it was the 'in thing' for places like ours to have policies...

I can't claim that these policies are perfect, nor that we cover absolutely everything that may be necessary (we are, after all, just amateurs, regardless of experience...) but we certainly do our best.

 

The point is, I think, that whilst we DO do our best to conform with what would (and should) be in the best interests of our staff, users and punters, being unpaid volunteers maybe doesn't mean that all of the strictures are always going to be applied in every conceivable case. And I don't mean that in a negative way - just an observation.

 

And where I think the relaxation of some of those strictures might be applicable is when comparitively inexperienced volunteers use the facilities and make mistakes that others wouldn't.

 

Example - We do our very best to make sure that all visiting companies have someone on site to supervise any technical issues, whether it's hanging a cloth on the rail, checking props etc for suitability, making sure they keep all the exits clear, all the way up to them working on the ladders adjusting/hanging LX, and pyro effects etc. HOWEVER, it isn't always possible to get such an experienced tech there, and on many occasions (usually dance schools....) they turn up with demands that weren't advised in advance so we're not necessarily prepared for them - which has several times led to the company getting things refused as a result.

 

Add to that the fact that our volunteer techs vary in their own skills and experience, and what one may let pass, another might well turn down. And with visiting techs from companies outside of our regular crew, we don't alsways know how experienced they are until they arrive.

 

So, whilst it's a LOT easier for pro venues to properly vet employees, train them accordingly, and restrict certain tasks to those WITH the training, it's a very different story in the amateur world.

[Scot628]

Interesting question and comes up an awful lot in the leisure and entertainment sector…general rambling first then an attempt at the examples….

 

If there is categorically no proof of employment then the HSWA doesn’t apply, and so neither do any of the subsidiary Regs. A volunteer society putting on a event in park, or in a council or privately run theatre would have no duties under HSWA or its associated legislation. Basically it’s a group of people doing something in a particular place, for fun, and as such no H&S law applies. There may however be other civil duties of care placed on them under common law, licensing regulations etc. There will however be duties on others who interact with this group of volunteers...

 

In each case the volunteers would have (I think) no duties under HSW legislation other than S8 and the potential to be prosecuted under S36. The reason I think these sections apply is because in each example there is another person/body involved to whom HSWA applies which in turn gathers in the volunteers to that limited extent (S8 is the duty on any "person" not to interfere/ misuse anything provided for the purposes of health and safety which isn't qualified by “employee”. Under S36 any "person" could be prosecuted if their acts in effect caused another person (duty holder) to end up in breach of the law.

 

1 An am-dram group producing a show in a pro venue with paid house techs working alongside unpaid volunteers.

 

I’d say that as the paid house techs are being paid to perform a service for the group, and are working for their employer as normal, there is the standard duty on the employer to ensure both the safety of the employees, and also that nothing that the employees do puts the volunteers at risk. The volunteers are not covered by any H&S duty if they are genuine unpaid volunteers, without employment as it relates to them, and being helped by paid employees.

 

2 The same am-dram group doing said show in a wholly volunteer run venue, though the venue is run on as businesslike fashion as possible/practical.

 

I think with all the issues surrounding the costs of running and maintaining a venue it would be nigh on impossible to claim there was no employment involved somewhere. If there was an employee, even if it was an accountant paid to service the books, or a cleaner paid to tidy up after events then that would trigger the HSWA. However ..the contrary case is there to be argued

 

3 A combined outdoor festival where some of the acts are paid pros, and others are not, but appear on the same bill.

 

All the bodies where there was employment would have duties to their employees, the other employees involved, and the volunteers and the audience.

 

Interestingly, and only as an aside; the level of work that you put into helping and checking things probably means you are taking a lot of responsibility onto yourselves that seems to lie elsewhere. You seem to be doing the work of others, although its very commendable and no doubt extremely appreciated as well as being the only way in practice that many of the events get put on I'd think!

 

Very interesting and enjoying the debate!

B

[Brian]

Worth a read...The HSEs Enforcement Guide.

 

The Enforcement Guide provides legal guidance to HSE staff in respect of their enforcement powers and duties. It will also be useful to other health and safety enforcement agencies. The information and advice it provides will assist HSE staff in the use of their discretion in making decisions

[kerry davies]

Wow! Some subject! Brian, could you clarify exactly which bit you refer to? I'm a bit dense and that is one huge document.

 

Scoutie, thanks for the link, interesting that it mixes up the HASAWA/common law elements.

 

Paul, I know you know this but for students reading this topic, schools etc are not exempt from HASAWA as they are workplaces for staff, technicians, cooks, cleaners etc. (DfES/0803/2001). The student has no legal duty under HASAWA which is why they sometimes feel aggrieved at not being allowed to do certain things, they are not held to be 'responsible' whereas the teachers are.

 

Tony, you have multiple roles in this as a volunteer worker, a senior hand and as a member of management. If you hire in paid staff or pay for a band or company to visit, the committee automatically become "the employer" with HASAWA and Management of...1999 duties. It gets complex and each separate set of specific circumstances alter things. You are on the ball with most stuff and, assuming that you have a written safety policy statement, I would only advise some basic H&S training for volunteers and committee. You already seem to RA individuals on competence levels so you will know what training each needs to be a safe worker.

Your constitution also matters as charities, charitable trusts, community interest companies and not-for-profit voluntary organisations all have subtle legal differences.

 

Community based outdoor events are my bag and because they almost invariably involve the hire of equipment and/or expertise (tents, stages, generators, PA's, not to mention any involvement of council employees like parkies, cleaners etc) I ask organisers to treat them as professional enterprises. It is simpler and safer than trying to explain S8, S36, S37 and the "duty of care to those around you", never mind common law, from two different points of view, volunteer and professional. Some councils and voluntary networks are beginning to provide event safety training for their community groups and not before time. There are tens of thousands of these events going on and ignoring their legal H&S aspects is pretty risky behaviour for LA's.

 

Bruce, Paul, Jive and all have a good attitude in that there is no point in treating voluntary staff as second class citizens and we should try to raise standards of H&S for everyone. Take heart everyone, Barry (scot628) does not lavish praise lightly and he has proved, yet again, that HSE does give advice and is not "out to get yer". Well done, BR.

[Jivemaster]

While not strictly H&S for Volunteers. If there were to be an incident involving someone being hurt or taking time off work and losing money, and IF there were to be a claim for loss of time money or body parts then what would the insurance company say?

 

Now that every street has it's no win no fee claims handler the insurance companies need to be very sure that best practise is being followed and that the loss was an unforseeable accident rather than a negligent act. In most if not all situations compliance with HSWA and it's regulations does come some way to reducing incidents to the unforseeable.

[Brian]

Brian, could you clarify exactly which bit you refer to? I'm a bit dense and that is one huge document.

As a whole, that section of the HSE website is interesting as it give a good insight into 'how' they think. This section is relevant to this discussion.

[slipstream]

Pretty sure our insurance defines an employee as anyone working under my direction - paid or unpaid. So full HSE applies to any actions they undertake.

 

Sam

[kitlane]

If the event/show/am dram group is being run in a 'professional' and/or 'business-like manner' then it seems likely that money will be changing hands.

 

Audience members will buy a ticket, programme or ice-cream.

The 'company' will hire the venue, hire equipment, have insurance, buy materials, pay performance rights etc.

 

There is probably a bank account for the 'company' to deal with all of this. The 'company' possibly has a 'management' structure of some sort (a committee).

 

All of this sounds like business activity to me.

 

It doesn't matter if the 'workforce' are not getting paid, in my mind they are engaged in work activity on behalf of a business, albeit one that does not make a profit.

 

In what way are the volunteers covered by insurance (Public Liability for example)? In a typical am dram group they will be members of the society and therefore insured under the society's policy. In which case they are clearly identifiable as members of the society and activities they undertake are on behalf of that entity. If they are not, then no insurance in place and that is scary.

[kerry davies]

Kit, because I am paid and instruct people, paid and otherwise, in their way of working, I am assumed by my insurer to hold the same satus as an employer. They aren't necessarily employees and are certainly not mine but I am regarded as "the employer"...wierd. I therefore have to have employers liability, the group holds the PLI/event insurance for the members.

 

Whether Slips is in the same position I couldn't say but suspect so.