Many companies will need to improve their safety procedures relating to exposure to asbestos, if they are to protect themselves from prosecution warns national property consultants Wakemans.
"A number of recent prosecutions has illustrated just how seriously the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) are taking their responsibilities under the new Control of Asbestos At Work Regulations 2002 (CAWR). It is clear that they will prosecute when clients and contractors are careless about exposing workers," says Wakemans Chief Executive David Howles.
"From May 2004, dutyholders have a new duty to manage the risk from asbestos in non domestic premises. A dutyholder is defined as anyone responsible for maintaining and repairing all or part of a property or who has control of a building. Although the requirements of this legislation have been known for some time (they were introduced in October 2002), some companies have yet to take on board the full implications."
It is estimated that asbestos related diseases currently kill up to 3,500 people a year in Great Britain and the HSE started a five year campaign in 2001 to raise awareness of the risk from asbestos in buildings.
"We would urge organisations, especially those with larger and older property portfolios, to call in professional assistance so that the correct procedures and plans can be put into place.
"Anyone liable to work on the premises needs to know where the asbestos is and the potential risks to their health if they disturb it. This applies to anyone installing telephones, computers, or any electrical equipment, as they also may disturb asbestos.
"Companies that fail to prepare a suitable plan or fail to take on board the duties and responsibilities as laid down in such a plan will be liable to prosecution.
"The recent cases have shown that the government is serious about tackling this problem and it is thought that the HSE intends to look at bringing in cumulative charges where appropriate. This means that companies could be prosecuted under the Health and Safety at Work Act as well as the CAWR so that even bigger penalties will be enforced."
|
|
