Safety and Health at Work

Occupational Safety and Health Research Institute, Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency (산업안전보건연구원)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Health and Safety Performance of UK Universities and How to Improve It

  • Received : 2023.03.13
  • Accepted : 2024.02.05
  • Published : 2024.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background: This research suggested a method for evaluating health and safety performance as a combination of reactive and active monitoring. Methods: A number of Freedom of Information requests (FoI) were sent to the Health and safety Executive (HSE) and 100 UK universities. Data on the number of reportable incidents, diseases and dangerous occurrences were compiled for UK universities and combined with the Impact Ranking for good health and well-being. A semi-structured survey was used to identify best H&S practices. Subsequently, the effect of workers' involvement in H&S management on RIDDOR and near-miss reports, was investigated using statistical analysis. Results: A ranking of UK universities that perform highly in Health and Safety (H&S) was assembled and selected universities were contacted to identify best practices. Best practices were divided into three categories: team management, roles and responsibilities, and H&S performance monitoring. One of the findings demonstrated a reverse dependence between provision of a refresher training in risk assessments and a number of reported RIDDOR incidents. Conclusion: Health and Safety professionals in the universities may find it useful to reflect on these findings and the identified best practices in order to improve the H&S performance in their own organisations.

Keywords

References

  1. USHA. Health and Safety management profile; 2021. 
  2. USHA. Leadership and management of health and safety in higher education institutions, 1-20. Universities Safety and Health Association; 2015. 
  3. These are the Top 10 Safest Universities. Which are the safest universities in the UK? [Internet]; 2022 [cited 2022 Aug 2]. Available from: https://www.unihomes.co.uk/blog/these-are-the-top-10-safest-universities. 
  4. (THE) [Internet]. The StudentStudent experience survey 2018: the safest UK universities. Times Higher Education. 2018 [cited 2022 Aug 2]. Available from: https://www.timeshighereducation.com/student/best-universities/studentexperience-survey-2018-safest-uk-universities. 
  5. College ranking - personal safety [Internet]; 2022 [cited 2022 Aug 8]. Available from: https://www.myplan.com/education/colleges/college_rankings_5.php. 
  6. Tuite B. University health and safety rankings - how safe are UK universities? [Internet]; 2016 [cited 2022 Aug 9]. Available from: https://www.arinite.co.uk/university-health-and-safety-rankings-how-safe-are-uk-universities. 
  7. HSE. Types of Reportable incidents [Internet]; 2013. p. 2-5. Available from: https://www.hse.gov.uk/riddor/reportable-incidents.htm. 
  8. HESA [Internet]. [cited 2022 Sep 1]. Available from: https://www.hesa.ac.uk/. 
  9. Hon CKH, Chan APC, Yam MCH. Relationships between safety climate and safety performance of building repair, maintenance, minor alteration, and addition (RMAA) works. Safety Science 2014;65:10-9.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2013.12.012
  10. HSE. Measuring performance [Internet]. [cited 2022 Dec 30]. Available from: https://www.hse.gov.uk/managing/delivering/check/measuring-performance.htm. 
  11. [Internet]Impact Rankings 2022 : good health and well-being. Times Higher Education. 2022 [cited 2022 Aug 2]. Available from: https://www.timeshighereducation.com/rankings/impact/2022/good-health-and-wellbeing#!/page/0/length/-1/locations/GBR/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/undefined. 
  12. HSE. Managing for health and safety HSG65; 2013. 
  13. HSE. Consulting employees on health and safety INDG232; 2013. 
  14. Popma JR. Does worker participation improve health and safety? Findings from The Netherlands. Policy and Practice in Health and Safety 2009;7(1):33-51.  https://doi.org/10.1080/14774003.2009.11667727
  15. Bourrier M. Elements for designing a self-correcting organization: examples from nuclear power plants. In: Hale A, Baram Michael, editors. Safety Management & the Challenge of Change. New York: Pergamon; 1998. p. 133-47. 
  16. HSE. Reducing error and influencing behaviour HSG48; 1999. 
  17. Bourrier M. Elements for designing a self-correcting organization: examples from nuclear power plants. In: Hale A, Baram Michael, editors. Safety Management & the Challenge of Change. New York: Pergamon; 1998. p. 133-47. 
  18. Cox RA. Improving risk assessment methods for process plant. J Hazardous Mater 1982;6:249-60.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3894(82)80013-7
  19. Cheng C, Wu T. An investigation and analysis of major accidents involving foreign workers in Taiwan's manufacture and construction industries. Safe Sci 2013;57:223-35.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2013.02.008
  20. Kines P, Lappalainen J, Mikkelson KL, Olsen E, Pousette A, Tharaldsen J, et al. Nordic Safety Climate Questionnaire (NOSACQ-50): a new tool for diagnosing occupational safety climate. Inter J Indu Ergono 2011;41:634-46.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2011.08.004
  21. Cheyne A, Cox S, Oliver A, Tomas JM. Modelling safety climate in the predication of levels of safety activity. An Inter J Work Health Organ 1998;12(3):255-71.  https://doi.org/10.1080/02678379808256865
  22. Yorio PL, Edwards J, Hoeneveld D. Safety culture across cultures. Safe Sci 2019;120(January):402e10. 
  23. Kuzmina O. RIDDOR at higher educations institutions 2015-2021 [Internet]; 2022 [cited 2022 Aug 9]. p. 5. Available from: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/riddor_at_higher_educations_inst. 
  24. Searle D. The effect of formalising worker involvement in the risk assessment process on the accident rate within UK higher education. Soc Sci Human Open 2023;8(1):100572. 
  25. Bell E, Bryman A, Harley B. Business research methods. 5th ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2019. 
  26. HSE. Health and safety at work Summary statistics for Great Britain 2020 Key facts; 2020. 
  27. HSE. L21 management of health and safety at work regulations 1999:approved code of practice. HSE; 2000. 
  28. van der Schaaf TW, Lucas DA, Hale AR. Near miss reporting as a safety tool. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann; 1991. 
  29. Ford JK, Quinones MA, Sego DJ, Sorra JS. Factors affecting the opportunity to perform trained tasks on the job. Personal Psychol 1992;45(3):511-27.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1992.tb00858.x
  30. Casey T, Turner N, Hu X, Bancroft K. Making safety training stickier: a richer model of safety training engagement and transfer. J Safe Res 2021;78:303-13.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2021.06.004
  31. Petty G. Teaching Today: a practical guide. 2nd ed. Cheltenham: Nelson Thornes Ltd; 2002. 
  32. Fleming N, Baume D. Learning styles again: VARKing up the right tree. Edu Develop 2006;7(4):4-7.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1471-0846(06)70627-8
  33. Espinoza-Poves JL, Miranda-Vichez WA, Chafloque-Cespedes R. The vark learning styles among university students of business schools. Propositos Y Representaciones 2019;7(2):384-414.  https://doi.org/10.20511/pyr2019.v7n2.254
  34. Husmann PR, O'Loughlin VD. Another nail in the coffin for learning styles? Disparities among undergraduate anatomy students' study strategies, class performance, and reported VARK learning styles. Anato Sci Edu 2018;12(1):6-19. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1777