In our earlier response to HSC, we said ‘it is EEF's view that information and consultation arrangements will only be successful and add value for both employers and their employees if these arrangements fit with other company factors such as its organisational structure, employee relations history and culture and management style and philosophy.’
The current proposals to introduce new duties through Approved Codes of Practice are contrary to positive employee involvement. It is management’s responsibility to manage the organisation, involving employees to help find solutions to problems. A duty to consult on individual risk assessments and a duty to respond to representation would introduce a harmful bureaucratic process, a paper chase in place of positive good practice.
The long term aim is to improve workplace culture - mandatory involvement in individual assessments would be extremely time consuming and cumbersome and more likely to create a barrier between employers and union reps. On the other hand, involving employees and their representatives in broad decisions on how companies approach assessment (particularly if incidents etc. show it may be lacking) can be invaluable.
Introducing these ‘duties’ through the back door in an Approved Code of Practice goes against the Better Regulations agenda and is damaging to the employer / employee partnership. However, we support the negotiation of further guidance which might help to clarify the issues.
EEF will continue to represent members’ views to HSE and HSC and fight for common sense to prevail.
For more background to the consultation see the HSC Discussion paper 15 March 2007
For a copy of EEF’s response to the consultation last year see the attached .doc download.