Critical Evaluation of Safety Health and Environmental Policy - Literature review Example

CRITICAL EVALUATION OF SAFETY HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY (UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL LANCASHIRE) by Student’s name Course code+name Professor’s name University name City, State Date of submission Introduction Workplaces are expected to be safe, healthy and environmentally friendly to all users, especially the employees. The University of Central Lancashire has an extensive report on how it formulates, implements and manages its safety, health and environment policy for the benefit of its students and employees. The essence of such a policy is to ensure that all people at the University are safe, live in a healthy and environmentally friendly surrounding (UClan 2014). More fundamentally, such a policy seeks to ensure that employees are not vulnerable to other externalities while at the workplace. Workplaces are expected to comply with some statutory regulations that originate from all levels of government (Tombs & Whyte 2013). This essay seeks to make a critical evaluation of the university’s safety, health and environment policy. In this assessment, the article will audit how the policy impacts on the safety of not only employees but all the stakeholders at the institution. Furthermore, the evaluation seeks to find if the policy complies with statutory regulations and if its sound for the benefit of the entire community. The University of Central Lancashire is a premier institution of learning that prides itself in quality management of its processes and resources to achieve its objectives for all its stakeholders, right from the students, employees, stakeholders, management, and any other persons that are affected by its activities. It is evident that the university is a committed to continuous improvement in all crucial areas of safety, health and environmental sustainability as an international model. The Safety, Health and Environmental policy of the university lies within the University’s board while the Vice Chancellor is the Chief Executive Officer (UClan 2014). The policy recognizes that good safety, health, and environmental management policy has definate business advantages to the organization. Again, a commitment to higher levels of safety, health and environmental management creates a business sense in the long run (Tomb & Whyte 2013). From its annual report for the year 2013-2104, it is evident that the institution is committed to improving safety within its confines for the benefit of all. The report documents that the purpose of the policy is to meet not only moral obligations but more fundamentally to address statutory provisions required in all workplaces. The university prides itself in a highly organized and efficient safety, health and environment committee that is tasked with the responsibility of implementing all the necessary recommendations, laws and regulations stipulated by all agencies, right from local to national government. On this basis, the committee must ensure that all its targets are met, and progress reported to the board and the CEO. The committee comprises of representations from all crucial departments across the University and at all levels. It also enjoys the representations of members from all relevant trade unions. The committee’s main duty is to implement, monitor and report all progress against actions outlined in the report (UClan 2014). Indeed, a critical analysis of the constitution of the committee shows that it is one that is well prepared to execute its mandate in the most professional way so as to achieve the objectives of the institution. A committee forms the foundation a good and timely execution of actions that may be considered beneficial to the employees and all stakeholders at any workplace (Tomb & Whyte 2013). While the committee prides itself in assembling the most relevant professionals and representatives, it should not be lost that its main goal is to implement good safety, health and environmental standards as required by the government. A workplace committee on safety, health and environmental management acts as the main link between the university and government agencies in the outlined areas. It is expected that the committee provides the necessary knowledge through planning, interpreting, and offering guidance to the employees tasked with duty of ensuring that employees are safe, healthy and work in certified environment (James, Tomb & Whyte 2013). It is evident that this section serves to familiarize members with the procedures, policies and guidance to ensure that the University of Central Lancashire adheres to the United Kingdom and European’s legislative standards. Institutionalization of the committee is very paramount in achieving the required standards within the nation, the larger Europe and in the international community (Hale, Borys &Adams 2015). Employees are expected to work under conditions that will not harm their health, safety, surroundings. It is important for any safety, health and environmental policy at any institution and firm to ensure that its employees are protected and can be rescued safely in case of any emergency so that the business is not affected. The employees must be protected from radiation, fire, hazardous waste, laser emissions and any other danger that may risk their lives (Hale, Borys & Adams 2015). The committee formulate at the university ensures that the employees are not subjected to such harm and that all necessary steps are taken whenever there is an accident. It also ensures that there is regular reporting about accidents; need to improve machinery and processes for the benefit of the employees, and regular training on safety, health and environmental management at the institution. The roles played the different people on the committee underscores the essential requirements of the UK’s laws when it comes to safety, health and environment regulation (James, Tomb & Whyte 2013). The committee has a Safety, Health, and Environmental management Manager whose roles include the provision of advice to the board of the University and its Vice Chancellor, provision of advice, information, instructions, and training to all stakeholders at the facility on environmental, safety, and health matters. The manager is also tasked with the responsibility of ensuring that the relevant UK and European legislative standards are monitored, developed and interpreted by all employees in the SHE section. The formulation of the committee ensures that the manager with the help of the selected representatives from recognized trade unions carries out all these mandates among others (UClan, 2013). The representatives are expected to fulfill their legal mandate as outlined in the Safety Representative and Safety Committee Regulations of 1977. The representation of the members of these unions is in conformity to the law, and they should endeavor to pursue their duties without any compromise position. On this basis, the SHE report at the institution makes fundamentally provisions that ensure overall compliance for the benefit of all employees and other stakeholders at the university. Workplace safety, health and environmental management policy of the university must strive to meet all the obligations outlined in the existing law, both in the United Kingdom and the European Union. While no one anticipates accidents at any workplace, occupational safety and hazard measures require that all employers must consider their employees as the most effective asset to the organization. For this reason, they need to put in place interventions that are timely, can be executed effectively and above all guarantee employees safety (Grabosky 2013). The University of Lancashire values its employees, but a critical look at the report reveals that a general mention of the steps to be taken for the benefits of these assets does not match what they intend to achieve in other areas. Employees must remain the core of any safety, health and environmental management policy of any company, institution or business. The report details audit done annually in all areas of operations. Here, the SHE committee highlights the achievements of these audits and inspections in the different periods under review, for instance, 2012-2013, and 2014. According to the report, health and safety audits scored 81%, a score that was considered good. The law requires that institutions, companies, and other establishments carry out both internal and external audit and inspections. What the report fails to mention about the score is if it was an internal or an external audit score (UClan 2013). External audits are carried out by government agencies and are independent of the institution under inspection. When a score is awarded and documented like in this report, it makes more sense to the standards bodies and the interested parties if an external body awarded it. The report states that the score is an indication of the control the university has on its buildings, campuses, and other stakeholders. The areas where the audit was done are crucial to the overall development and safety of the students, staff, and all stakeholders. While it is worthwhile to commend such efforts, the university needs to prioritize the safety of its employees in these crucial departments. High-risk area employees like those working where radiological applications are used need extra safety, health, and environmental protection. Uncontrolled exposure to such conditions may impact negatively on the health of such employees (Grabosky 2013). Training employees on safety, health, and environmental management is a very crucial component of the overall success of any business and workplace. Accordingly, employers like the university are legally mandated to provide specific training and information to their employees on a continuous basis so as to equip them with the necessary and relevant techniques to handle and mitigate any disaster. The report highlights key areas of training where the employees were engaged. The statistics indicate that a majority of these employees certified the delivery of their training as excellent. Training provides the employees with an added opportunity to better their safety, health and environmental management skills for their benefits and the benefit of the employer (Tomb & Whyte 2013b). The committee report indicates that more than one hundred classroom based courses were offered to students in the period 2013-2014. Again, the use of the internet proved a timely tool for the organization as it was able to deliver training to more than 1,700 staff members (UClan, 2014). Training sessions like these are meant to improve competencies, and provide employees the opportunity to raise their safety, health and environmental management concerns from their work areas so that they can be addressed. When these issues are raised and consequently addressed by the concerned authorities, the safety, health and environment management skills of the workers are bound to improve and place them in a better position to handle any crisis that may arise (James, Tomb & Whyte 2013). The report document accidents and incidents that involved students during the period under review. It acknowledges that over the years, there has been a reduction in the number of accidents and incidents involving students. While it commendable that there was a decrease in the accidents, the report indicates that no employee’s accidents or major incident were reported at the university during the same period. It is important to note that employee’s safety, health, and environmental management is a core part of achieving success for such organizations. The report emphasizes the need to investigate and report any accident or incident that may occur at the institution (UClan, 2013). An institution can ascertain if it is doing well by benchmarking its report against other institutions around the globe. The University of Central Lancashire benchmarked its report against those of Universities Safety and Health Association where it did not perform so well. Because of this action, the institution realized that it could do more to get the targets as its accidents and incidents were higher than those of USHA. Safety and health management targets need institutions like the University of Central Lancashire to improve their standards for the benefit of employees, students and all stakeholders. External benchmarking provides such institutions with the opportunity to get a true picture of how they are fairing, and what they can do to improve efficiency, competence and better workplace environment for the employees (James, Tomb & Whyte 2013). The wellbeing of workers remains a crucial component of safety and health while at the workplace. The university has made efforts in all areas to improve the health and wellbeing of its staff by employing both proactive and reactive approaches to get them. Firms and institutions are expected to have healthy employees for service delivery, guarantee success and improve morale for the business (Grabosky 2013). The success of any enterprise is achieved when the employees are recognized as excellent performers. The university has a well-being Webpage to enable the employees to engage in information sharing and gathering for their effective delivery of services. Employees can perform better when they are well groomed, motivated and encouraged by the management in all aspects of their operations (Grabosky 2013). Environmental sustainability remains a core component across different businesses and multinationals in the world. Our environment remains important to achieving all the goals and all efforts to protect it are laudable, especially from institutions of higher learning like the University. The University’s environmental management policy is founded on the continuous improvement of all systems. The University has achieved a certification standard that puts it way above the rest and its sustainability policy was ratified in 2014 and forms the framework for environmental management at the institution. Sustainable business requires institutions to draw long-term plans to help them achieve environmental targets and remain sustainable ventures in the future. The university has a three-year strategic environmental management plan that will guarantee continual improvement (UClan 2014). Its four-year corporate plan underscores its need to become a model university for environmental sustainability and management by the year 2017. Importantly, the company strives to create an enabling environment for its students to champion sustainability. However, it needs to ensure that the employees remain an integral part of this transformation. Sustainable businesses grow when employees are given the opportunity to innovate, create and transform their workplace environment. The green impact that university intends to achieve can be done through an elaborate process to equip all players with the necessary tools to champion the course through practical ways (UClan 2014). The university has a moral duty to ensure that its employees replicate their abilities in the various departments for the overall success of the business. Conclusion It is evident that the institution has created an enabling environment for its employees in a bid to comply with the health and safety regulations. When institutions like universities strive to meet the legal and statutory obligations, it follows that their employees are guaranteed safety and healthy workplace environment. Sustainability in a business makes a good case for the formulation of policies that will drive such firms to success. The formation of the Safety, Health, and Environmental management committee is an indication that the University of Central Lancashire is committed to complying with all regulations set by the government. However, it needs to improve in its reporting, accident and emergency preparedness to score favorably on the USHA’s standardizations. Bibliography Grabosky, P., 2013. Beyond Responsive Regulation: The expanding role of non‐state actors in the regulatory process. Regulation & Governance, Vol.7, No.1, pp.114-123. Online, Wiley Online Library Hale, A., Borys, D. and Adams, M., 2015. Safety regulation: the lessons of workplace safety rule management for managing the regulatory burden. Safety science, Vol.71, pp.112-122. New York, Elsevier James, P., Tombs, S. and Whyte, D., 2013. An independent review of British health and safety regulation? From common sense to non-sense. Policy Studies, Vol.34, No.1, pp.36-52. London, Taylor & Francis Tombs, S. and Whyte, D., 2013. Transcending the deregulation debate? Regulation, risk, and the enforcement of health and safety law in the UK. Regulation & Governance, Vol.7, No.1, pp.61-79. Online, Wiley Online Library. Tombs, S. and Whyte, D., 2013. The myths and realities of deterrence in workplace safety regulation. British journal of criminology, p.azt024. London, Taylor & Francis UClan, 2014. University of Central Lancashire Safety, Health and Environmental Management Annual Report 2013-2014. PDF UClan, 2013. University of Central Lancashire Safety, Health and Environmental Management Annual Report 2011-2012. PDF Read More