The role of Health and Safety Representatives in COVID-19
Lead Research Organisation:
University of Greenwich
Department Name: Human Resources & Organ. Behaviour, FBUS
Abstract
Workplace health and safety representative have legal rights to represent the interests and concerns of workers over health and safety, to make representations on potential hazards and dangers and to have contact with health and safety inspectors from the Health and Safety Executive or the local authority (HSE,2020). In a pandemic their independence from but relationship with management is potentially critical in assessing and addressing risk for workers and for public health.
This research identifies the role that health and safety representatives have played during COVID-19, lessons learned and best practice for future waves or pandemics. It examines organisational and sectoral mechanisms and processes for worker voice and representation and effective social dialogue and joint regulation on health and safety. It explores the potentially key part health and safety representatives are playing in the return to work and productivity. They are not only essential to independent risk assessment and the provision of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), but also the organisation of work and workplace ergonomics, including the challenges of continued home working. They are central to the protection of mental health, ensuring that health and safety measures cover all groups of workers and to the confidence of workers in their organisation's capacity to keep them safe.
Drawing upon case-studies in eight key sectors, the project, supported by the HSE and a range of trade unions, aims to explore the balance between productivity, public health and worker health and safety during pandemics, with a focus upon exemplary and future practice.
This research identifies the role that health and safety representatives have played during COVID-19, lessons learned and best practice for future waves or pandemics. It examines organisational and sectoral mechanisms and processes for worker voice and representation and effective social dialogue and joint regulation on health and safety. It explores the potentially key part health and safety representatives are playing in the return to work and productivity. They are not only essential to independent risk assessment and the provision of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), but also the organisation of work and workplace ergonomics, including the challenges of continued home working. They are central to the protection of mental health, ensuring that health and safety measures cover all groups of workers and to the confidence of workers in their organisation's capacity to keep them safe.
Drawing upon case-studies in eight key sectors, the project, supported by the HSE and a range of trade unions, aims to explore the balance between productivity, public health and worker health and safety during pandemics, with a focus upon exemplary and future practice.
Organisations
- University of Greenwich (Lead Research Organisation)
- Southern New Hampshire University (Collaboration)
- University of Southern Maine (Collaboration)
- Health and Safety Executive (Project Partner)
- USDAW (Project Partner)
- Royal College of Midwives (Project Partner)
- Unite the Union (Project Partner)
- Trades Union Congress (Project Partner)
- Rail, Marine and Transport Union (Project Partner)
Publications
Moore S
(2023)
Health and Safety Reps in COVID-19-Representation Unleashed?
in International journal of environmental research and public health
| Description | The research explores the role of UK union health and safety (H&S) representatives and the operation of representative structures and mechanisms governing workplace and organisational Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) during COVID-19. It does so in a context in which the capacity of representatives has been undermined by the legacy of deregulation, and where non-standard workers are excluded from representation over OHS and rights to sick pay. As in previous studies the research points to the absence of H&S committees, even in workplaces and organisations with union H&S representation. The survey indicates expanded union H&S representation during COVID-19, but only half of respondents reported associated H&S committees. The presence of a health and safety committee with union representation was associated with negotiation or consultation with union representatives over OHS issues during the pandemic, as well as with perceived managerial support for representatives. However, the presence of a H&S committee with union representatives had no influence over the frequency of engagement between union health and safety representatives and managers over OHS issues and the presence of HS representation structures made no difference to H&S representatives' perception of OHS risk during the pandemic. Expanded union representation was associated with union engagement with management and with negotiation or consultation over OHS issues during the pandemic. There was, however, no relationship between expanded union representation and perceived risk or with perceived managerial support These findings indicate that on certain outcomes representative activity was independent of organisational or workplace structures, in particular managerial support and engagement and involvement. The qualification is the significant relationship between the presence of H&S committees with union representation and expanded union representation. Where formal representative mechanisms existed, they provided the basis for more informal day-to-day engagement between management and union. However, the research demonstrates that the legacy of deregulation and absence of organisational infrastructures, meant that the autonomous collective representation of workers' interests over OHS, independent of structures, was crucial to risk prevention. The proactive role played by union H&S reps based on their embeddedness in the labour process and intimate knowledge of how the organisation of work created risk. In some cases, they were in work while senior managers were working from home. Workplace representatives exerted bottom-up pressure on management, holding management to account, enforcing organisational policies, and ensuring the immediacy of employers' responses to the pandemic. They pressed for risk assessments, but also regulated the implementation of measures at the workplace. Health and safety representatives took unilateral action in some cases, with tension over health and safety emerging in other cases and unions taking grievances to control risk. In monitoring risk amongst the workforce, ensuring compliance with regulations and overcoming resistance to them H&S representatives challenged what may be called 'a culture of denial'. Unions were keen to ensure that COVID-19 did not become a disciplinary issue, although the tension between the educational and policing role was evident. Union representatives stressed the role of education and communication based on the trust union members had in their representatives in ensuring compliance and criticised attempts to make health and safety an individual rather than organisational or societal issue. Joint regulation and engagement over OHS was possible in some workplaces, but OHS in the pandemic has also been contested, challenging the notion that H&S reps have been captured by management in the context of unitarist practice (Walters and Wadsworth, 2019). The tension between union power and the wider legal infrastructure remains salient (Hall and Tucker, 2022. |
| Exploitation Route | The research reinvigorates academic research and debates on Occupational Health and Safety, with submissions to academic peer-reviewed journals in progress. The survey of health and safety representatives has been fed back to the TUC and wider research findings have been shared with key informants and research participants. The investigators are exploring the best way to feed into the UK COVID-19 Inquiry, particularly the later module on frontline workers. Policy recommendations on the strengthening of representational mechanisms that legitimise independent worker voice and that require and support independent workplace Occupational Health and Safety representation are directed at government and employers. The research outputs recommend public health authorities promote a review of occupational and Statutory Sick Pay in the light of current and future pandemics and push for reform of and increases in SSP. They highlight the need to recognise that employment protection and collective representation for workers on non-standard contracts are not conducive to risk prevention at the workplace and can promote transmission. Research outcomes suggest government needs to review the powers and resources of the Health and Safety Executive in the light of the pandemic, along with requirements on employers to report deaths and infection. |
| Sectors | Agriculture, Food and Drink,Construction,Financial Services, and Management Consultancy,Healthcare,Manufacturing, including Industrial Biotechology,Retail,Transport,Other |
| URL | https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/ier/rewage/about/esrc_covid_grants/ |
| Description | Interim findings were presented to online workshops of key experts and participants. Findings were presented to the All Parliamentary Group on Occupational Health and Safety. |
| First Year Of Impact | 2021 |
| Sector | Other |
| Impact Types | Societal,Policy & public services |
| Description | COVID-19 Recovery: Building future pandemic preparedness and understanding citizen engagement in the USA and UK |
| Amount | £100,000 (GBP) |
| Funding ID | CRUSA210015 |
| Organisation | The British Academy |
| Sector | Academic/University |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Start | 10/2021 |
| End | 03/2022 |
| Description | Understanding Vaccine Hesitancy amongst US and UK frontline workers |
| Organisation | Southern New Hampshire University |
| Country | United States |
| Sector | Academic/University |
| PI Contribution | The research was a comparative study of Covid-19 vaccine hesitancy in the UK and US, focussing upon frontline workers in two comparable cities, Oxford in the UK and Manchester in the US. It focused upon work and the workplace as a key site of infection and prevention and thus key to public health. The research is a comparative study that focusses upon four sectors employing front-line workers in Oxford in the southeast of the UK and Manchester, New Hampshire in the US. The four sectors are: the social care sector; the health sector; public transport; and emergency services. A US-UK comparison allows for interrogation of contexts shaped by place, culture, social, political and economic factors. It permits evaluation of health and welfare infrastructures and how different healthcare systems shape worker responses to vaccines. The research was based on documentary evidence of policies towards vaccination; interviews with key informants; in-depth semi-structured interviews with workers in each sector; and focus groups of workers in each sector and of community and trade union activists. My research team conducted research in Oxford, UK. |
| Collaborator Contribution | The research was a comparative study of Covid-19 vaccine hesitancy in the UK and US, focussing upon frontline workers in two comparable cities, Oxford in the UK and Manchester in the US. It focused upon work and the workplace as a key site of infection and prevention and thus key to public health. The research is a comparative study that focusses upon four sectors employing front-line workers in Oxford in the southeast of the UK and Manchester, New Hampshire in the US. The four sectors are: the social care sector; the health sector; public transport; and emergency services. A US-UK comparison allows for interrogation of contexts shaped by place, culture, social, political and economic factors. It permits evaluation of health and welfare infrastructures and how different healthcare systems shape worker responses to vaccines. The research was based on documentary evidence of policies towards vaccination; interviews with key informants; in-depth semi-structured interviews with workers in each sector; and focus groups of workers in each sector and of community and trade union activists. Partners from the University of Southern Maine and Southern New Hampshire University conducted research in Manchester, US. |
| Impact | A journal article based on the research has been submitted to a 4* journal. A summary report was provided for the British Academy. A film was produced based on the research was made by the British Academy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQgoaEoHFb8 Presentations based on the research were made to various forums. |
| Start Year | 2021 |
| Description | Understanding Vaccine Hesitancy amongst US and UK frontline workers |
| Organisation | University of Southern Maine |
| Country | United States |
| Sector | Academic/University |
| PI Contribution | The research was a comparative study of Covid-19 vaccine hesitancy in the UK and US, focussing upon frontline workers in two comparable cities, Oxford in the UK and Manchester in the US. It focused upon work and the workplace as a key site of infection and prevention and thus key to public health. The research is a comparative study that focusses upon four sectors employing front-line workers in Oxford in the southeast of the UK and Manchester, New Hampshire in the US. The four sectors are: the social care sector; the health sector; public transport; and emergency services. A US-UK comparison allows for interrogation of contexts shaped by place, culture, social, political and economic factors. It permits evaluation of health and welfare infrastructures and how different healthcare systems shape worker responses to vaccines. The research was based on documentary evidence of policies towards vaccination; interviews with key informants; in-depth semi-structured interviews with workers in each sector; and focus groups of workers in each sector and of community and trade union activists. My research team conducted research in Oxford, UK. |
| Collaborator Contribution | The research was a comparative study of Covid-19 vaccine hesitancy in the UK and US, focussing upon frontline workers in two comparable cities, Oxford in the UK and Manchester in the US. It focused upon work and the workplace as a key site of infection and prevention and thus key to public health. The research is a comparative study that focusses upon four sectors employing front-line workers in Oxford in the southeast of the UK and Manchester, New Hampshire in the US. The four sectors are: the social care sector; the health sector; public transport; and emergency services. A US-UK comparison allows for interrogation of contexts shaped by place, culture, social, political and economic factors. It permits evaluation of health and welfare infrastructures and how different healthcare systems shape worker responses to vaccines. The research was based on documentary evidence of policies towards vaccination; interviews with key informants; in-depth semi-structured interviews with workers in each sector; and focus groups of workers in each sector and of community and trade union activists. Partners from the University of Southern Maine and Southern New Hampshire University conducted research in Manchester, US. |
| Impact | A journal article based on the research has been submitted to a 4* journal. A summary report was provided for the British Academy. A film was produced based on the research was made by the British Academy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQgoaEoHFb8 Presentations based on the research were made to various forums. |
| Start Year | 2021 |
| Description | On the Frontline - the role of workplace union health and safety reps in the pandemic |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Study participants or study members |
| Results and Impact | An online seminar on November 11th 2021 with presentation of the research findings and contributions from health and safety experts representing trade unions, managers and occupational health and safety organisations and campaigns, including Hazards. It focussed on • What lessons can be learned from working through Covid? • What more could employers, unions and government do to improve workplace health and safety? • How might legal changes better safeguard workplaces in future pandemics? • How has the HSE responded? • How do union health and safety reps generate a safety culture in organisations? • How can protection for frontline health and social care workers be prioritised, recognising that a high proportion are from BME communities, The event was of particular interest to health and safety specialists from unions and management, occupational health and safety experts and anyone with a practical interest in supporting employee health and wellbeing during the pandemic. Speakers and contributors: Janet Newsham: National Hazards Campaign / Manchester Hazards Centre; Shelly Asquith TUC Health, Safety and Wellbeing Officer; Kim Sunley, National Health and Safety Officer, Unison; Dr Martie Van Tongeren Manchester University, Theme Leader Protect project; Prof Joanne Crawford, Head of Department of Health University of Wellington;Jim McDaid Train Driver, RMT Rep London Underground; employer representative NHS Ambulance Service;Tony Carstang - USDAW Rep and Warehouse Colleague, Sainsbury's Distribution Waltham Cross; Wayne Cespedes Unite, Full Time Health and Safety Rep Bus Driver Go Ahead London |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2021 |