Young, free and at risk

The risk facing young people in the workplace - and consequently the legal standing of their employers - was illustrated recently by the death of an apprentice mechanic in Sussex.

The apprentice, aged 18, died when petrol exploded at a motor-vehicle repair garage in February 2005. At the time, he was helping his manager to empty a mixture of petrol and diesel from a dustbin into a waste-oil disposal tank on the petrol forecourt. The flue-pipe outlet from a gas boiler, located next to the tank, was switched on, causing fuel vapour to enter the flue and explode.

The garage manager was found guilty of manslaughter and jailed for nine months, while his father - the owner of the garage - was fined £10,000 under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974.

Health and Safety Executive inspector, Joanna Teasdale, commented: "This case is particularly distressing as the apprentice was learning the trade and so was heavily reliant on the duty of care owed to him by his manager and the garage owner. This was sadly absent."

This event illustrates why managing the risks relating to young people in the workplace can be likened to the role of a parent. However, some of the guidance that exists actually fails to pinpoint the distinction between 'children' and 'young people'.

Under the Management of Health and Safety at Work Act 1999, children under the age of 13 are prohibited from undertaking any form of work.

However, while the Act describes children as "those who have not reached the minimum school-leaving age of 16", a young person is defined as being "not yet 18". There is also a third category, covering those aged between 18 and 21 years - these people are relatively new to work, are inexperienced and, therefore, still pose a risk.

The engineering industry in the UK was built on the craft apprentice process - something that bred good working practices. That aspect is a diminishing part of the UK industry and the service industries that have replaced it have never had the same need for rigorous training that manufacturing still has. However, workplace safety training remains essential for every business.

Why and how do young workers need protecting? Their lack of work experience, and experience in general, means that their immaturity can have dire consequences in the workplace.

Along with the problems associated with acceptable behaviour - high jinks and horseplay in particular - young people often do not have the physical attributes, such as size or strength, to cope with particular tasks being imposed on them.

Risk assessment is at the heart of controlling risks involving young people. Brokers need to encourage clients to look at risks from the point of view of age and take the appropriate precautions.

The approach to assessing risk for young people is different from that governing older workers and might lead to some work being considered unacceptable for young people in a particular workplace. For example, demolition work involves a vibration risk; this can be hazardous for youngsters, as their bones are not yet fully formed. Other activities such as off-road driving, using a road breaker or working with hazardous substances such as chemicals, may also have to be ruled out.

There are three main reasons for employers taking risk management for young workers seriously: the moral and ethical viewpoint of looking after young people; legislative compliance; and the sound financial sense it makes. Businesses work better if people are trained, accidents only cost them money.

Though insurers compensate the injured employee, there are many things that have to be paid for by the employer and will often total more than the insurance settlement. For example, the costs relating to a fatal accident involving a factory employee can include: compensation for the family; closing down the location of the accident; an HSE investigation, time for meetings; money spent on modifying premises; additional training for staff; potential prosecution; and the impact on the reputation of a business having court proceedings against it reported to the wider business community.

Small businesses often perform some risk management, consequently reducing their accidents and claims, and thereby obtaining a reduction in premium.

Unfortunately, it also means that they spend less time investigating accidents.

There is a feeling of complacency that accidents will not happen to them.

Insurers are concerned that basic risk control in SMEs often leaves something to be desired.

Furthermore, HSE statistics also show that firms are not good at preventing young people from getting involved in hazardous activities. Older, more experienced staff may be able to take short cuts in a particular work activity and get away with it. The danger lies with the young person observing the experienced people taking a short cut, and trying to replicate it themselves.

With our children, we do not take the risks that we would when alone.

This kind of mentality should inform our treatment of young people in the workplace.

- Phil Grace, Casualty risk manager, Norwich Union

CASE STUDIES

- A 19-year-old fitter/welder was welding an item partially suspended from a crane. The item slipped and fell onto his foot, resulting in multiple fractures. The concern was that his long-term working capacity would be affected. It was very likely that he had not been given adequate training and supervision. A claim covers not only pain and suffering but also loss or reduction in earnings.

- An 18-year-old, employed as a steel erector, fell five metres and fractured a foot. He had been told never to walk along a horizontal steel beam but, working unsupervised, he did so and had the accident. Foot injuries can affect employability for many jobs.

- An 18-year-old, working in a warehouse, was driving a forklift truck at speed when he tried to execute a 180-degree turn. The vehicle overturned and he was crushed, resulting in his death. He had not been given training in forklift-truck driving and the authorised driver had left the key in the truck. The young person did not understand that these vehicles are fundamentally unstable and not designed for such manoeuvres. He did not have the experience, skills or knowledge to drive such a vehicle.