Letter: Workers at risk as companies escape prosecution

Sir: Your disturbing report of the death of William Neilson from massive radiation exposure ('Worker killed by record dose of radiation', 9 May) raises important issues, not least employer responsibility for the welfare and safety of workers. In this instance, Mr Neilson worked for a contractor employed by the client company, BP Chemicals, at the Grangemouth refinery.

Less than three weeks ago, BP was fined pounds 200,000 in the Scottish courts for breaches of safety legislation at Grangemouth. This is a paltry sum compared to the company's annual profits. It followed the death of one man and the maiming of three others (in one case with 50 per cent burns). In this case, one of the contractors involved, a Belgian-based concern, was able to escape the jurisdiction of the court as a foreign company, despite Belgium's membership of the EU. In the case of Mr Neilson, his former employers did not need to decamp to foreign parts. They could simply refuse to accept responsibility for his injuries.

The Law Commission has recently recommended reform of the manslaughter laws to make it easier to prosecute company directors for acts of gross negligence under a charge of involuntary manslaughter. For many, this is a long overdue step in the right direction but one which the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) seems uncomfortable with. This is unfortunate since, as the HSE itself recognises, and as Mr Neilson's death exemplifies, large corporate concerns increasingly relying on contractors are thereby able to offload detailed responsibility for the monitoring of health and safety procedures. The incoherence which such reliance on sub-contracting can create in a health and safety programme exposes the effective limits of the philosophy of self-regulation underlying the Health and Safety at Work Act.

Issues of criminal justice and deterrents after workplace death and injury fail to feature in the rhetoric of a Government supposedly committed to law and order. Confirming, and even encouraging, 'best practice' in the field of occupational safety is being similarly ignored in the drive towards deregulation of health and safety law. The minister's response to the HSE's internal review of this law is awaited with some interest - and not a little concern.

Yours faithfully,

CHARLES WOOLFSON

Department of Social and Economic Research

University of Glasgow

Glasgow

9 May