The Malta Chamber notes Health and Safety at Work Act is a positive move, calls for proactive enforcement

The Malta Chamber of Commerce, Enterprise and Industry has described the Health and Safety at Work Act as a positive move, yet has called for proactive enforcement from Government.

Last week the Malta Chamber, participated and contributed during the second reading stage of the Health and Safety at Work Act at the Consideration of Bills Commitee.

The Malta Chamber has on different occastions highlighted the “urgent attention” that needs to be given to health and safety to effectively prevent accidents and deaths. This inclues submitting its views during the public consultation process at MCESD last year.

“Laws and regulations need to reflect the nature of the work and the corresponding risk. Laws and regulations must also address abuse, and enforcement must be carried out in a proactive and timely manner,” the Malta Chamber said in a statement.

Amongst a number of other points, the Malta Chamber called for clarity on the applicability and role of the newly introduced Health and Safety Reporting Officer (HSRO).

The Malta Chamber insisted that:

a) The HSRO role should not be a blanket requirement based solely on the nature of the business and its size as originally proposed but should be dependent on the risk inherent in the nature of the work and how it is being executed.

The Chamber stated that the original bill was ushered with the caveat that the HSRO will not apply to all businesses. It hinted at large business and certain industries, without defining large in the context of the Bill, and without specifying which industries.

The victims of tragic occupational accidents in recent years were, in most cases, working with small companies or in high-risk unregulated environments.

“Risk management requires mitigating measures corresponding to the risks inherent to the operations and the way they are carried out, and this will differ from one company to another depending on competence more than size,” it continued.

b) The requirement of an HSRO should be imposed to address repeated abuses and to curb irresponsible practices by high-risk operators who systematically try to get away with it.

The Bill as originally drafted would have shifted the burden of policing on the HSRO across the board, “which would have been unfair on operators who fully comply with existing health and safety obligations and adopt a proactive approach to risk management.”

Therefore it expressed its belied that blanket impositions of the requirement of an HSRO would “dramatically increasing personnel costs, especially because the HSRO role will be tough to fill.”

For that reason it highlights that proactive and properly co-ordinated enforcement needs to be carried out by the authority, irrespective of the introduction of the HSRO role.

c) The Chamber notes that clarity is required on how the new role of the HSRO would fit with that of the Health and Safety officer/practitioner which already exists in companies that are in line with current occupational health and safety.

“Accidents keep happening, among other reasons, because some businesses do not adhere to the existing obligations. The reality is that the majority of the bigger companies are very likely to have an inhouse H&S officer or otherwise have a service agreement with a H&S practitioner/firm.” It continued.

Some smaller companies subcontract external service providers for the number of hours required, depending on nature/risk, for their risk assessments, inspections and follow-ups. “It still needs to be seen how the two roles will interact in those companies where the HSRO will be required,” the Chamber shared.

The Malta Chamber positively notes that the HSRO requirement has been amended to reflect “the nature of the work” rather than the nature of the business or its size. Subsequent subsidiary legislation will need to determine where an HSRO will be required subject to the “nature of the work”.

The Authority will also have the right to “order that an HSRO is appointed in relation to a particular employer for such time as the authority may deem necessary” where there are serious and consistent breaches of the law.

The next steps require government to embark on proactive enforcement including the sharing of pertinent information between government departments, entities, agencies and authorities through proper digitalisation to facilitate enforcement.

The Malta Chamber also emphasises that the government must also ensure that the corresponding legal notices to this enabling law are enacted without unnecessary procrastination.

Furthermore, it reiterates its position in favour of health and safety regulations and standards that prevent accidents and death.

In order to achieve meaningful legislation, the Malta Chamber continued, “there must be proper engagement with representatives of both employers and employees, ideally around the same table.”

It concluded by reaffirming its commitment to participate and engage at all consultation stages while urging the government “to make better use of the MCESD as this is a matter of relevance to both employers and employees, as well as to civil society.”