The Most Dangerous Jobs in the UK

Most of us take for granted that when we leave for work in the morning we will return safely that night. We assume our workplace is safe and we will be free from harm. And thankfully, most of the time this is the case. However, according to statistics from the Health & Safety Executive (HSE), 178 people never returned home from work in 2012/13 and a further 78,000 employees were injured. Furthermore, workplace injury and ill-health cost around £13.8 billion in 2010/11.

The industries responsible for the most accidents and injuries are:

• Farming
• Construction
• Manufacturing

So why are these three industries responsible for so many workplace injuries, and what is being done to make each industry safer for workers?

Farming

More accidents happen per head of the working population in the agricultural sector than any other industry. Just over 1 in 100 workers (both employees and self-employed) work in agriculture but the industry is responsible for 1 in 5 work-related deaths.

Many injuries in the farming sector go unreported, so it is difficult to gain an accurate picture of how the trauma rates compare over a number of years, however, there has been very little change in the health and safety statistics since the mid-1990s.

The common denominator of these three risky industries is that they all involve large, heavy machinery. However, a farmer also has to deal with unpredictable livestock, dust, vehicles, chemicals, heights, bad weather and strenuous, repetitive work.

The National Farmers Union (NFU) and the HSE are making considerable efforts to try and raise awareness within the farming industry of health and safety best practices. The NFU states that it regularly meets with its members to discuss simple safety strategies such as telling someone your plans for the day, following safe stopping procedures in vehicles, and not cutting corners when working in situations involving heights, livestock and chemicals.

Construction

In 2012/13 the construction industry was responsible for 39 deaths. Although this is a high figure, in the previous five years there had been an average of 53 deaths per year, so there has been a significant improvement in fatality rates. However, added to this figure is around 3,700 new diagnosis of (often fatal) cancer each year which can be attributed to past exposure to asbestos, dust and chemicals. The HSE has more detailed industry statistics.

Between 2004 and 2007 a number of health and safety regulations came into force which has aided the improvement of accident statistics, including:

• Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007
• Work at Height Regulations 2005
• Control of Noise at Work Regulations 2005
• Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations (Amendment) 2004
• Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005

An Approved Code of Practice was also published in 2007 which offers practical guidance to the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations.
These regulations, combined with a greater awareness of health and safety within the industry, have all led to an improvement in the number of serious injuries and fatalities sustained.

Manufacturing

There are approximately 2.8 million workers across a wide range of industries employed in manufacturing within the UK. According to the HSE, accident rates have improved over the past two decades with a third less fatalities in 2012/13 than 20 years ago. Food manufacturing had the highest number of recorded injuries within the sectors.

Because the manufacturing industry is so broad, the injuries sustained can range from chemical burns through to knife related accidents. However, back injury is the most common problem sustained, often due to repetitive work being performed in awkward positions and heavy lifting. The HSE and the industry itself produce many publications and offer training on how to prevent back injury when working. You can read more about recovering from a back injury here.

Post Traumatic Stress Disorder – Suffering in Silence

Although Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) did not become an official diagnosis until 1980, its symptoms and sufferings have been with us for many centuries. For example, there are the cases of ‘shell shock’ during the Great War which are now known to have been cases of PTSD. Unfortunately for its sufferers, PTSD is still seen as a weakness by some and our society expects people who are involved in or witness traumatic events to just ‘get over it’ within a very short period of time.

One aspect that contributes to society’s lack of understanding is that very few people know what PTSD actually is. There is also the question why some people suffer from it after what seems a relatively mild trauma and others can survive a major event and have no symptoms at all. To address these two questions let’s look at the definition of PTSD.

What is PTSD?

According to the NHS PTSD is “an anxiety disorder caused by stressful, frightening or distressing events”. These can include being involved in or witnessing:

• Road accidents
• Violent physical or sexual assault
• Military combat
• Terrorist attacks
• Someone’s violent death
• Prolonged physical or sexual abuse or neglect
• Natural disasters

PTSD does not necessarily develop straight after the event. There have been many documented cases where a person has been involved in, or witnessed a traumatic event, and for months or sometimes even years, they have no symptoms of PTSD. Then, without warning, they suddenly start experiencing the classic signs of the affliction such as:

• Nightmares
• Flashbacks to the event
• Insomnia
• Difficulty concentrating
• Anger and irritability
• Avoidance and becoming ‘numb’ emotionally
• Feeling ‘on edge’ all the time

As scientists begin to understand this disorder, they are discovering that PTSD is nothing new and has been suffered by people throughout history. This goes some way towards dispelling the myth that people who suffer from PTSD are somehow ‘weak minded’ or ‘soft’.

For example, Thomas Heebøll-Holm, a historian at the University of Copenhagen, analysed three 14th century texts written by a French Knight called Geoffroi de Charny, who was also a diplomat and trusted adviser to King John II of France. After studying between the lines, Heebøll-Holm believes he can make a case for medieval knights suffering from some trauma due to their violent and relentlessly harsh lifestyle. Although the author showed no signs of PSTD, in his writing he often expressed concern about the mental wellbeing of other men. You can read more about his fascinating finds here.

Shell-shock is also a well known term, which was applied to soldiers during World War 1 who became hyper-sensitive to noise, dizzy, anxious and began to have tremors. It was initially thought these symptoms were brought on by neurological damage caused by exploding shells and gunfire (hence the term ‘shell-shock’). By 1916 more than 40% of all casualties were attributed to what seemed to be this new phenomenon, and around 350 men who displayed symptoms were executed for cowardice. We now know the horrors of trench warfare had an enormous emotional effect on veterans and 306 of the men who were executed received a group pardon for their alleged offences in 2006.

Why are some people vulnerable to PTSD and not others?

It is estimated around 50% of people will witness or be involved in a traumatic event at some point in their lives and thankfully, most people will cope well, even when confronted with horrendous situations. However, there are a percentage of people who never fully recover after a serious event. Many studies have been done to try and establish why some people, although they initially show some signs of anxiety, do OK in the wake of violence, natural disasters or car accidents and others develop severe, sometimes crippling PTSD.

There are biological differences between those who develop PTSD and those who do not. According to an article in the Nature Journal “functional magnetic resonance imaging (FMRI), which tracks blood flow in the brain, has revealed that when people who have PTSD are reminded of the trauma, they tend to have an underactive prefrontal cortex and an overactive amygdala, another limbic brain region, which processes fear and emotion”.

Environmental factors are also thought to play a part in people’s recovery from trauma. Study after study has shown that social and community support acts as a cushion against PTSD. Religious practice and having a strong purpose in life have also been shown to aide recovery from PTSD.

There is much work to be done to ensure people who suffer from PTSD are not dismissed or seen as defective in some way. Some have stated that even using the word ‘disorder’ in the name is offensive, as post-traumatic stress is a natural reaction to terrible events.

If you suffer or have suffered from PTSD we can offer you helpful legal advice which may assist your situation, for more information visit our Post Traumatic Stress Disorder page. If you would rather speak to someone now about your claim, call us in complete confidence on 0845 345 4444, or fill in our contact form and we’ll get straight back to you.

Dispelling the Myths around Concussion

The most common type of injury sustained after a blow to the head is concussion.  Concussion can range from being a minor incident which requires rest and observation at home, to a severe, life-threatening injury.

As an example of this latter scenario, in April 2014 a coroner ruled that a 14 year old boy died as a result of “second impact syndrome”.  The boy was participating in a school rugby match when he suffered two concussive type injuries in quick succession which saw him collapse to the ground and tragically never regain consciousness.

Listed below are some of the myths surrounding concussion that need to be dispelled in order to protect people from more serious injury.

Myth number 1.  You have to be knocked out to receive a concussion.

You do not have to be knocked unconscious for concussion to occur. It happens when a blow to the head or body, or a fall or other injury shakes and jars the brain inside the skull.  This affects the reticular activating system in the brain which controls your sense of awareness and consciousness.

If you suspect you or a person you are with has concussion, look for the following signs:

• Headache or a feeling of pressure in the head
• Temporary loss of consciousness
• Confusion or feeling as if in a fog
• Amnesia surrounding the traumatic event
• Dizziness or “seeing stars”
• Ringing in the ears
• Nausea
• Vomiting
• Slurred speech
• Delayed response to questions
• Appearing dazed
• Fatigue

Some symptoms of concussions may be immediate or delayed in onset by hours or days after injury, such as:

• Concentration and memory complaints
• Irritability and other personality changes
• Sensitivity to light and noise
• Sleep disturbances
• Psychological adjustment problems and depression
• Disorders of taste and smell

Children

Head trauma is very common in young children. If your child has received anything more than a light bump on the head, the American Academy of Paediatrics recommends you should seek medical advice.  Nonverbal clues of a concussion in children may include:

• Appearing dazed
• Listlessness and tiring easily
• Irritability and crankiness
• Loss of balance and unsteady walking
• Crying excessively
• Change in eating or sleeping patterns
• Lack of interest in favourite toys

Myth number 2.  Players can carry on playing after a severe blow to the head if they feel up to it.

One of the most common situations for concussion to occur is on the sports field.  Players are particularly vulnerable in contact sports such as rugby, boxing and football.

Following recent high profile cases, sporting associations have put more emphasis on alerting players to the dangers of multiple concussions over a lifetime.

Symptoms of concussion may not appear immediately after an accident.  Therefore, if a player has experienced a severe blow to the head and concussion is suspected, they should be taken out of the game immediately.  If they continue to play there is a real risk of becoming concussed for a second time causing “second impact syndrome” which can lead to long-term, serious brain damage or death.

Myth number 3.  Concussion can only be caused by a direct blow to the head.

Concussion can be caused by a sudden violent movement of the head caused by an external force applied to the body, for example, a rugby tackle or a car accident.

Myth number 4.  A little concussion is no big deal.

A concussion is considered to be a mild traumatic brain injury.  If it is not treated properly it can lead to long-term disability or even death.  Your brain needs time to heal and rest before you return to normal, day-to-day activity.

A brain injury is always serious and should be treated as such.  If you have suffered from a concussion, or suspect someone close to you has it, seek medical advice straight away.

If you have suffered an injury which could have been avoided, you could be entitled to make a personal injury claim, for more information visit our personal injury page. If you would rather speak to someone now about your claim, call us in complete confidence on 0845 345 4444, or fill in this contact form and we’ll get straight back to you.

Keeping Your Child Safe at School

In April 2014, both the Manchester Evening News and The Yorkshire Post reported that schools in the Greater Manchester area and Yorkshire had paid out £1.5 million and over £1 million pounds respectively for personal injury claims.  Payouts included:

• £22,000 to a student injured in a school activity in Tameside
• £8,000 awarded to a pupil in Rochdale after goal posts fell on him
• £9,494 awarded to a child who was injured after being pushed by another child
• £35,000 paid to a student in Leeds who suffered a broken limb
• £16.000 awarded to a pupil injured during a science experiment

Wayne Dunning, from ELAS Health and Safety Consultants, who compiled the reports detailing school personal injury claims stated;

“These figures are shocking and clearly not enough is being done to protect children in schools from what are, in the main, preventable accidents. Health and safety is not being managed properly in the education sector and this is costing taxpayers millions, not only in direct compensation, but also additional hidden costs from administration. It’s clear from the nature of the accidents that many areas are being overlooked by school managers and teachers, not through any fault of their own, but because they haven’t received the necessary training required to identify the potential risks and hazards that may prevent an accident”.

Responsibility for safety standards

In light of these figures, parents maybe asking themselves, “who is responsible for safety standards at my child’s school, and what can I do if I feel that the standards are not high enough?”

According to the UK Government website, every school should have its own health and safety policy document.  Parents should be able to access and read this document at anytime.

Health and Safety Executive (HSE)

If your child is involved in an incident at school you can report it to the Health & Safety Executive (HSE) who will investigate the situation and may prosecute the school if they find there was negligence.

In June 2013 Manningtree High School in Essex was fined £9,000 and ordered to pay £1,641 in costs after pleading guilty of breaching Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 for failing to adequately protect pupils against the risk of falls.  The incident in question involved a 14 year old pupil falling from a climbing wall while participating in lead-climbing, and fracturing his heel bone.  The HSE found that the school did not have an adequate safety management system in place for lead-climbing and that the instructor who was present was not competent to teach or supervise the activity.

Injuries in schools

According to HSE statistics slips, trips and falls account for around 40% of all injuries recorded in schools.

However, although it is important to keep children safe and protected from major harm, many adults react strongly to any push towards a “cotton wool culture” for children.  People recognise the importance of free play and the need for children to learn risk-assessment by actually taking the odd risk.

In 2012 the HSE released a high level statement emphasising how important play is for children’s development and wellbeing.  Its key message to play providers (which includes schools) was ‘Those providing play opportunities should focus on controlling the real risks, while securing or increasing the benefits – not on the paperwork’.

The balancing between the need to take risks in order to learn and keeping vulnerable children safe is something both parents and schools struggle to maintain.  However, you have a right to expect that your child will be safe at school and be protected from serious physical and psychological injury while they in their school’s care.

You could be entitled to make a personal injury claim, more detailed information can be found here. To speak to someone now about your claim, call us in complete confidence on 0845 345 4444, or fill in this contact form and we’ll get straight back to you.

The rear-end shunt – Is the Following Driver Always To Blame?

When it comes to rear-end motor vehicle collisions, there is a strong assumption that the rear vehicle is 100% at fault regardless of whether the driver of the first vehicle drove in a way that may have contributed to the accident.

The common belief “you should be able to stop in time no matter what the circumstances” is very entrenched in our general thinking. However, whist this is true in a majority of cases, the courts have, on occasion, found the driver of the front vehicle to be partly responsible for rear-end shunts.

Cases of negligence

The most common scenario in which the courts will apportion blame is when the driver of the first vehicle brakes without warning, and the second vehicle, unable to stop in time, drives into them. In order to apportion part of the blame, the driver in the rear vehicle must show negligence on the part of the driver of the front vehicle.

What is negligence?

Understanding negligence can be quite difficult for a lay-person without any legal knowledge or background, but it is something that can be useful to be aware of.

The famous definition of negligence is taken from a case held over 100 years ago, but is still in place today. It is either:

• The omission to do something which a reasonable man would normally do in the situation

Or

• Doing something that a reasonable person would not do in those circumstances

Proving negligence

When it comes to proving negligence in a motor vehicle accident of any kind, witnesses are crucial in assisting the court to establish the facts.

This was highlighted in one case from three years ago . This involved, a woman – Margaret Anderson – being rear-end shunted by a lorry driven by a Warburton’s employee.

She was driving on a dual carriageway and overtook a lorry. She then noticed smoke coming from the rear of her car and realised she needed to stop. According to her argument in court, she didn’t see the sign for an upcoming lay-by, and stopped just at the end of it. Her car was partially sticking out onto the carriageway and it was here that she was struck by the lorry.

A police officer who gave evidence stated that the claimant could have pulled her car further over to the left so it was not protruding over the white line marking the edge of the carriageway. A witness to the accident gave evidence that the driver of the lorry gradually reduced his speed to 20-25mph and the smoke became so thick that at one point he (the witness) could no longer see the lorry.

Who’s to blame?

The judge held that blame should be apportioned 2/3 to Mrs. Anderson and 1/3 to the lorry driver on account that although he had slowed down he was still driving too fast for the conditions. Margaret Anderson had to take a greater portion of the responsibility as the judge ruled that her panic was not sufficient reason for not seeing and using the lay-by to park her car safely. Also when she did stop her car, she could have manoeuvred it into a safer position further off the carriageway.

Will the shunter ever be blameless?

It is rare for the shunter to be held totally blameless. In another case, from the 60s , the driver of the rear vehicle was held to be 20% liable even though the lorry that he drove into was found to have no rear lights or reflector, and it was blocking half of a snow-covered road at the time of the accident.

It has happened however, in a case from 2000 . Due to vehicle defects, the driver of a lorry came to an immediate halt without the rear brake lights activating. The cars immediately behind the lorry were able to swerve onto the hard shoulder, however, there was nowhere for the driver of a lorry travelling behind the cars to go.

The driver was not travelling at excessive speed, and although he applied his brakes, he was not able to stop in time to avoid rear-shunting the lorry in front of him.

The judge held that safe driving speeds and distances were those at which a driver was capable of dealing with foreseeable events. The immediate and abrupt halt of a lorry did not fit into this category of a foreseeable event, in this case.

It all depends on the circumstances

It always depends on the individual circumstances of the case, as no two accidents will ever be the same. This means that cases involving rear-end shunts are considered on a case-by-case basis. It’s therefore important to seek legal advice as soon as possible, especially if you sustained a personal injury in the accident.

For more information on car accident claims, view our dedicated page. To find out what you may be entitled to and to get our expert ‘no win, no fee’ solicitors on board with your car accident claim, contact Injury Lawyers 4U today on 0845 345 4444. Alternatively, fill in the form to arrange a call back at your convenience from one of our team.