Ann. occup. Hyg., Vol. 46, No. 2, pp. 271-272, 2002
© 2002 British Occupational Hygiene Society
Published by Oxford University Press
Systematic Occupational Health & Safety Management
Sypol Limited Elsinore House, Buckingham Street Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire HP20 2NQ, UK
Systematic Occupational Health & Safety Management. Perspectives on International Development, Kaj Frick, Per Langaa Jensen, Michael Quinlan, Ton Wilthagen (Eds), Pergamon Press, Oxford, 2000, pp. 527.
Against a background of increasing globalization, there is a growing convergence of managerial approaches to risk management. These range from the development of an increasingly internationally respected Australasian standard on Risk Management (Australia and New Zealand Standards Institutes, 1999) to the growth of Corporate Governance guidelines and standards, from pressures on large corporations to meet the challenge for transparency and openness in their reports (Global Reporting Initiative, 2000) to calls from the UK Government for Directors to take more responsibility for the management of health and safety (Health and Safety Executive, 2001). This was the context in which significant developments in Occupational Health & Safety Management Systems (OHMS) were discussed at a conference held in Amsterdam in 1998, and modified versions of the papers have been published in this challenging and thought-provoking book. The editors identify four strands in the process by which increasing numbers of the larger organizations in the developed world have been adopting OHMS:active promotion by consultants and governments;an international debate and the adoption of national standards;a trend towards mandatory requirements for OHMS;spread of OHMS through ‘hybrid’ regulatory regimes which require self-audit. Within Europe the first three strands are the key drivers, while Australasia and the USA have been developing an approach that reduces the regulatory burden (through inspections) for organizations which meet the specified systems and self-audit criteria. From almost all quarters there is agreement that OHMS is the way to ill-health at work, although such implied claims are not matched by proper evaluation. The ‘success’ hypothesis posits that ensuring senior management commitment, and the integration of health and safety into the day-to-day decisions of organizations will reduce ill-health. The ‘paper tiger’ hypothesis suggests that many risks are ignored by such systems, which generate a great deal of paperwork and may create obstacles to worker involvement. The ‘sham’ hypothesis is openly critical of OHMS, seeing it as a pretext to deregulate. Exploring these issues, and seeking some of the practical outcomes of the development of OHMS within countries and within organizations, the papers are organized into four sections: Politics and Strategies; Changing Labour Markets and Business Structures; Implementation and Effects; Integration of OHMS into Business and Management Development. The IOHA was invited to review the then extant OHMS available around the world, and prepare a report for the ILO (International Occupational Hygiene Association, 1998). The result of the debate that this provoked led the ILO to launch a new international OHMS at a conference in Finland in October 2001 (International Labour Office, 2001). Whilst such a significant development occurred after the publication of the proceedings of the Amsterdam conference, this does not invalidate for a moment the views expressed in this excellent text. For occupational hygiene practitioners, the arguments marshalled within the book will assist in deciding on the advice to colleagues—‘Should we work towards OHSAS 18001 (British Standards Institution, 1999) or is HSE’s HS(G)65 (Health and Safety Executive, 1997) adequate?’ For those with a broader responsibility, in the political arena, there is a strong cautionary note that managerial solutions are desirable, but not when they exclude either the workforce or wider society through the regulatory framework. OHMS may offer a significant opportunity to improve the health of the workforce, or it appears it may be a smokescreen for deregulation. But then another convergent theme is the growth of Socially Responsible Investment, so perhaps whatever the deregulators may wish, OHMS will have to be a servant of organizations genuinely seeking better health and safety outcomes.
REFERENCES
Australia and New Zealand Standards Institutes. (1999) Risk Management Standard, AS/NZS 4360:1999.
British Standards Institution. (1999) OHSAS 18001:1999 Occupational Health and Safety Management Systems—Specification, BSI London.
Global Reporting Initiative. (2000) Sustainability Reporting Guidelines on Economic, Environmental and Social performance, Global Reporting Initiative, Boston, MA.
Health and Safety Executive. (1997) Successful health and safety management, 2nd edn, HSC, London 1997, HS(G)65, ISBN 0-7176-1276-7.
Health and Safety Executive. (2001) Directors’ responsibilities for health and safety, HSC London, 2001, INDG343, ISBN 0-7176-2080-8.
International Labour Office. (2001) Guidelines on occupational safety and health management systems, ILO/OSH 2001, International Labour Office, Geneva, 2001.
International Occupational Hygiene Association. (1998) IOHA report to ILO on an International Occupational Health and Safety Management System. Review and Analysis of International, National, and Regional Systems and Proposals for a New International Document, 31 August 1998.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||