Whose risk is it anyway?
24 Feb 2010
Owners/operators in the process industries tend not to track exactly how many sub-contract workers are on site or how many are working for tier-two, tier-three or tier-four suppliers. This is, in part, because they believe that their principle contractors would be responsible in the event of a serious accident to, say, a tier-three sub-contract worker.
Increasingly, however, the burden for compliance is being shifted from the provider of goods or services to the procurer – as with the new European Directive on chemical safety, which clearly shifts responsibility to the buyer right across the entire supply chain, down through all the tiers of sub-contractors. This includes not only checking for proof of a supplier’s compliance to health & safety requirements, but also monitoring their status.
As Per Karschowski, Achilles Group regional director for western, central and eastern Europe, explains, most procurement professionals do ensure that principle contractors are compliant with health & safety working practices and legislative requirements. However, he adds, they also put too much trust in traditional contractual clauses with the principle contractor regarding responsibility for accidents caused by sub-contractors.
“Those procuring services must gain a greater visibility of their supply chain, through all the levels of supplier and sub-contractor relationships, to ensure full control over what happens on their own premises or within their sphere of influence,” warns Karschowski . “They must get closer to, and co-operate more closely with, principle contractors on a continuous and ongoing basis to take control of the process - beyond the signing of the contract.”
“Importantly, a sub-contractor should [contractually] be treated in the same way as you would a principle contractor. You forward the responsibility for health & safety issues on to your sub-contractors, but by using the same methodology as you use towards your principle contractor, so that you can ensure that all the way down the chain you maintain the same standards.”
The message here clearly is that process companies must do more to tackle this serious issue and wake-up to the dangers posed by non-compliance of a third-or forth-tier supplier on a site under their control.
