NEBOSH

National Diploma in Occupational Health and Safety

• Unit course notes

SAMPLE
• Exam question and answer booklet
COURSE
• Mock exam
• Unit DNI guidance MATERIALS
NEBOSH
National Diploma in Occupational Health and Safety

UNIT A: Managing health and safety

A1 Element A1: Principles of health and safety management

E
PL
M
SA
A1 1.1 Contents

1.0 Learning outcomes 3

1.1 Moral, legal and economic reasons for the effective management of health and safety 4

Moral 4

The impact of organisational size on incident rates 6

Legal 7

Principle of self-regulation 7

Financial 13

E
Insured and uninsured costs 20

Employers’ liability insurance claims 21

Costs and benefits of health and safety management 22

PL
M
SA

© Astutis Ltd Element A1: Principles of health and safety management

2
1.0 1.0 Learning outcomes

On completion of this element, candidates should be able to:

XX Explain the moral, legal and economic reasons for the effective management of health
and safety.

XX Outline the societal factors which influence an organisation’s health and safety standards
and priorities.

XX Outline the uses of, and reasons for introducing a health and safety management system.

E
XX Explain the principles and content of an effective health and safety management system
including the reasons for integration with other management systems.

PL
M
SA

© Astutis Ltd Element A1: Principles of health and safety management

3
 Moral, legal and economic reasons for the effective
1.1
1.1

management of health and safety

Society exerts pressure through three overlapping and interacting spheres of influence, as
shown in Figure 1.1.

Moral Legal
Prevention
What is
Punishment
right or wrong?

E
Compensation

PL Financial
Insured and
uninsured costs
M
Figure 1.1: Moral, legal and financial drivers

Moral

Morals are the codes of conduct, or rules of behaviour imposed by a society regarding what is
right and wrong.
SA

For people to be killed, or seriously injured, or to suffer illness as a consequence of work is

clearly wrong.

Although, in the UK there are generally good standards of workplace health and safety, a lot of
harm is still caused each year.

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) publishes annual statistics of reported cases of workplace
injury and illness. As can be seen the numbers of cases of occupational illness is significantly
higher than the numbers of injuries. Numbers of reported accidents for 2014 / 15 are shown in
Table 1.1.

© Astutis Ltd Element A1: Principles of health and safety management

4
 Rate per 100 000 workers
Reported numbers
Injury type
2014 / 15 Average over
2014 / 2015
5 years

Fatal injuries (all workers) 142 0.46 0.53

Notified specified injuries

18 084
(e.g. broken arm or leg) 306.2

Reported ‘over 7 day’ 292.9* (over 3 years

injury (unable to do since RIDDOR
57 970
normal work for more change 2013)

E
than 7 days)

* Rate of non-fatal injury per 100 000 workers (recent HSE figures do not provide split of
non-fatal injury rates)
PL Table 1.1: Numbers of injuries reported 2014 / 15

The trend for workplace injuries has been generally downwards over the last twenty years but
is less clear since about 2008 / 09. Allowing for changes to the RIDDOR Regulations it seems as
if the downward trend is slowing if not plateauing off.
M
The two major causes of reported non-fatal injuries are:

XX slips and trips (28%)

XX handling, lifting and carrying (24%).

It should also be noted that there is substantial under-reporting of non-fatal injuries. Current
SA

levels of reporting are estimate at below 50%.

Data on occupational ill-health is compiled from a number of sources including self-reports,

medical reporting systems and the industrial injury disability benefit scheme.

Estimated numbers of cases of work-related ill health self-reported in 2014 / 15 are shown in
Table 1.2.

© Astutis Ltd Element A1: Principles of health and safety management

5
 Total cases (Prevalence) New cases (Incidence)
of self-reported work of self-reported work
Type of ill-health
related illness (central related illness (central
estimate) estimate)

All illnesses 1 243 000 516 000

Musculoskeletal disorders 553 000 169 000

Stress, depression and

440 000 234 000
anxiety

Table 1.2: Occupational ill-health reports 2014 / 15

E
Table 1.3 shows numbers of workplace deaths attributable to occupational cancers. The total is
more than 30 times that for fatal injuries.

PL Causes of death

Occupational cancers (general)

Asbestos related cancers

Estimate of deaths each year

8 000

4 000

Table 1.3: Typical numbers of annual deaths by occupational cancers

M
The impact of organisational size on incident rates

Generally speaking there is an inverse relationship between organisation size and

accident / incident rates, i.e. larger organisations tend to have lower rates of accidents and
SA

occupational illnesses than small organisations.

An explanation for this might be that larger organisations are: better organised, have a greater
awareness of health and safety, have higher rates of unionisation and worker engagement, better
training, and more resources to implement comprehensive health and safety arrangements.

WEB LINKS

HSE statistics:
www.hse.gov.uk/statistics

© Astutis Ltd Element A1: Principles of health and safety management

6
 Legal

There are two systems of law that influence the management of health and safety. These are
introduced in Element A2 and explored more fully in Elements A3 and A4.

The criminal law establishes a set of rules for acceptable behaviour. In the workplace the main
duties are covered by the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and the Management of Health
and Safety at Work Regulations 1999.

If the necessary standards are not met the enforcement agencies (either the Health and
Safety Executive (HSE), the Office of Road and Rail (ORR), or the local authority environmental
health department, depending on the nature of the work) may take preventive action through
prohibition notices (stopping activities posing a risk of serious injury) and improvement notices

E
(requiring improvements to achieve legal compliance), and / or punitive action to prosecute
offenders for breaking the rules.

PL The civil law allows an injured person to sue a third party for compensation for their injury or
loss if the injury was caused through the third party’s negligence. Civil action may also obtain
an injunction to stop a continuation or recurrence of harmful behaviour.

Principle of self-regulation
M
The Robens Report (which led to the creation of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974)
advocated a goal-based approach to health and safety regulation and also expressed the need
for a ‘more effectively self-regulating system’.

It was hoped at the time that this would grow out of an increased atmosphere of communication
SA

and co-operation between employer and employees, capitalising on the role of the Trade
Unions.

In reality a hybrid approach developed in the UK, with the HSE taking the lead in the publication
of guidance and advice leaving much of industry in a position of following their lead rather than
taking the initiative.

The approach has generally been successful with rates of workplace fatalities, injuries and
illnesses decreasing.

The debate over the merits of self-regulation (and the broader issue of deregulation) over state
regulation is part of a broader political and philosophical argument about the required levels
of state involvement in and regulation of business activities.

© Astutis Ltd Element A1: Principles of health and safety management

7
 In the 1980s, Margaret Thatcher’s Government embraced the ideology of a free market
economy and began the process of reducing burdens upon business, publishing two discussion
papers entitled Building Business, Not Barriers and Lifting the Burden, which clearly stated the
government position on the matter.

In 1992 John Major’s government responded to on-going calls from business and the
Conservative Party to lift the burden on business by launching a deregulation initiative aimed
at removing unnecessary red tape from business.

Lord Sainsbury was appointed to head up a central Deregulation Task Force overseeing eight
Business Task Forces as part of the Cabinet Office. The Government position at the time was
that:

E
A certain amount of regulation is essential, not least to ensure public safety and
promote quality standards, but these benefits have to be weighed against the cost of
enforcing regulation and complying with it.
PL The Task Forces were expected to examine the jungle of regulation embarking on a new
blitz on regulation leading to a bonfire of unnecessary controls moving from regulation for
regulation’s sake to reduce the burdens on business. Alternatives to State regulation, such as
public education programs, codes of practice, economic incentives for business to improve and
in particular, self-regulation by industry were also considered.
M
Prior to the final report of the Deregulation Task Force, the Deregulation and Contracting Out
Bill 1994 was laid before Parliament. It proposed wide-ranging powers for the Secretary of State
for Employment to remove existing health and safety legislation, among others, effectively
enabling ‘fast track’ deregulation.
SA

The Final Report of the DTI’s Deregulation Task Force was unveiled in 1995. It was criticised by
the Trades Unions over its big industry bias and clear agenda of reducing financial burdens on
business, alleging a hidden agenda of lessening the protection of employees in the workplace.
The Trades Unions also challenged the Government regarding what it considered to be a
‘burden’ and whether those burdens were ‘perceived’ or real. The Trades Union position was
that many of the:

…burdens are perceived rather than real and that in practice they are far outweighed
by burdens imposed on such businesses as a result of failure to manage health and
safety effectively.

© Astutis Ltd Element A1: Principles of health and safety management

8
 The HSC was simultaneously conducting its own review of the relevance and usefulness of
over 400 separate pieces of health and safety legislation. The HSC review came out firmly
against deregulation and proposed re-regulation – simplifying and streamlining the law and
introducing new packages of regulations on hazards not yet covered by existing legislation.

The report was presented to the DTI’s Deregulation Task Force, and recommended the repeal
of seven pieces of primary legislation and ninety four sets of regulations, together with a
greater shift from detailed prescriptive requirements towards general and simple goal-based
requirements.

It further recommended that the self-employed and small businesses remain covered by
legislation but were better supported with additional advice and assistance.

E
The New Labour administration set up the Better Regulation Task Force in 1997:

To advise the Government on action to ensure that regulation and its enforcement are

PL proportionate, accountable, consistent, transparent and targeted.

The Task Force became the Better Regulation Commission on 1 January 2006. In October 1999,
the task force published its interim report defining self-regulation as:

…the means by which members of a profession, trade or commercial activity are bound
by a mutually agreed set of rules which govern their relationship with the citizen, client
M
or customer.

Self-regulation carries, it was argued, numerous advantages being: more flexible, more readily
complied with, more relevant to the needs of a particular industry, able to ensure confidence
in an entire industry, more cost-effective and able to lead to a better relationship between
industry and clients.
SA

The Lofstedt Review (2011) is the latest UK Government commissioned review of health and
safety regulation. Its purpose is to:

Consider the opportunities for reducing the burden of health and safety legislation on
UK businesses whilst maintaining the progress made in improving health and safety
outcomes.

Opponents of the review have criticise the appointment of Professor Ragnar Lofstedt as chair
of the review, alleging his track record in the USA as an advocate of deregulation in the areas of
environmental protection and food safety introduces a bias towards this end.

© Astutis Ltd Element A1: Principles of health and safety management

9
 Hazards magazine has also criticised Lofstedt for his view that tighter regulatory controls on
industry mean an unjustified bill for firms that comply with the law and a disadvantage in global
markets.

Hazards magazine has criticised the UK Government, alleging that its agenda is driven by risk
envy of global competitors that do not abide by strict rules governing safety and decency at
work. Lofstedt’s view that tighter regulatory controls on industry leads to an unjustified bill for
firms and a disadvantage in global markets has also been challenged. The counter view is that
reacting to global competition in this way leaves the world’s dirtiest players to set the standard.

Lofstedt’s final report was published in November 2011. The main recommendations were:

XX Exempting self-employed people whose work activities pose no potential risk of harm to

E
others from health and safety law.

XX The HSE should review all its ACoPs with the initial phase of the review completed by

PL XX

XX
June 2012.

The HSE should undertake a programme of sector-specific consolidations to be completed

by April 2015.

The HSE is given the legal authority to direct all local authority health and safety inspection
and enforcement activity, in order to ensure that it is consistent and targeted towards
the most risky workplaces.
M
XX The original intention of the pre-action protocol standard disclosure list is clarified and
restated and that regulatory provisions that impose strict liability should be reviewed by
June 2013 and either qualified with ‘reasonably practicable’, where strict liability is not
absolutely necessary, or amended to prevent civil liability from attaching to a breach of
those provisions.
SA

In January 2012, HSE commissioned research to help decide if the core set of health and safety
regulations could be consolidated in any way to provide clarity and savings for businesses.

The research report written by Richard Matthews QC, Consolidation: the practicality and effects
of the options for consolidating health and safety Regulations, was published in December 2012.

In April 2013 The Health and Safety (Miscellaneous Repeals, Revocations and Amendments)
Regulations 2013 came into force.

© Astutis Ltd Element A1: Principles of health and safety management

10
 The ‘red tape challenge’ was introduced by the 2010 to 2015 Conservative and Liberal
Democrat coalition government as a cross-Government programme to tackle the stock of
what they perceived to be ‘unnecessary and over-complicated regulation’. The intention of
the programme is to reduce the burdens for business and society, save taxpayers money and
support economic growth. The initiative continues under the current Conservative government
and is said to have scrapped or improved 84% of health and safety legislation.

The Deregulation Act 2015 became law, on 26 March 2015. It provides for the removal or
reduction of burdens on businesses, civil society, individuals, public sector bodies and the
taxpayer. These include measures relating to general and specific areas of business, companies
and insolvency, the use of land, housing, transport, communications, the environment,
education and training, entertainment and alcohol, public authorities and the administration

E
of justice. In addition, the Act repeals legislation that is no longer of any practical use.

Part 1 of the Act ‘Measures affecting the workplace: general’ includes a number of modifications

PL to health and safety legislation, notably:

XX Limiting the scope of the general duty on self-employed persons section 3 of the Health
and Safety at Work atc Act 1974, by applying the duty to those self-employed persons
carrying out certain activities on a prescribed list, rather than all those who are self-
employed.
M
XX Extending the exemption for turban wearing Sikhs from wearing a safety helmet from
construction sites to all workplaces (except in urgent response to hazardous situations
such as fire or riots, or if a member of HM Forces and taking part in a military operation).
SA

© Astutis Ltd Element A1: Principles of health and safety management

11
 WEB LINKS

Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1974/37

Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999

www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1999/3242/contents/made

Lofstedt review: Reclaiming health and safety for all: An independent review of
health and safety legislation, November 2011
www.gov.uk/government/publications/reclaiming-health-and-safety-for-all-lofstedt-
report

E
Consolidation: the practicality and effects of the options for consolidating health and
safety regulations report by Richard Matthews QC
www.hse.gov.uk/legislation/assets/docs/consolidation-report-2012.pdf

PL The Health and Safety (Miscellaneous Repeals, Revocations and Amendments)

Regulations 2013
www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/448/contents/made

Deregulation Act 2015

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/20/contents/enacted
M
SA

© Astutis Ltd Element A1: Principles of health and safety management

12
 Financial

Accidents clearly cost money as a consequence of injured people, damaged plant and machinery
and wasted product.

The total economic cost of workplace injuries and ill health includes both the financial costs
incurred (e.g. lost production and healthcare costs) and a valuation of the human costs (e.g.
impact on quality of life or consequences of loss of life).

In 2013 / 14 the HSE estimated the total cost to society of workplace injury and illness to be
£14.3 billion with around 2 / 3 of the cost attributable to illness as shown in Figure 1.2

E
£4.9 bn Injury
PL £9.4 bn Illness
(equivalent to unit
cost of £18 700
per case)
£14.3 bn
Cost of workplace
injury and illness
2013/2014
(equivalent to
unit cost of
£1.6m per fatal
injury, £7 500 per
non=fatal injury)
M
Figure 1.2: Estimated total cost of workplace injuries and illness 2013 / 14

These figures are around 18% lower than the 2004 / 05 figures but broadly consistent with
SA

2009 / 10 figures. The costs of injuries have decreased by ⅓ over this period whereas the costs
of illness remain broadly the same.

The total cost figure can be apportioned between the costs to individuals, employers and the
government as shown in Figure 1.3. and Table 1.4.

© Astutis Ltd Element A1: Principles of health and safety management

13
 Costs to Costs to Costs to Costs to
Britain individuals employers Government
(Society)

£14.3 bn £8.2 bn £2.8 bn £3.4 bn

Figure 1.3: Total costs apportioned by bearer

E
Cost bearer

Cost category
Government / 

PL Productivity costs

Health and
rehabilitation
costs
Individuals


Employers


taxpayer


M
Admin and legal
costs   
Employers’
Liability
Compulsory  
SA

Insurance

Non-financial
human costs 
Table 1.4: Cost components by bearer

© Astutis Ltd Element A1: Principles of health and safety management

14
 Employers / organisational costs

The HSE estimates that occupational injuries and illnesses cost the UK in the region of £20 billion
to £30 billion each year if the total costs to individuals, employers and society are considered.

The costs of highly visible accidents involving large scale loss of life or major property damage
as a result of fire and explosion are often determined by official inquiries.

XX The BP Texas City fire and explosion in 2005 cost over $21 million in fines, $2 billion in civil
claims, and $1 billion in reinstating the site.

XX The Buncefield oil refinery fire in 2005 is believed to be the most expensive accident in
UK history with a total cost of over £1 billion, including £9.5 million in fines.

E
Smaller accidents have proved much more difficult to cost as relatively few companies have
systems in place to quantify them.

PL Over thirty years ago the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) gave evidence to the Robens
Committee on Health and Safety at Work, stating:

At the company level, if a readily applied and simple formula could be devised by which
the financial loss caused by accidents and diseases could be measured, it would make a
valuable contribution towards reducing industrial accidents and occupational ill-health.
M
In 1989 the HSE began a series of five case studies with organisations from different industrial
sectors with the aim of developing a means accurately identifying the full cost of accidents. The
study findings were published 1993 in a HSE Guidance booklet The Costs of Accidents at Work
(HSG96), which is no longer available from the HSE.

The five participating projects were a construction project, a creamery, an independent

SA

transport company working with the creamery, a North Sea oil platform, and an NHS hospital.
All had a history of average, or better than average health and safety performance.

The study used a definition of ‘accident’ covering a broad range of losses including injury and
ill-health, damage to property, plant, materials and the environment, and the loss of business
opportunity.

All personal injury accidents were included, as were all other losses above a minimum reportable
level which was set at the minimum unit of product or its financial equivalent.

The study accounted separately for financial and opportunity costs.

© Astutis Ltd Element A1: Principles of health and safety management

15
 Financial costs are the basic costs incurred to return the situation to what it was before an
accident happened. This covers both material and labour costs.

Opportunity costs (or lost opportunity costs) include those incurred through people stood idle
or being unproductive as a result of dealing with the consequences of an accident and energy
costs from plant running idle and buildings being lit and heated.

The key findings of the study are presented in Table 1.5. The following should be considered in
interpreting the findings:

1 No major or catastrophic losses were experienced during the study.

2 No prosecutions or significant civil claims were undertaken during the study.

E
3 There was probably under reporting as a result of the minimum level of loss criteria for
reporting.

4 The financial values quoted are actual 1990 figures and have not been adjusted for
PL inflation.

Business

Construction
Total loss

£245 075
Annualised loss

£700 000
Representing

8.5% of tender
price
M
1.4% of operating
Creamery £243 834 £975 336
costs

1.8% of operating
Transport £48 928 £195 712 costs company
37% of profits
SA

14.2% of potential
Oil platform £940 921 £3 763 684
output

5% of annual
Hospital £99 285 £397 140
running costs

Table 1.5: HSG96 calculated losses for each organisation

© Astutis Ltd Element A1: Principles of health and safety management

16
 The HSE provided guidance in 2002 in ‘Reduce Risks – Cut Costs’ (INDG355), which identified
three methods for quickly and crudely estimating uninsured costs of accidents.

1 The uninsured costs of an accident are approximately 10 times the

insurance premiums paid.
2 Uninsured losses from accidents in smaller firms add up to £315 per
employee per year.
3 The average uninsured cost of an accident causing absence from work
is approximately £2 100.

As every business and every incident are different the only accurate way of
determining costs is to measure them. The HSE has devised an Incident Cost Calculator (see

E
Table 1.6) for the purpose.

Incident Cost Calculator

Date and time of incident
PL Description
Person(s) involved

Dealing with Incident (immediate action)

Examples Time Spent Cost (£)
M
First aid treatment
Taking injured person to hospital / home
Making the area safe
Fire fighting
Immediate staff downtime (work stopped)
SA

Other

Investigation
Examples Time Spent Cost (£)
Staff time to investigate and report
Meetings to discuss incident
Time spent with HSE / LA enforcement officer
Consultants fees
Other

Table 1.6 (1): Incident cost calculator

© Astutis Ltd Element A1: Principles of health and safety management

17
 Getting Back to Business
Examples Time Spent Cost (£)
Assessing / rescheduling work activities
Recovering work / production
Cleaning / waste disposal
Product reworking
Repairing damage
Hiring or purchasing tools, plant, equipment
etc.
Other

E
Business Costs
Examples Time Spent Cost (£)

PL Salary costs of injured person off work

Salary costs of replacement workers
Lost work time
Overtime costs
Recruitment costs for new staff
M
Contract penalties
Cancelled and lost orders
Other

Action to Safeguard Future Business

Examples Time Spent Cost (£)
SA

Reassuring customers
Providing alternative sources of supply for
customers
Other

Table 1.6 (2): Incident cost calculator

© Astutis Ltd Element A1: Principles of health and safety management

18
 Sanctions and Penalties
Examples Time Spent Cost (£)
Compensation claim payments
Solicitors fees and legal expenses
Staff time dealing with legal case
Fines and costs due to criminal proceedings
Increase in insurance premiums
Other

Other

E
Examples Time Spent Cost (£)

PL Total

Table 1.6 (3): Incident cost calculator

Making the costs of accidents explicit and drawing the information to the attention of
management may not be sufficient on its own to motivate managers to consider health and
M
safety factors as part of their business decision making processes.

The calculations of health and safety costs are unlikely to help unless the response to the
following variables is positive:

XX the significance of health and safety costs relative to other cost categories or company
SA

turnover in the company

XX the level of direct influence management action has over health and safety costs

XX the lag between management action and the effect on health and safety costs (so that
managers can see the benefits of their actions)

XX management access to information about the effects of management initiatives on health

and safety costs.

© Astutis Ltd Element A1: Principles of health and safety management

19
 Insured and uninsured costs

HSE Guidance on the real costs of accidents at work indicates that the uninsured costs of an
accident may be more than 10 times the insurance premiums paid. Figure 1.4 shows examples
of accident costs that would not be covered by employers’ liability insurance.

■ Injury, ill-health and damage £1 Insured costs

£10 Uninsured costs

■ Lost time ■ Damage to product, plant,
buildings, tools and
■ Extra wages / overtime
equipment

E
■ Sick pay
■ Clearing the site
■ Production delays
■ Investigation time
■ Fines
■ Excess on insurance
PL ■ Loss of contracts
■ Legal costs
claims
■ Loss of business reputation

Figure 1.4: Insured and uninsured accident costs

Insured
M
e.g. claims against e.g. production
employer and material disturbances and
damage product liability
Indirect
Direct
SA

e.g. investigation
e.g. sick-pay, costs, loss of goodwill,
reparations and hiring costs of
product damage replacements

Uninsured
Figure 1.5: Insured / uninsured costs and direct / indirect costs

© Astutis Ltd Element A1: Principles of health and safety management

20
 Employers’ liability insurance claims

The number of civil claims for compensation against employers as a result of accidents fell
steadily in the early twenty first century and the total cost of compensation cases in Britain has
remained, in real terms, static since 1989.

More than 850 000 people are injured or made ill as a result of their job each year. The
Association of British Insurers (ABI) put the numbers who gain compensation from their
employer at around 60 000 a year.

Average damages for an Employers’ Liability Insurance (ELI) claim are £7 500. Britain pays out
much less on civil compensation (as a percentage of GDP) than other major European countries
and about a third of the USA figure. The average cost of employers’ liability insurance is 0.25%

E
of total payroll costs and is the lowest in Europe.

In 1999 the ABI reported that the cost of claims and costs was 54% higher than the amount

PL that they received in insurance premiums. Since then the costs of ELI have been seen to rise
significantly. The major driver for this has been the global economy, not an increase in the
number of claims or the size of compensation awards.

Other factors include major increases in legal and medical costs (50% more than inflation)
largely because of failure to follow the civil procedure rules resulting in unnecessary costs.
M
SA

© Astutis Ltd Element A1: Principles of health and safety management

21
 Costs and benefits of health and safety management

If you think safety’s expensive, try an accident is an

often cited maxim which was brought back to the The Troodos shipping company
tanker M/T Haven (formerly Amoco
fore by Sir Stelios Haji-Iaonnou in his 2004 interview
Milford Haven) exploded, caught fire
on BBC Radio 4s ‘On the Ropes.‘ and sank off the coast of Genoa,
Italy in 1991, killing six Cypriot crew
Stelios also reflected that it takes years to build a members and leaking 50 000 tonnes
reputation, but it can be destroyed overnight. of crude oil into the Mediterranean.
Stelios (and his father) faced
Health and safety costs can be classified broadly manslaughter charges in Italy before
into two overall categories: eventually being cleared in the
Italian Supreme Court.

E
The costs of control – these are the costs
associated with risk assessment and the development and implementation of a health and
safety management system to manage preventive and protective measures. These costs tend

PL to be relatively stable.

Costs of
failure

Costs of
The costs of failure – the consequences of occupational
accidents or work related illnesses can lead to an increase in
existing costs as well as a potential reduction in income. These
costs will vary with the type and number of consequences.
M
control

Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) has been used to evaluate

Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA)
the costs and benefits of investment into health and
(1) Identify all costs and benefits on
safety management systems. CBA takes account of the basis of opportunity cost.
both private and external costs and benefits and (2) Convert all costs into monetary
attempts to measure them in monetary terms. A value.
SA

project (development of safety management system) (3) Conduct a sensitivity analysis –

i.e. consider the likelihood of the
is only worth undertaking if the discounted benefits cost or benefit occurring.
outweigh the discounted costs.
(4) Discount for the timing of the
costs and benefits – a £1,000
Applying cost-benefit analysis to health and safety benefit now is worth more than
£1,000 benefit in ten years time.
management systems can be difficult because of
the challenges of quantifying costs monetarily and
potentially long delays between action being taken
and the benefits becoming apparent.

Few, if any, leading companies have reached the point where the investment in their health and
safety management system is not delivering a net benefit.

© Astutis Ltd Element A1: Principles of health and safety management

22
 EXAM QUESTIONS

(a) Explain why organisations often identify the costs of health and safety control
measures much more easily than they identify the costs that can arise from poor
health and safety standards.
(6 marks)

(b) Outline, with examples, the meaning of the terms ‘insured’ and ‘uninsured’ costs
in connection with accidents and incidents at work AND outline the relative
size of these two costs in an organisation as demonstrated by accident costing

E
studies.
(4 marks)

Answers from the examiner’s feedback are on page 2 of the Unit A: Exam questions and
PL answers PDF----------------------------------------
M
EXAM QUESTIONS

A large public limited company (plc) has recently experienced a fire and explosion
resulting in multiple fatalities and extensive environmental damage. Outline a range
of consequences that may affect the company as a result of this incident.
SA

(5 marks)

Answers from the examiner’s feedback are on page 4 of the Unit

A: Exam questions and answers PDF---------------------------------
-------

© Astutis Ltd Element A1: Principles of health and safety management

23
NEBOSH
National Diploma in Occupational Health and Safety

Unit A: Managing health and safety

Exam questions and answers

from January 2010 to July 2017 SAMPLE
NEBOSH Examiners’ reports*

*NEBOSH Diploma Examiners’ reports can be downloaded by NEBOSH students from the NEBOSH website
 Unit A: Managing health and safety
Element – Principles of health and safety management
Element A1A1

 Relatively easy to quantify capital and running costs of providing control

(a) Explain why organisations often 6 measures
identify the costs of health and marks  Control measures are generally immediate and therefore easily visible
safety control measures much  Financial losses arising from poor health and safety standards are much
more easily than they identify the harder to identify, for reasons such as:
costs that can arise from poor - savings gained in terms of a reduction in accidents and incidents are not
health and safety standards. immediate but generally medium to long term
- costs of accidents and incidents of ill health may not be fully understood
and there may be no adequate procedure in place to collect such costs,
either because of lack of relevant expertise or the time needed to collect
such information
- difficult to assess the realistic cost of loss of productivity, reputation,
good will, etc.

(b) Outline, with examples, the 4  Costs normally covered by insurance would include those associated with
meaning of the terms ‘insured’ and marks employer’s liability insurance, public liability and fire, for example.
‘uninsured’ costs in connection with  Uninsured costs arising from accidents and incidents at work include:
accidents and incidents at work damage to property, repair of plant and the cost of any clean up required.
AND outline the relative size of  Uninsured costs are typically between eight and thirty six times greater than
insured costs. (Note: These figures are from the HSE guidance HSG96,
these two costs in an organisation
which has since been replaced with those from more recent HSE guidance
as demonstrated by accident
on the cost of accidents at work. The more recent guidance indicates that
costing studies. the uninsured costs of an accident may be more than 10 times the
insurance premium paid.)

2 Exam question information: January 2010 / compulsory

 Unit A: Managing health and safety
Element A1 – Principles of health and safety management

HSG65 and OHSAS 18001 are nationally HSG65 OHSAS 18001

recognised health and safety management models. Policy Policy
development

Continual Improvement

Organising Organisational
development
(a) Select ONE of the health and safety 6
OH&S policy
management system models marks Planning and
Management
Auditing review
mentioned above AND draw a implementing Planning

labelled diagram showing the main

Developing
Implementation
elements of the model and any links Measuring
performance
techniques of
planning,
Checking and and operation
measuring and corrective action
between those elements reviewing

Reviewing
performance Feedback loop to
improve performance

(b) For your chosen model, identify the 4

system elements into which the marks
following activities would fit:
HSG65 OHSAS 18001
i. Promotion of employee competence
i. Organising i. Implementation and operation
ii. Setting and revising of health and
ii. Planning and implementing ii. Planning
safety objectives iii. Checking and corrective
iii. Measuring performance
iii. Carrying out health surveillance action
iv. Organising
iv. Establishing health and safety iv. Implementation and operation
responsibilities for individuals.

3 Exam question information: July 2010 / compulsory

 Unit A: Managing health and safety
Element A1 – Principles of health and safety management

A large public limited company (plc) has recently Consequences include:

experienced a fire and explosion resulting in multiple  Possibility of criminal prosecution by the relevant enforcing authority
fatalities and extensive environmental damage.  Initiation of civil actions for damages
 Regulators could have less trust in the organisation in the future
 Licences could be lost
 Could be more stringent requirements for issue of licences in the future
(a) Outline a range of consequences that 5
 Likely to be direct costs to the company, such as the cost of clearing up
may affect the company as a result of marks the accident (not usually covered by insurance)
this incident.  Likely to be a variety of indirect costs, such as the effect on the morale of
the work force; difficulty recruiting new staff; failure to supply a promised
output; loss of confidence among shareholders and investors; loss of
reputation amongst the companies’ clients and its immediate community.
(b) As a result of the incident, shareholders 5
in the company have raised concerns marks
about the risk management  The purpose of the Turnbull/Financial Reporting Council guidelines on
arrangements that are in place and ‘internal control’ is to ensure that good risk management practice is in
have called into question the Board’s place in order to safeguard the organisation’s assets and shareholders’
annual statement that was provided as investments, to minimise losses and improve profitability and to assist in
compliance with legal obligations.
part of compliance with the
 The guidelines relevance to this type of incident is that many of the
Turnbull/Financial Reporting Council
risks they are designed to manage are realised in such an incident. The
guidelines on ‘internal control’. risks typically relate to health, safety and the environment, business
continuity, financial stability and customer relations. Following the
Explain the purpose of these guidelines guidelines should reduce considerably the probability of such an
and why they are relevant to this type of incident occurring.
incident.

4 Exam question information: January 2011 / compulsory

Unit A: Managing health and safety
Element A1 – Principles of health and safety management

Outline ways in which a health and 10 Health and safety practitioners can evaluate their own practice in a
safety practitioner could evaluate and marks number of ways:
 Measuring the effect of changes and developments they have
develop their own competence
implemented in their organisation
 Setting personal objectives and targets and assessing their
performance against them
 Reviewing failures or unsuccessful attempts to produce change
 Benchmarking their practice against that of other practitioners and
against good practice case studies or information
 Seeking feedback from others in the organisation and as part of the
annual appraisal of their performance by senior management.

Health and safety practitioners can develop their own practice by:
 Obtaining a recognised professional qualification to further improve
their core knowledge and competence
 Keeping up to date by undertaking training in relevant areas
 Participating in CPD schemes
 Ensuring they have access to suitable information sources
 Networking with peers at safety groups and conferences
 Seeking advice from other competent practitioners and consultants
 Initiating and following a personal development plan.

5 Exam question information: July 2011 / compulsory

 SAMPLE
NEBOSH National Diploma
Unit A mock exam

To help you with your revision and

exam preparation for the NEBOSH
National Diploma Unit A exam, we
are offering you the opportunity to
complete a mock exam for this Unit.

Questions and answers

The exam questions have been put together from past NEBOSH
Diploma exam papers by our NEBOSH qualified tutor and marker.
Your answers will be marked by your tutor and your paper, with their
feedback, returned to you within 4 weeks.

Handwritten or typed?

We recommend that you handwrite your answers to give yourself

practice for the real exams. 3 hours is a long time to write legibly
for, and the more practice you have the better! To help you we
have provided an exam style booklet for you to print out and
complete.

How long?
We suggest you set aside 3 hours to sit the mock exam, as though it
was the real thing. If this is not possible we suggest you break down the
questions, depending how much time you have. As a guide you should
allow 15 minutes to answer a10 mark question from Section A and 30
minutes to answer a 20 mark question from Section B.

© Astutis Ltd 2017

 Submission
You can submit your mock exam to us either by post or by email.

By post:
Print out the answer booklet, complete it by hand and return to us:

NEBOSH Diploma Mock Exam

[Your tutor’s name]
Astutis Ltd
6 Charnwood Court
Parc Nantgarw
Cardiff
CF15 7QZ

By email:

Print out the answer booklet, complete by hand, scan and save …
… OR …

… word process your answers and return to us by email:

 Send to your tutor

 Copy in [email protected]
 The subject of your email should be: NEBOSH Diploma Mock
Exam

© Astutis Ltd 2017

THE NATIONAL EXAMINATION BOARD IN OCCUPATIONAL
SAFETY AND HEALTH

NEBOSH NATIONAL DIPLOMA IN OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND

SAFETY

Unit A: Managing health and safety

Date XXXXXXXXXXXX
3 hours, 0930 to 1230

10 minutes reading time is allowed before the start of this examination. You may not write
anything during this period.

Answer both Section A and Section B

SECTION A
This section contains six questions. Answer ALL SIX questions.
All questions carry equal marks.
The maximum marks for each question, or part of a question, are shown in brackets.
You are advised to spend about 15 minutes on each question.
Start each answer on a new page.

1 (a) Outline reasons for establishing effective consultation

arrangements with employees on health and safety matters in
the workplace (4)

(b) Outline a range of formal and informal consultation

arrangements that may contribute to effective consultation on
health and safety matters in the workplace. (6)

2 Human failure was identified as a significant factor in an

accident involving a crane. An employee was seriously injured
when struck by material being transported by the crane.

Outline the types of human failure which may have contributed

to the accident AND in EACH case give examples relevant to
the scenario to illustrate your answer. (10)

© Astutis Ltd 2017

3 (a) With reference to relevant case law, explain the meaning of
'vicarious liability' in civil law AND describe the circumstances in
which an employer will have vicarious liability for the acts of
employees. (5)

(b) Describe the principle of 'strict liability' in civil law. Illustrate

your answer with ONE example of where such liability exists
AND explain clearly the criteria for liability in the example you
choose. (5)

4 A Health and Safety Executive inspector visits a small, limited

company. The inspector decides to serve a prohibition notice on
the employer in respect of an unguarded machine.

(a) Identify the legal criteria that must be satisfied before a

prohibition notice may be lawfully served. (2)

(b) If the employer chooses to appeal against the notice identify the
effect of the appeal AND the timescale within which an appeal
must be made. (2)

At a subsequent visit the inspector discovers that the unguarded

machine is still in use by an employee and that this activity has
been agreed by the Operations Director. The inspector decides
to bring a prosecution against the Operations Director by virtue
of Section 37 of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 in
respect of the breach of the prohibition notice.

(c) Outline the legal criteria that the inspector would need to satisfy
to bring a successful prosecution. (3)

(d) Identify the maximum penalties that would be available on

conviction of the Operations Director. (3)

© Astutis Ltd 2017

5 Regulation 7 of the Management of Health and Safety at Work
Regulations 1999 requires that employers appoint persons to
assist them in complying with their legal health and safety
obligations.

(a) Outline the main requirements of this regulation. (4)

(b) Outline the key areas of strategic involvement of the health and
safety professional with respect to developing and maintaining
an employers' health and safety management system. (6)

6 Outline the issues that should be considered when planning a

health and safety inspection programme.
(Information on the specific workplace conditions or behaviours
that might be covered in an inspection is NOT required) (10)

© Astutis Ltd 2017

 SECTION B
This section contains five questions. Answer THREE questions only.
All questions carry equal marks.
The maximum marks for each question, or part of a question, are shown in brackets.
You are advised to spend about 30 minutes on each question.
Start each answer on a new page.

A low pressure storage vessel is connected via pipework to a

7
manufacturing plant which could, in the event of malfunction,
generate a pressure great enough to rupture the vessel. To
prevent this a pressure detector is installed in the low pressure
storage vessel. If pressure starts to rise above an acceptable
level the detector activates a valve control system. This in turn
closes the inlet valve to the vessel isolating it from excessive
pressure. It has been estimated that pressure great enough to
rupture the low pressure storage vessel would be generated once
every four years on average. Reliability data for the system is
given below:

(a) Construct an event tree for the protective system described

above AND use it to calculate the frequency of a rupture of the
low pressure storage vessel. (12)

(b) It is proposed that, in addition to the protective system described

above, the low pressure storage vessel is also fitted with a
suitable pressure relief valve (reliability 0.9). Assuming that the
vessel would only rupture if both the protective system and the
pressure relief valve failed at the same time, calculate the
frequency of rupture of the low pressure storage vessel in these
circumstances. (4)

(c) Outline the issues that would need to be considered when

deciding whether both protective systems were needed on the
low pressure storage vessel. (4)

© Astutis Ltd 2017

8 The case of R v Swan Hunter Shipbuilders Ltd and Another
[1982] arose from a serious fire during a ship repair at Swan
Hunter's shipyard. Swan Hunter were convicted in the Court of
Appeal.

(a) Identify the specific provisions of the Health and Safety at Work
etc Act 1974 under which Swan Hunter Shipbuilders Ltd (Swan
Hunter) were prosecuted AND in EACH case outline the reasons
why the company was convicted. (6)
(b) The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999
were not in force at the time of this case. Had these Regulations
been in force, identify the requirements of the Regulations under
which Swan Hunter could have been prosecuted specifically in
connection with the fire incident AND outline reasons in EACH
case.
Requirements in the Regulations relating to competent health and
safety assistance and emergency procedures should be excluded. (8)

(c) The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999

are supported by an Approved Code of Practice and guidance. In
criminal proceedings outline the legal status of:

(i) an Approved Code of Practice.

(3)
(ii) Guidance.
(3)
9 Company A engaged the services of Contractor 8 to undertake
repair work inside a storage tank. The production supervisor of
Company A issued a permit-to-work for Contractor B's employees
to enter the tank to undertake the work. The work involved the
use of flammable
solvents and Contractor B's employee was badly burned when
some of the solvent was spilled from an open bucket and was
ignited by an ordinary hand-lamp that had been provided for their
use by Company A.
With reference to possible breaches of the Health and Safety at
Work etc Act 1974 and the Management of Health and Safety at
Work Regulations 1999, in this scenario, outline the company or
individuals who may have committed breaches AND the specific
legal requirements that may have been breached.
Your answer should include relevant case law and an explanation
(20)
of its relevance.
© Astutis Ltd 2017
10 A fast-growing manufacturing organisation employs 150 people.
Health and safety standards at the organisation are poor as
arrangements have developed in an unplanned way without
professional advice. The organisation has managed to avoid any
serious accidents and staff at all levels do not seem particularly
concerned. However, two employees have recently experienced
near miss incidents and have complained jointly the Health and
Safety Executive (HSE). A subsequent visit by a HSE inspector in
connection with the near miss incidents has resulted in the issue
of three improvement notices.
The managing director wishes to dismiss the two employees
whom he has described as troublemakers.

(a) Explain what advice a health and safety adviser should give to
the managing director about the proposed disciplinary action
against the employees who have complained. (5)

(b) Outline steps that could be taken to gain the support of the
workforce in improving the health and safety culture in the
organisation. (15)

11 A forklift truck is used to move loaded pallets in a large

distribution warehouse. On one particular occasion the truck
skidded on a patch of oil. As a consequence the truck collided
with an unaccompanied visitor and crushed the visitor's leg.

(a) Outline reasons why the accident should be investigated. (4)

(b) The initial responses of reporting and securing the scene of the
accident have been carried out. Outline the actions which should
be taken in order to collect evidence for an investigation of the
accident. (8)

(c) The investigation reveals that there have been previous skidding
incidents which had not been reported and the company therefore
decides to introduce a formal system for reporting 'near miss'
incidents. Outline the factors that should be considered when
developing and implementing such a system. (8)

© Astutis Ltd 2017

 NEBOSH
National Diploma
Unit A
Answer booklet for

UNIT A mock exam

Name:

Remember to start each question on a new page and to enter the

question number in the box at the top right of the page.

Please note: This booklet has been designed to be printed out

and the mock exam completed by hand, to give you practice for
the real exam.

© Astutis Ltd 2017

 Enter question
number in this box

Leave this column blank

for feedback from your
marker

© Astutis Ltd 2017

 NEBOSH
Diploma in Occupational Health and Safety

DNI Unit DNI assignment guidance

E
PL
M
SA
 Guidance from NEBOSH

All the information you need for completing your Unit DNI assignment is available to download
from the NEBOSH Diploma Assignment brief Unit DNI webpage of the NEBOSH website.

E
PL
M
SA

The Unit DNI Candidate Guidance is

essential reading for anyone before they
start the Unit DNI assignment, along with
the additional information and support we
offer in the following pages.

© Astutis Ltd 2017 Unit DNI assignment guidance

2
DNI D.2 What is the aim of the Unit DNI assignment?

The aim of the Unit DNI assignment is to produce an overall review of the health and safety
arrangements in an organisation and indicate the organisation’s priorities for the future.

This assignment enables you to demonstrate the ability to carry out a range of activities
expected of a competent occupational health and safety practitioner.

When carrying out the Unit DNI assignment your focus will be on applying the knowledge

E
and understanding you have developed in the course to your workplace. This will provide
you with opportunities to:

PL XX

XX

XX

XX
carry out research

critically analyse and evaluate the information you gather

make recommendations for the workplace

present all of this in a formal report for senior managers and executives at your workplace.

You will need to refer to the material in the course notes on the role of the health and safety
M
practitioner when completing this part of the assignment.
SA

Page 2 (point 1) of the NEBOSH Unit DNI Assignment – guidance and information for
candidates gives you the information you need about the purpose and aim.

© Astutis Ltd 2017 Unit DNI assignment guidance

3
DNI D.3 When & where should I complete the assignment?

When?

You need to have completed your study for the other units before completing and submitting
your Unit DNI assignment to NEBOSH. There are a number of submission dates each year,
which are detailed on the NEBOSH Diploma exam dates page. The How do I submit my Unit DNI
assignment section of this guide gives you more information.

E
Where?

A suitable workplace must be chosen … ideally it will be your own workplace. The workplace
should be large enough to provide the opportunity for the review of health and safety

PL arrangements.

If the workplace is very large you should limit the area you consider to a department or a
division, to ensure that the assignment is manageable and the report can be completed within
the specified word limit.

If you do not have access to a suitable workplace, contact your tutor for advice.
M
Page 3 (point 4) of the NEBOSH Unit DNI Assignment – guidance and information for
candidates gives you the information you need about the assessment location.
SA

© Astutis Ltd 2017 Unit DNI assignment guidance

4
DNI D.4 What do I actually have to do?

Before you write the report

XX Decide on the workplace, department or division.

XX Find out about the health and safety arrangements within the organisation.

XX Review and critically analyse the management of health and safety.

XX Identify the top three priorities where improvements should be made.

E
Writing the report

PL The report should be between 8 000 to 12 000 words in total, excluding the References/
Bibliography and Appendices.

The report should be word processed (typed) and presented in an ‘approved manner’, which
means:

XX A4 page size
M
Remember to spell-check your
XX 2 cm margins top and bottom, left and right
report, or get someone else to
XX legible font, such as Arial read it through for you before
XX minimum font size of 11 pt you submit it to NEBOSH.

XX single line spacing

SA

XX numbered pages.

Note: Inappropriately presented assignments are liable to be returned.

Pages 3-4 (point 5) and pages 4-5 (point 8) of the NEBOSH Unit DNI Assignment –
guidance and information for candidates gives you the information you need about word
limits and formatting the report.

© Astutis Ltd 2017 Unit DNI assignment guidance

5