The value of healthand safety: 2012

Contents

The survey: in brief 011 Introduction 032 Characteristics of respondents 043 Salaries 074 Self-employed consultants 115 The top issues facing the health and safety function 12

AppendixSalary survey questions 21

© IOSH 2012

01

The survey: in brief

Highlights- the average salary for full-time in-

company health and safetyprofessionals is £41,657 – a 9 percent increase over the 2009 averageof £37,705

- over half (55 per cent) of the surveysample had a salary between£30,000 and £49,999, withearnings affected by a range offactors, including academicqualifications, experience,responsibility, organisation size andsector

- three fifths of consultants chargebetween £250 and £550 a day,while nearly a third (31 per cent)work more than 200 remunerateddays per year

- over a third of respondents feel thattheir status within the organisationhas increased, and the majority (84per cent) feel valued by theirorganisation

IOSH’s sixth salary and attitudes survey was completed by 3,939 people. Ninety-one per cent

of them were in-company health and safety professionals and 9 per cent self-employed

consultants. As with the last survey in 2009, the aim was to gauge the opinions of

professionals on a range of key issues, and to update our data on salary levels. The survey

provides a useful comparison with the past and a baseline for the future.

- over half (55 per cent) ofprofessionals feel that theirorganisation is more committed tohealth and safety than it was fiveyears ago – although this is a lowerproportion than that reported in2009 (61 per cent of employedrespondents)

- newcomers to the profession (thosewith less than five years’experience) made up 16 per cent ofthe sample – but in 2009 this figurewas 19 per cent and in 2005 it was55 per cent, suggesting successionissues in the future

- the economic situation was an issuefor practitioners – particularlyconcerns over shrinking budgets,job losses and corners being cut –while the UK government’sderegulatory agenda makes itharder to win over hearts andminds

- respondents reported an increasingneed to use economic arguments tomake the case for health and safety,but the survey revealed that morethan half of them did not know thefinancial value of their health andsafety interventions. IOSH’s Li£eSavings campaign and resourcescould help with this

- the survey also found thatrespondents feel the need tochange organisational culture onhealth and safety issues, and tointegrate health and safety intoeveryday business operations.Nearly half of respondents reportedthat they have been interactingmore frequently with professionalsin other disciplines.

Even though the respondents reportvarious challenges, the overwhelmingopinion is that health and safety is aworthwhile career: nearly nine out of10 continue to say they wouldrecommend it to others.

02

This report presents the findings of thesixth IOSH salary and attitudes survey.As with the last survey in 2009, theaim was to gauge the opinions ofhealth and safety professionals on arange of key issues, and to update ourdata on salary levels.

An invitation to take part in the surveywas sent in May 2012 to all IOSHmembers via Connect. The survey wasalso advertised in SHP magazine anddirect e-shots were sent in June to allIOSH members and readers of SHPonline.

The survey was completed by 3,939people, of whom 91 per cent were in-company health and safetyprofessionals and 9 per cent self-employed consultants. The surveypresents a snapshot of the professionin August 2012.

03

1 Introduction

Title and report format adapted from the 2005 Salary and Attitudes survey by MDHPercentages are rounded up or down to the nearest whole figure (except in tables)

Gender and ageOver three quarters of the sample weremale. More than two thirds of males,but less than half of females, wereaged 45 or over. Table 1 shows thecomposition of the sample by age andgender.

Organisation and positionThe 3,597 employed respondents and342 self-employed respondents wereasked which sector they mainly workedin. The 10 most frequent responses aregiven in Table 2.

For employed respondents, the overallpattern is similar to that in 2009, withconstruction continuing to be thelargest sector. The proportion inmanufacturing is larger than in 2009.Just under a third of self-employedrespondents worked in construction,perhaps reflecting higher demand orthe project-based nature of the work,which may lend itself more readily toconsultancy.

Over a third (37 per cent) of employedrespondents described their role asmanagers, and a further 18 per cent assenior managers/directors. A thirddescribed themselves as advisers.Nearly half (48 per cent) stated thatthey did not have any people reportingdirectly to them.

Professional experienceOver half (55 per cent) of employedrespondents had worked in a healthand safety role for over 10 years,slightly higher than in the previoussurvey, with a further 29 per centhaving five to nine years’ experience(Table 3). Sixteen per cent had been inthe profession for fewer than fiveyears, compared to 19 per cent in2009 and 55 per cent in 2005. If thistrend continues, it may becomedifficult to replace adequately theexperience of those who will retire orleave the profession.

Self-employed respondents tended tohave had longer health and safetyexperience. This pattern is perhaps notunexpected, as it would be unusual toset up as a consultant without severalyears’ knowledge and expertise.

Forty-five per cent of self-employedrespondents had been self-employedfor less than five years (compared to 58per cent in 2009). Seven per cent hadbeen self-employed for over 20 years(4 per cent in 2009). These findingsreinforce the information on employedrespondents’ experience and couldsuggest that the profession is ageingand not being replenished quicklyenough.

Arrival into current rolesTwo-fifths of employed respondentscame into their role through internalmoves from other health and safetyroles or from other disciplines, up fourpercentage points from the 2009survey. Thirty-five per cent had beenrecruited from another organisation.For 4 per cent it was their firstsignificant job after leaving education.

The reasons most frequently given forbecoming self-employed were toimprove control over the type of workthey did or to be their own boss, butnearly a third (31 per cent) had madethe decision following redundancy(compared to 25 per cent in 2009).

2 Characteristics of respondents

04

Age (years) Male Female Total

16–24 0.5 0.2 0.7

25–34 6.7 4.3 11.0

35–44 17.9 8.4 26.3

45–54 29.9 7.8 37.8

55–64 19.4 2.9 22.3

65+ 1.8 0.1 1.9

All 76.3 23.7 100.0

Table 1: Gender and age composition of the survey respondents (%)

Industrial sector Employed Self-employed

Construction 19 31

Manufacturing 18 18

Public administration and defence 14 7

Education and training 7 7

Professional, scientific and technical activities 6 6

Healthcare 5 5

Transportation and storage 5 4

Mining, quarrying (inc. natural gas andpetroleum extraction)

4 3

Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply 4 2

Wholesale and retail trade 2 2

Table 2: Industrial distribution (%), by employment status

Academic qualifications The proportions of both employed andself-employed respondents withacademic qualifications were higherthan in 2009, as Table 4 shows.

Health and safety qualificationsAs in earlier surveys, nearly allrespondents (98 per cent employedand 96 per cent self-employed) had atleast one specific health and safetyqualification. Table 5 gives theirresponses when asked which healthand safety qualifications they held(more than one answer could begiven).

IOSH membershipTable 6 shows that men and womenwere similarly distributed across thedifferent IOSH membership categories.Graduate membership was the onlycategory where there wereproportionally more women than men.

Thirty-seven per cent of employedrespondents were Chartered Membersor Chartered Fellows of IOSH. Twenty-four per cent were Graduate members,24 per cent Technician members and 8per cent Affiliates. Just under 8 percent stated they were not members ofIOSH at any level.

In the much smaller sample of self-employed consultants, 55 per centwere Chartered Members or CharteredFellows (44 per cent in 2009). Sixteenper cent were Graduate members, 17per cent Technician members and 8 percent Affiliates. Four per cent of self-employed respondents were not IOSHmembers (6 per cent in 2009).

05

Table 3: Health and safety experience (%), by employment status

Table 4: Respondents with academic qualifications (%) (2009 in brackets)

Table 5: Health and safety qualifications held (%)

Health and safety experience Employed Self-employed

0–4 years 16 6

5–9 years 29 16

10–19 years 40 38

20+ years 15 41

Academic qualification Employed Self-employed

Degree 43 (32) 42 (33)

Postgraduate 15 (12) 22 (14)

Health and safety qualification Employed Self-employed

NEBOSH certificate 54 44

NEBOSH diploma 35 37

Degree 7 6

Postgraduate 18 23

Membership category Male Female All

CFIOSH 2.5 0.8 2.1

CMIOSH 36.8 36.4 36.7

Grad IOSH 22.1 25.1 22.8

Tech IOSH 23.3 21.9 22.9

Affiliate 7.6 7.3 7.5

Retired 0.0 - 0.0

None 7.8 8.6 7.9

Table 6: IOSH membership (%), by gender

Membership of other bodiesRespondents were asked which otherbodies they or their organisationsbelonged to (Figure 1). The mostcommon answers given were the RoyalSociety for the Prevention of Accidents(RoSPA) (24 per cent), the InternationalInstitute of Risk and SafetyManagement (IIRSM) (20 per cent), theInstitute of EnvironmentalManagement and Assessment (18 percent) and the British Safety Council(BSC) (13 per cent).

ResponsibilitiesWe asked respondents to indicate thework area for which they hadresponsibility. Inevitably they commonlyhad more than one, as Table 7 reveals.While self-employed respondentscovered a similar breadth ofresponsibilities to in-company healthand safety professionals, they did so inconsistently lower proportions. Thisindicates, perhaps, a level of control inconcentrating their expertise ratherthan spreading themselves acrossseveral disciplines.

06

Table 7: Areas of responsibility (%), by employment status

Area of responsibility Employed Self-employed

Audit 80 76

Risk management 80 80

Training 80 77

Fire 71 58

Occupational health 65 59

Environment 58 48

Facilities 34 31

Security and quality control 25 17

Human resources 14 -

0 5 10 15 20 25

BIFM

BOHS

BSC

BSIF

CIEH

IEHF

IEMA

IIRSM

IRM

RoSPA

None

Other

Figure 1: Membership of other bodies (%)

Respondents told us what they earned,according to a range of salary bands(Table 8). Over half (53 per cent) ofrespondents had a salary between£30,000 and £49,999. Twenty-two percent earned £50,000 or more and thetop two per cent earned £100,000 ormore. Three per cent reported earningless than £15,000.

From the sample, 3,069 respondentschose to tell us their exact salary. Theaverage salary of these respondentswas £41,519.

The highest salary was £210,000 for asenior manager in Asia. The highestsalaries recorded in the UK were£180,000 for a senior manager in theSouth East of England and £156,000for a senior manager in Scotland. Thelowest individual salary (£13,800) wasfor an employed respondent workingmore than 35 hours per week – afemale Affiliate member of IOSH with apostgraduate qualification working inin the education sector.

Average salary, by employmentstatus and hours workedEmployed respondents working morethan 35 hours per week (2,813),spending all their time on health andsafety, had an average salary of£41,657. Not surprisingly, the averagesalary is lower for those working 16 to34 hours a week (100): £30,626. Somerespondents worked fewer than 16hours a week. The average of allsalaries provided by employedrespondents was £41,268 (a 9 per centincrease on the 2009 figure of£37,705), while for those working inthe UK it was £38,916.

Earnings for self-employed consultantswere generally higher. Those workingover 35 hours a week (100) averaged asalary of £56,031. The 29 respondentsworking 16–34 hours per week earnedan average salary of £31,172, whilethe 16 respondents working up to 16hours per week averaged £15,494.

Asked about recent salary increases,over a third (37 per cent) of allrespondents said they had received nopay rise at their last salary review; infact 3 per cent had taken a cut in pay.Nearly half (49 per cent) had received apay rise of up to 4 per cent with 12per cent receiving a 5 per cent increaseor more.

Average salary by genderThere was a statistically significantdifference in the salaries of men andwomen. The proportion of womenearning between £15,000 and£24,999 was double that of men. Agreater proportion of women thanmen earned £25,000–£35,000 – adifference of nine percentage points.Between £35,000 and £60,000 thesituation is reversed, favouring men byseven percentage points. The ‘glassceiling’ is most starkly illustrated by thefact that men are two and a half timesmore likely than women to be earning£60,000 or more.

Average salary varied not only bygender but also by industrial sector,experience and qualifications, as thefollowing sections illustrate.

3 Salaries

07

Table 8: Salary distribution (%), by employment status

Pre-tax salary (£) Employed Self-employed All

Less than 10,000 0.8 12.9 1.8

10,000–14,999 0.8 9.1 1.5

15,000–24,999 9.1 10.2 9.2

25,000–29,999 13.4 9.1 13.0

30,000–34,999 17.8 6.1 16.8

35,000–39,999 16.3 8.5 15.6

40,000–44,999 11.9 8.2 11.6

45,000–49,999 9.0 5.8 8.7

50,000–59,999 9.5 7.9 9.4

60,000–79,999 7.0 10.5 7.3

80,000–99,999 2.4 6.4 2.7

100,000 and over 2.1 5.3 2.4

08

Average salary by sectorMining and quarrying (includingextraction of natural gas andpetroleum) remains the best-paidsector, with an average salary of£69,546 reported (130 respondents).This represents an increase from the

2009 figure of £57,408. Table 9 showsaverage salary by sector for allrespondents.

Local government has been one of thelowest paid sectors since 2005. In thissurvey, the average salary for the sector

was 19 per cent below the average forall sectors. The education sector hadthe lowest average salary, increasing byonly 1 per cent since 2009.

Average salary by experienceThe average salary for those who hadmore than 20 years’ experience (507respondents) was £52,319. Thiscompared to an average salary of:

- £44,017 for those who had worked10–19 years (1,210 respondents)

- £37,671 for those who had worked5–9 years (870 respondents)

- £30,811 for those who had worked0–4 years (482 respondents).

Principal field of operation Average annualsalary (£)

Samplesize

Mining and quarrying (includes extraction ofnatural gas and petroleum)

69,546 130

Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply 50,948 107

Transportation and storage 45,278 151

Construction 44,777 579

Information and communication (includingtelecommunications)

44,538 58

Financial and insurance activities 43,748 62

Real estate activities 43,449 68

Professional, scientific and technical activities 41,821 176

Water supply, sewerage, waste management andremediation activities

41,783 67

Administrative and support service activities(includes employment agencies, travel agencies,cleaning services)

41,728 39

Average salary, all sectors 41,519 3,069

Accommodation and food service activities 40,695 45

Agriculture, forestry and fishing 39,442 14

Manufacturing 39,327 543

Other service activities (includes trade unions,membership organisations, religious and politicalorganisations, hairdressing and beauty treatments)

36,947 152

Human health and social work activities(includesnursing)

36,381 144

Wholesale and retail trade, repair of motorvehicles and motor cycles

36,286 76

Public administration and defence (Local authority,fire, police and ambulance services)

34,971 407

Arts, entertainment and recreation 34,538 44

Education 33,942 207

Table 9: Average salary by sector (sample sizes are for those who answeredboth the ‘salary’ and ‘principal field of operation’ questions)

Average salary by academicqualificationThose with MBAs (42 respondents)earned on average £69,251. Thosewith an MPhil or PhD (36) earned anaverage of £49,061. Those withmaster’s degrees (360) earned£49,429, but those with an MSc inhealth and safety (398) earned some£2,800 more, an average of £52,254 .Those with a NEBOSH diploma (953)earned an average of £43,753.Respondents with a degree earned an

average of £42,201 (1,325) and thosewith an HNC or HND (414) earned anaverage of £40,355. Figure 2 illustratessalary distribution by highest academic(not health and safety-related)qualification.

Average salary by IOSH membershipcategoryAverage annual salary also variedaccording to category of IOSHmembership, as shown in Table 10.IOSH membership category can be

considered a reasonable measure ofexperience, qualifications and level ofresponsibility, and thus salary levelswould tend to reflect this. The 9 percent salary increase reported in thissurvey doesn’t apply uniformly to allmembership categories. Interestingly,those at the higher levels of IOSHmembership reported a drop inaverage salary since 2009. The largestpercentage increment in salaries wasfor Affiliate members.

09

Other

None

Up to

GCSE

/'O' le

vel/C

SE

Up to

'A' le

vel/H

igher

or

(inc.

S/NVQ le

vel 3

)

HNC/HND o

r equ

ivalen

t

Degree

or e

quiva

lent

(S/NVQ le

vel 4

)

Mas

ter’s

deg

ree

(oth

er th

an M

BA)

MBA

MPh

il, Ph

D

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

Salary (£)

u

Membershipcategory

Average salary(£) 2012

Average salary(£) 2009

Change2009–2012 (%)

CFIOSH 57,328 58,484 -1.9

CMIOSH 48,280 42,847 +12.7

Grad IOSH 39,756 35,058 +13.4

Tech IOSH 35,237 33,748 +4.4

Affiliate 37,139 32,469 +14.4

None 33,846 31,384 +7.8

Table 10: IOSH membership category and average salary

Figure 2: Average salary by academic qualification

Average salary by area and level ofresponsibilityThe majority of respondents told usthat they were responsible for severalareas of their business. Nearly twothirds were responsible foroccupational health and over half forthe environment. Those withoccupational health included in theirrole (2,015 respondents) earned anaverage of £43,294; and those withsome responsibility for the environment(1,802) £42,951. Respondents whoseresponsibilities excluded environmentand occupational health but includedfacilities management (138) earnedless, at £36,803.

Equally, roles were reflected in salaries.The 549 senior managers or directorswho gave us information earned anaverage of £60,044; while managers(109) were drawing average salaries of£41,379; supervisors £34,592 (66) andadvisers £34,251 (994). A smallnumber of trainers (46) wasrepresented in the sample, with anaverage salary of £30,025.

Non-salary benefitsTable 11 shows some of the otherbenefits received by respondents. Overhalf received an IOSH subscription andnearly a third medical insurance. Over athird received a bonus. Eleven per centdid not receive any benefits. Otherbenefits mentioned included extraallowances, insurance and dividends,free rail or air travel, subscriptions(other than to IOSH), company vehiclesand flexible working.

10

Non-salary benefit Respondents

Pension scheme 61.1

IOSH subscription 50.7

Bonus 38.2

Company car or car insurance 37.8

Medical insurance 31.8

Share options 11.8

Commission 0.8

Other 16.9

Table 11: Proportion of respondents (%) receiving non-salary benefits

Daily charge ratesConsultants told us what they chargedclients (Figure 3). More than halfcharged up to £350 a day. Theproportion charging up to £250 a dayis five percentage points lower than in2009. One third charged between£351 and £550 a day. Sixteen per centcharged over £550 a day.

Sixteen per cent of consultantsreported that they had fared well asmore companies had outsourcedhealth and safety services but 15 percent said they had had to reduce ratesto secure new business. Twenty-nineper cent said they had fared worse inthe current economic climate but 41per cent reported no significant impact.

Days workedConsultants don’t seem to work asmany days as they used to. Fifteen percent of respondents worked more than250 ‘remunerated’ days per year. Thisis less than half that reported in 2009.Thirty-one per cent worked between200 and 250 days, also a substantialreduction, compared to the figure of50 per cent in 2009.

What influences health and safetypolicy in clients’ business?Respondents were presented with a listof factors and asked to rate how muchthey thought each one influencedhealth and safety policy in their clients’business.

Over three quarters felt that boardswere considerably influential or actedas the main drivers of companies’health and safety policy.

Over two thirds felt that trade unionshad a slight or no influence. Sixty-fiveper cent felt that health and safetypolicy was influenced by ‘knee jerk’reactions and 62 per cent bylegislation. Just over half (51 per cent)felt that the desire to improve thecompany’s reputation was drivinghealth and safety policy, whereas theneed to secure business was cited by65 per cent of respondents.

Less than half felt that the commercialadvantages of health and safety weredrivers. Pressure from insurancecompanies was seen by the majority asnot influential or only slightly so. Overthree quarters felt stories andprosecution reports in the media werenot influential in driving policy.

11

4 Self-employed consultants

up to £250

£251-£350

£351-£450

£451-£550

£551-£650

£651-£750

£751-£1,000

Over £1,0001% 5%

4%

6%

13%

20%27%

24%

Figure 3: Consultants’ average daily rate

Respondents were asked what theythought was the top issue facing thehealth and safety function. The top 10issues they mentioned are shown inFigure 4.

Economic situationNearly a third mentioned the currenteconomic situation. Shrinking budgets,pressure to cut costs and austeritymeasures had had an impact on healthand safety, maintenance and training.There was a lack of funding to

implement improvements and jobswere being lost. Respondents reportedcorners being cut and a reducedinvestment in safety.

There were concerns about lack ofresources for the Health and SafetyExecutive. Respondents wonderedwhether the Fee for Intervention wouldcause it to become reactive, and lesshelpful and proactive than before.

The biggest challenge is seen to beensuring employers still regard healthand safety as a critical and corefunction during a period of recession.Health and safety practitionersreported it challenging to justifyexpenditure to the board and tomaintain a high standard in the face ofbudget cuts. It was suggested thatpractitioners might need to be morerealistic about what companies couldafford and carry out more stringentcost-risk analysis. One specific examplecited by a respondent was the problemof balancing workplace safety with theneed for accelerated de-commissioningplans in the nuclear sector.

The pressure to make a business casefor health and safety is reflected in thereaction to the following statement, towhich two thirds of respondentsagreed or strongly agreed (Figure 5).

“Since the downturn, I need to useeconomic arguments more often tosupport the case for health andsafety.”

12

5 Top issues facing the health and safety function

Risk management

Claim culture

Health and wellbeing

Competence

Management responsibility

Legislation and deregulation

Government

Media image

Culture

Economic situation

2%4%4%

7%

7%

8%

8%

15%

15%

30%

Strongly disagree

Disagree

Agree

Strongly agree

Don’t know

27%

4%3%

18%

48%

Figure 4: Top issues facing the health and safety function

Figure 5: Economic arguments have to be used more often to make thecase for health and safety

When asked to estimate the financialbenefit from their organisation's mostsuccessful health and safetyintervention to date, a quarter put thefigure at over £10,000. However, overhalf of respondents could not providean answer (Figure 6). If practitionersneed increasingly to make an economicargument but are finding it hard toestimate the financial impact of healthand safety interventions, then makinga convincing business case will betough.

CultureThe second most mentioned topic (15per cent) was the need to changeculture and to implement behaviouralsafety programmes. Respondents felt itwas a priority to integrate health andsafety into everyday businessoperations, to challenge the mind-setthat health and safety is somethingoutside of ‘what we do’ and to movefrom compliance to commitment.

Respondents mentioned theimportance of embedding health andsafety into organisational culture, frominduction onwards, to ensure thathealth and safety is not seen as justanother ‘piece of the bureaucraticfunction’ of the organisation. Theybelieved that behavioural safetyprogrammes were needed toencourage ownership of health andsafety by all levels of the organisation.The aim should be to create a culturewhere health and safety issues are

regarded with the same priority andimportance as commercial and revenueissues.

There are small signs that health andsafety professionals are trying to gettheir work recognised by other parts oftheir organisation. Nearly half ofrespondents reported an increase inthe amount of professional interactionwith other disciplines at work over thelast two years (Figure 7).

13

Less than £1,000

£1,000–£4,999

£5,000–£10,000

More than £10,000

Don’t know

26%

55%

9%

7%

3%

Increased

Stayed the same

Reduced

Don’t know

4%

9%

39%

48%

Figure 6: Estimated financial benefits from the mostsuccessful health and safety intervention

Figure 7: Amount of professional interaction withother disciplines over the last two years

MediaAnother 15 per cent of respondentsmentioned the media. They felt thattheir work was being made moredifficult by misreporting of health andsafety issues and the general bad pressthat the profession receives. They felttheir credibility was being underminedand that it was a priority to dispel themyths and prejudices against healthand safety.

Respondents were asked to considerwhat role a panel of experts from awide range of interests set up by theHealth and Safety Executive might havein helping to correct some commonmisconceptions.

“The new 'challenge panel' for non-regulatory decisions will help improvepublic understanding of realrequirements.”

Over 40 per cent of respondentsagreed or strongly agreed with thisstatement, but nearly a third disagreedor strongly disagreed (Figure 8). Thislack of conviction illustrates thedifficulty in challenging widely-heldmisconceptions.

GovernmentEight per cent of respondents felt theUK government’s view of health andsafety as a burden on society hadstigmatised the profession. It was feltthat we should celebrate consistentlyhaving the lowest fatality rates, andfocus on positive health and safetymessages, such as those coming out ofthe building of the Olympic stadium.

Respondents were asked what theythought about the potential of taxbreaks to increase employer provisionand worker uptake of health assistancesuch as physiotherapy for non-work-related conditions.

14

Strongly disagree

Disagree

Agree

Strongly agree

Don’t know

S

4%

5%

25%

39%

27%

Figure 8: Statement – the new challenge panel for non-regulatorydecisions will help improve public understanding of real requirements

Two thirds of respondents eitheragreed or strongly agreed that taxbreaks would encourage employerprovision (Figure 9), and over threequarters of respondents agreed orstrongly agreed that they wouldpromote employee take-up (Figure 10).

15

Strongly disagree

Disagree

Agree

Strongly agree

Don’t know

S

2%

17%

54%

13%

14%

Strongly disagree

Disagree

Agree

Strongly agree

Don’t know

S

2%

17%

54%

13%

14%

Figure 9: Statement – tax breaks for health assistance for non-work-related conditions would encourage employer provision

Figure 10: Statement – tax breaks for health assistance for non-work-related conditions would encourage worker uptake

Legislation and deregulationJust under 8 per cent of respondentsmentioned this issue. There wasuncertainty about deregulation. On theone hand more streamlined andfocused legislation was welcomed.However, some respondents felt it wasimportant to ensure that reductions in

legislation should not compromisehealth and safety, and were concernedthat they might lead to lowerstandards, particularly in high-risksectors such as the waste industry.Keeping on top of the changes was apriority for many.

On top of this, just over half ofrespondents agreed or strongly agreedthat reductions in proactive regulatoryinspections would have a negativeeffect on health and safety standardsin their organisation or those theyprovide consultancy for (Figure 12).

Half the respondents agreed orstrongly agreed that the government’sderegulatory agenda had made itharder for them to win over hearts andminds, but over a third disagreed(Figure 11).

16

Strongly disagree

Disagree

Agree

Strongly agree

Don’t know

4%

12%

14%

36%

34%

Strongly disagree

Disagree

Agree

Strongly agree

Don’t know

31%

36%

20%

5%8%

Figure 11: Statement – the government’s deregulatory agenda makes itharder to win over hearts and minds

Figure 12: Statement – reduction in proactive inspections will have anegative effect on health and safety standards in organisations

Management responsibility andsupport for the health and safetyroleLack of senior management support wasa top issue for seven per cent ofrespondents. It was difficult to securesenior management commitment tohealth and safety in the face ofconflicting business priorities andfinancial pressures. Respondents wantedsenior managers to take a lead role insafety strategy rather than just beingreactive and only getting involvedfollowing an accident.

Respondents were asked how healthand safety was reported to the boardof their company or governing body oftheir organisation. Figure 13 showsthat the majority (55 per cent) reporteddirectly to the board, reinforcing thefinding on the highly influential role ofboards in driving company health andsafety policy.

Asked whether they thought theirorganisation was more committed tohealth and safety than five years ago,over half of respondents (55 per cent)felt that this was the case (Figure 14).This is worse, however, than for 2009,when we reported that 61 per cent ofemployed, and 54 per cent of self-employed, respondents held this view.

17

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

%

Direct to the main board or governing body

via Operations

via HR/Personnel

via Audit

via Finance

via Facilities or Estates

via Security

Other

Not applicable

B

Figure 13: Health and safety reporting route

No opinion

Less committed

About the same

More committed

55%31%

10%

4%

Figure 14: What practitioners think about their organisation’s commitmentto health and safety, compared with five years ago

Thirty-seven per cent of respondentsfelt that the status of health and safetypractitioners was higher than five yearsago, and 44 per cent felt it was aboutthe same (Figure 15). When asked howtheir organisation saw the health andsafety role, 84 per cent said it waseither valued or highly valued – as in2009.

So, while a smaller proportion ofrespondents feel that their organisationis more committed to health and safetythan five years ago, very few actuallythink that their own status hasdeclined: an apparent contradiction.One reason for this could be that in aneconomic climate where cuts are beingmade in safety jobs and budgets, thehealth and safety practitioners still inpost may feel that their input is moregreatly valued.

18

No opinion

Lower status

About the same

Higher status

37%

44%

14%

5%

Figure 15: What practitioners think about their status, compared with fiveyears ago

CompetenceSeven per cent of respondentsmentioned the importance of keepingcompetence levels high. There wasdifficulty in recruiting senior health andsafety personnel in technical areas suchas process safety. There was a call toset a benchmark qualification andmembership level for professionals toact as health and safety consultants.Some mentioned the importance ofpractical competence as well asacademic qualifications. Reducing thenumber of experienced practitionersthrough internal changes orredundancy and replacing them withinexperienced but qualified people wasalso an issue.

The survey asked whether theaccreditation of health and safetyconsultants had been beneficial. Sixtyper cent of respondents agreed orstrongly agreed, but a surprising 21 percent disagreed (Table 12).

Accreditation is usually viewed as alicense to practice, and a guarantor ofan expected standard of work, so it is alittle unexpected that there is notwholehearted agreement thataccreditation has been beneficial. Evenamong consultants themselves, only 55per cent agreed.

Respondents were also asked toconsider whether it would beadvantageous for specialist areas ofpractice to be recognised by IOSH via aseries of registers such as aConstruction Safety PractitionerRegister.

Just over two thirds of respondentseither strongly agreed (13 per cent) oragreed (55 per cent). Sixteen per centdisagreed and 4 per cent stronglydisagreed (Figure 16). A further 12 percent said they didn’t know.

19

Employed Self-employed All

Strongly agree 14.3 15.2 14.3

Agree 46.6 40.1 46.1

Disagree 15.2 21.9 15.8

Strongly disagree 4.4 12.3 5.1

Don’t know 19.5 10.5 18.7

4%

Strongly disagree

Disagree

Agree

Strongly agree

Don’t know

12%

13%

55%

16%

Table 12: Accreditating consultants has been beneficial (% of respondents)

Figure 16: Statement – IOSH should recognise specialist areas of practicevia a series of registers

Health and wellbeingThis was a priority topic for four percent of respondents. They felt it wasnecessary to improve awareness andmonitoring of occupational healthissues, and they observed high levels ofwork-related stress. Managingwellbeing proactively and building upthe resilience of employees wasthought to be important.

While over half (56 per cent) ofrespondents felt prepared for thechallenges involved in helping peoplereturn to work after long-termabsence, and two thirds felt preparedto advise on health and wellbeingissues, 28 per cent felt they neededfurther training and guidance (Figure17). These figures represent a modestimprovement on 2009.

Claims cultureFour per cent of respondentsmentioned this. Increased litigation at atime of reduced funding was an issue.Respondents reported spending a lotof time protecting their companyagainst frivolous claims. Even wheresafety controls were reasonable,respondents felt that the potential forlitigation costs was significantfollowing an accident.

Risk managementTwo per cent of respondentsmentioned this. Respondentscommented on the poor quality ofsome risk assessments and that it wasimportant to strike a balance betweenrisk aversion and risk control. Realisticand cost-effective risk managementsolutions were essential.

20

0 10 20 30 40 50

Fully prepared

Prepared

Partly, need trainingand guidance

Not applicable

%

Helping people return to work

Advising on health and wellbeing issues

Figure 17: Challenges of long-term absence and wellbeing

21

1. Are you employed as an in-house health and safety professional or are you a self-employed consultant? (Please select theanswer which best describes your role)

In-house (includes employed consultant)Self-employed consultant

2. How long have you been self-employed?0-4 years5-9 years10-19 years20 years or more

3. Why did you decide to become a self-employed consultant?I was offered the opportunity to buy an existing businessI wanted to be my own bossI reviewed my options following redundancyIt was the only way I could significantly increase my incomeIt allowed me to do the kind of work that I wanted to doOther, please specify below

4.

5. What is your average daily rate, for work conducted by you personally?(£ or equivalent)

Up to £250£251–£350£351–£450£451–£550£551–£650£651–£750£751–£1,000£1,001 or more

6. On average, how many remunerated days do you work each year?Up to 5051–100101–150151–200201–250251 or more

7. What is the annual cost of your professional indemnity cover? (£ or equivalent)

8. What impact has the economic downturn had on your business as aconsultant so far?

I have fared worse, as demand from companies decreases owing to pressures to save moneyI have fared better as more companies look to out-source health and safety servicesI have had to reduce my rates to secure new businessIt has had no significant impact

Appendix Salary survey questions

22

9. How much influence do you believe EACH of the following has in drivinghealth and safety policy in your client's business?

Main driver Considerable influence Slight influence No influence

The main board

A Director

Senior health andsafety managers

Trade unions

Knee-jerk reaction to events

Legislation

Desire to improvecorporate reputation

The need to securebusiness

Commercial advantages of goodhealth and safety practice

Pressure frominsurance companies

Stories/prosecutionreports in the media

10. Approximately how many people are employed by your organisation?1–45–2425–4950–99100–249250–9991,000–4,9995,000–9,99910,000–19,99920,000–49,99950,000 or moreNone, I don't employ anyone

23

11. Which of the following categories best describes the MAIN field in whichyour organisation operates?

Agriculture, forestry and fishingMining and quarrying (includes extraction of natural gas and petroleum)ManufacturingElectricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supplyWater supply, sewerage, waste management and remediation activitiesConstructionWholesale and retail trade, repair of motor vehicles and motor cyclesTransportation and storageAccommodation and food service activitiesInformation and communication (including telecommunications)Financial and insurance activitiesReal estate activitiesProfessional, scientific and technical activitiesAdministrative and support service activities (includes employment agencies, travel agencies, cleaning services)Public administration and defence (Local authority, fire, police and ambulance services)EducationHuman health and social work activities (includes nursing)Arts, entertainment and recreationOther service activities (includes trade unions, membership organisations, religious and political organisations,

hairdressing and beauty treatments)

12. In which of the following geographical regions are you primarily based?North EastYorkshire and HumbersideNorth WestEast MidlandsWest MidlandsEast AngliaSouth EastSouth WestScotlandWalesNorthern IrelandRepublic of IrelandAfricaAsiaAustralasiaEurope (excluding UK and Ireland)Middle EastNorth AmericaSouth America

13. For how many sites are you responsible?Single siteMulti site (single state e.g. UK)Multi site (Europe)Multi site WorldwideNot applicable

24

14. How many people report to you directly?None1–45–910–1920–2930–4950 and over

15. How long have you worked in a health and safety role?0–4 years5–9 years10–19 years20 years or more

16. How did you come into this role?Internal promotionInternal move from another disciplineRecruited from another organisationEstablished own consultancy businessCareer change roleFirst career role (i.e. first significant job after leaving education)

17. How did you find your current job?Internal move/promotion/ intranetAdvertisement in a magazineAdvertisement in local pressAdvertisement in national pressRecruitment consultantSpecialist health and safety recruitment website (e.g. SHP4jobs)General recruitment website (e.g. Monster, fish4jobs etc)Word of mouthOther, please specify below

18.

19. What is your highest academic (not health and safety-related) qualification?MPhil, PhDMBAMaster’s degree (other than MBA)Degree or equivalent (S/NVQ level 4)HNC/HND or equivalentUp to 'A' level/Higher or equivalent (inc. S/NVQ level 3)Up to GCSE /'O' level/CSENoneOther, please specify below

20.

25

21. What category of IOSH membership are you?NoneAffiliateTech IOSHGrad IOSHCMIOSHCFIOSHRetired

22. Which of the following health and safety qualifications do you have?Masters/postgraduate diplomaPostgraduate certificateBSc degreeHE DiplomaNEBOSH DiplomaNEBOSH Specialist DiplomaNEBOSH CertificateS/NVQ level 4NoneOther, please specify below

23.

24. How much of your role is focused on health and safety? (select thenearest figure)

100%75%50%25% or less

25. Do you deal with/have responsibility for any of the following issues?(Select all that apply)

AuditingEnvironmentFacilities managementFireHuman resourcesOccupational healthQuality controlRisk managementSecurityTrainingNone of the above

26

26. Which of the following bodies are you or your organisation a member of?(Select all that apply)

BIFMBOHSBSCBSIFCIEHIEHFIEMAIIRSMIOSHIRMRoSPANoneOther, please specify below

27.

28. Which of the following best describes your role and responsibilities?CEO/OwnerSenior Manager/DirectorManagerSupervisorAdviserHSE/ORR/Local Authority InspectorSafety representativeTrainerOther, please specify below

29.

30. What is your annual salary before tax? (Base salary only in £ or equivalent)Less than £10,000£10,000–£14,999£15,000–£24,999£25,000–£29,999£30,000–£34,999£35,000–£39,999£40,000–£44,999£45,000–£49,999£50,000–£59,999£60,000–£79,999£80,000–£99,999£100,000 and over

31. If possible, state your exact annual salary before tax (Base salary only in £ or equivalent)

27

32. Do you receive any of the following benefits?BonusCommissionShare optionsMedical insuranceIOSH subscriptionCompany car or car allowancePension schemeOther, please specify below

33.

34. At your last salary review, what was the percentage change to your basic salary? (use nearest figure)Not applicable (self-employed)ReductionNoneUp to 1%1%–2%3%–4%5%–6%7%–10%11%–20%More than 20%

35. On average, how many hours do you work each week?up to 16 hours16–34 hours35–48 hoursOver 48 hours

36. Through which route does 'health and safety' report to the main board of your company or governing body of yourorganisation?

Direct to the main board or governing bodyvia Operationsvia HR/Personnelvia Auditvia Financevia Facilities or Estatesvia SecurityOtherNot applicable

37. Do you feel your employer, or companies you work with, are more committed to health and safety than they were fiveyears ago?

More committedAbout the sameLess committedNo opinion

38. What do you feel is the status of health and safety practitioners in your organisation today as compared to five years ago?

Higher statusAbout the sameLower statusNo opinion

28

39. How do you feel your health and safety role is valued by your organisation?Highly valuedValuedNot valuedNo opinion

40. How prepared do you feel for the challenges involved with helpingpeople 'return to work' after long-term absence?

Fully preparedPreparedPartly, need training and guidanceNot applicable

41. How prepared do you feel to advise on health and wellbeing issues?Fully preparedPreparedPartly, need training and guidanceNot applicable

42. In your opinion what is the top issue facing the health and safety function now?

43. Would you recommend a career in health and safety to others?YesNo

Please give us your opinion on some topical questions

44. Charging organisations that breach health and safety law for enforcement costs will: (select all that apply)Act as a deterrent to non-complianceHelp level the 'playing field'Risk encouraging under-reportingHave no effectDon't know

Indicate your opinion on the following statements

Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Don’t know45. Bringing in tax-breaks for certain health assistance (e.g. physiotherapy) for non-work-related conditions wouldencourage employer provision

46. Bringing in tax-breaksfor certain health assistance (e.g. physiotherapy) for non-work-related conditions would encourage worker uptake

29

47. The new 'challengepanel' for non-regulatory decisions will help improve public understandingof real requirements

48. The Government's deregulatory agenda has made it harder for me to win over hearts and minds

49. Reductions inproactive regulatoryinspections will have anegative effect onhealth and safetystandards in myorganisation or those Iprovide consultancyfor

50. The accreditation ofhealth and safetyconsultants has beenbeneficial

51. It would beadvantageous forspecialist areas ofpractice to berecognised by IOSHvia a series ofregisters such as‘Construction SafetyPractitioner Register’

52. Since the downturn, I need to use economicarguments more oftento support the case forhealth and safetyinterventions

53. What was the estimated financial benefit from your organisation's most successful health and safety intervention todate?

Less than £1,000£1,000–£4,999£5,000–£10,000More than £10,000Don't know

30

54Over the last two years, the amount of professional interaction I've had with other disciplines at work has:

ReducedStayed the sameIncreasedDon't know

About you

56What is your full name?

57What is your email address?

58Are you male or female?

MaleFemale

59What is your age?

16–2425–3435–4445–5455–64Over 65

Thank you for taking the time to complete this questionnaire.

POL0

804/

2811

12/P

DF

IOSHThe GrangeHighfield DriveWigstonLeicestershireLE18 1NNUK

t +44 (0)116 257 3100f +44 (0)116 257 3101www.iosh.co.uk

IOSH is the Chartered body for health and safetyprofessionals. With more than 40,000 membersin 80 countries, we’re the world’s biggestprofessional health and safety organisation.

We set standards, and support, develop andconnect our members with resources, guidance,events and training. We’re the voice of theprofession, and campaign on issues that affectmillions of working people.

IOSH was founded in 1945 and is a registeredcharity with international NGO status.

Institution of Occupational Safety and HealthFounded 1945Incorporated by Royal Charter 2003Registered charity 1096790