Occupational health: Healthy outlook (News analysis)

Following its successful occupational health pilot, Ross Pearman talks to Constructing Better Health about its plans for a national scheme and what the benefits are for the industry.

Industry preconceptions that handling occupational health is 'too expensive' and involves the 'white coat brigade' are set to become a thing of the past.

That is the view of Constructing Better Health (CBH) as it looks to roll out its national occupational health scheme in July after a successful pilot.

But what can the industry expect from a national scheme, who will fund it, and how do you change the attitudes of a mainly macho industry?

"Once you start to raise awareness and give individuals the means to have checks and access information, they really take the message on board," said CBH's project manager Michelle Aldous. "If you provide information, people will act on it.

"The pilot saw some obstacles. Site management didn't think the workers would be interested this comes from the whole macho attitude. But once you give them that access, there was incredible interest. We got to a point where site managers asked for the health units to return as they didn't have enough time due to increasing interest."

Going national

So why does the industry need a national scheme?

"Employers get the benefit of a workforce working longer and one that is more productive," said Aldous.

TGWU national secretary Bob Blackman agreed: "The average retirement age in construction is 62, not 65, due to ill-health."

Aldous commented: "When you deal with health it is not immediate. When you have an accident it is immediate, and everyone realises it is an issue and take measures to prevent it."

She said one of the biggest problems for the industry when it comes to managing occupational health is a lack of consistency.

"Employers know they have a legal obligation to manage occupational health, but they are not sure how to do it. There is a misconception of it being expensive and involving the white coat brigade.

"Larger companies have the resources. They know what to do on prevention and control, such as reducing noise. However, there was a lack of awareness on health surveillance and how it is managed - due to the transience and mobility of the workforce. People ask: Is that my problem?"

Aldous wouldn't be drawn into whether it was the main contractor's responsibility to push occupational health management down the supply chain.

So were companies not fulfilling their legal obligations?

"It was being done to some degree, but not to a common standard," Aldous replied.

To tackle this issue CBH has, in partnership with the Health and Safety Laboratory in Buxton, been drawing up a set of industry standards for companies to follow.

Aldous was unable to disclose full details, but said they would straddle two areas: health screening and health provider competency.

"For health screening, we will be developing standards for things like hand-arm vibration. For health providers, it will be aimed at their competency."

Recognising many one-man-band providers who may not be providing construction companies with the right service for their industry, Aldous said CBH was working on setting up a list of registered providers who will have to prove their competency to work with the scheme.

This list will become available for contractors to access and choose the right company for them.

With the right providers and standards, the scheme will then provide a database, currently being developed by B&CE, which will hold all the screening data.

"Longer-term, the database will give us tools to look at what health trends are arising. This will also help us create research reports for the manufacturing of better equipment or plant."

For ease of use, worker health data will be stored on their CSCS cards, although the exact details have yet to be finalised. However, this will not result in any extra costs for the card.

Scheme funding

So how will the scheme be funded and how will you get industry investment?

"We are currently working on business plans and the funds required will depend on the final evolvement of the scheme," admitted Aldous. "However, it will be funded through the industry and will be independent from the government.

"We don't need a lump sum to operate. We have funding in place to get to working capability, but we need to be mindful of how we can get revenue streams. These plans are in place, but we can't talk about them yet."

CBH chairman Trevor Walker added: "The industry is already paying for occupational health mistakes. If we manage it better we cut down costs and the whole process will be cost neutral, maybe even cost beneficial."

But will the industry see it that way?

"In the past six to seven months, we have been getting the industry to understand this position. You are looking at a genuine industry initiative," he added.

What the national CBH scheme offers

• Common industry standards
• A referral system to GP or occupational health advisor
• A list of registered health providers
• Occupational health toolkits
• A knowledge portal website featuring data downloads