A vast swathe of industries – from pharmaceuticals and manufacturing, to energy and telecommunications – are subject to a multitude of regulations designed to ensure the safety, quality and ethical standards of their products and services. As a result, one key resource that many organisations turn to when looking to achieve compliance and mitigate potential risks are engineering services.
And risk in those working environments is a constant threat. As Robert Godard, a principal with I.S. Partners LLC, points out, every modern business faces a certain degree of such risk, regardless of industry. “Risk has always been intertwined with any type of business endeavour – and good business leaders have adapted to risk related to their business by understanding it and finding ways to combat it,” he states. The need for risk management has never been greater, with infringement of personal data privacy rights and lack of disaster preparedness just two pitfalls engineering organisations can fall into. “Adhering to compliance standards will help these organisations to avoid and mitigate risk,” Godard adds.
Like any other facet of a business, effective risk management control starts by working with your management team to develop and design your organisation’s collective goal. “While your company’s shared vision is often more aspirational and even somewhat nebulous, without a distinct plan of action, your risk management game plan involves defining concrete objectives, laid out in clear terms,” says Godard. “Your management team will lead the primary phase of risk management control, identifying and categorising the various risks that run throughout your organisation. Each team member will focus on a particular risk factor, relevant to their area, monitoring that risk and ensuring compliance with risk management procedures.”
MINEFIELD OF CONFUSION
An organisation’s obligations are clear. In accordance with the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, employers have a legal responsibility to provide and maintain ‘plant and systems of work that are, so far as is reasonably practicable, safe and without risks to health’. While engineering compliance creates that safe, controlled-risk environment for employees, it can often be a complex, confusing minefield of legislation and obligations. It also encompasses several factors, from risk assessments and surveys, to machinery upgrades and maintenance, even including the reviewing, updating and storage of technical drawings and other documentation.
“Engineering compliance is more than just a box-ticking exercise,” says Musk Process Services. “It is a crucial part of your workplace health and safety – and you have a legal and moral obligation to conform to the set standards and legislation. As an employer, you have a responsibility to make sure everybody gets home safely and a pro-active approach to legal compliance will help you achieve that every day.”
In addition to the risk of accident, employers could also face huge financial penalties for failure to achieve and maintain compliance. HSE fines are technically unlimited and often scaled – the larger the firm, the larger the cost of the fine. “In addition to fines, company directors are liable in the case of accidents and compliance failures,” cautions Musk. “And, in serious cases, they can face jail time of up to two years and a ban from being a company director for up to 15 years. Engineering compliance is therefore vital for both the safety of individual employees and the sustainability of the whole company itself.”
A positive, organised approach to compliance and the right support can help to remove the risk of such outcomes. The Musk Process Services engineering compliance team, for example, is a specialised department of electrical, mechanical and software design engineers. They provide compliance support to manufacturing sites across the UK in a range of industries, including chemical, automotive, industrial.
“Our services span the whole of the compliance journey – from initial compliance health checks to reviewing, planning and implementing remedial actions identified from PUWER [Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998] and DSEAR [Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regulations 2002] assessments,” continues the company in a statement. “We can also support creating technical drawings for a compliance paper trail, and through to the storage and management of all legally required documentation to help an organisation remain compliant.”
Compliance extends its tentacles across so many areas beyond PUWER and DSEAR, of course – from the Pressure Systems Safety Regulations 2000 (PSSR) to the Electricity at Work Regulations 1989 (EAWR) (Electrical HV / LV Distribution); from the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 2002 (COSHH) to Dangerous parts of Machinery – access and guarding (Regulation 11).
Wherever compliance is to be found, though, organisations are progressively adopting safety-compliant designs in manufacturing facilities to reduce accidents, save costs, avoid legal proceedings and improve maintenance turnaround, says L&T Technology Services. “We understand that non-compliance is a major cause of concern. It can lead to millions in penalties and impact market reputation.” L&T’s approach is to deliver consulting and advisory support that includes process safety study, machine risk assessment and safety, electrical safety, structural stability and building information modelling.
ROUTE TO COMPLIANCE
Whatever the solutions that businesses adopt to comply with the applicable regulations, these will vary greatly, depending on the type of regulation and the individual business, according to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS). Its investigations reveal a wide variety of activities undertaken by businesses of different sizes and sectors in order to conform. And the most frequently cited negative impacts of regulation? Financial cost and time. These tended to be at their most burdensome during the first year of compliance, due to the need to amend systems and processes, and purchase additional equipment, but sometimes continued during the course of embedding and maintaining such compliance.
In addition to the cost and time challenges, some participants spoke of a sense of frustration or fear. “While these negative impacts are less tangible and quantifiable than cost and time, the research identified they are still important,” says the BEIS. “A sense of frustration that a regulation is not fit for purpose, for example, or is overly onerous can lead to negative perceptions of [that regulation] and ultimately impact attitudes towards compliance.” For some, a fear of the repercussions of an inspection was a real challenge and the resulting lack of confidence led to a less proactive approach in engaging with the regulator.
On the positive side, safety was frequently mentioned by BEIS as one of the most impotant benefits of a wide range of regulations – both in terms of staff and the public. “Safety was often highly valued and, for some, the serious risks of not complying outweighed the negative impacts of regulation,” confirms BEIS. “Many also appreciated that safety-focused regulations protected the company from complaints or litigation.”
BOX:
There are several actions an organisation can take in pursuit of full compliance. These include:
Conduct a comprehensive review of all applicable laws, regulations and standards within the organisation’s jurisdiction Ensure all employees are aware of relevant legal requirements Identify any potential legal risks and create a plan for addressing them Ensure all processes and procedures are compliant with the applicable laws and regulations Establish a system for tracking and reporting compliance issues Conduct periodic reviews of processes and procedures to ensure compliance Ensure all employees are trained on regulatory compliance and risk management requirements.