By Harry Glasbeek

Published in August 2005

As UK trade unionists eagerly await the introduction of the long promised Corporate Manslaughter Bill, this Comparative Note looks at what we can learn from similar legislation introduced in Canada in 2004.

The Canadian legislation came about following a major industrial accident and the inability of the existing criminal legislation to hold anyone to account. The Bill however, rather than deal with the inherent conflict in capitalist corporations (the push for profit versus the promotion of safety), attempts to redress “narrow technical difficulties created by law and the judiciary”.

Each year over 40,000 workers die or suffer major injuries as a result of accidents at work. As many as 20,000 workers may die of occupational illnesses. In an effort to reduce such carnage, the Institute of Employment Rights produced a report in 1997 analysing UK health and safety laws and suggesting a range of recommendations for government action. A year after the IER report was published the government published its own report, which contained proposals and targets for improving the system for health and safety at work. This booklet revisits the IER’s recommendations and compares them to the proposals put forward by the government. It goes on to critically consider the extent to which the government strategy has delivered a safe and healthy working environment before outlining what we believe still needs to be done to protect people at work. The conclusions are stark. The government has failed to take forward any of the legal reforms proposed in its own report.

by David Walters and Phil James

Published in June 1998

As we approach the 25th anniversary of the Health and Safety at Work Act, the Institute has gathered a group of health and safety experts to review the adequacy of existing legislation. This Interim Report outlines why we believe a review is necessary. Our proposals for change will be published in a final report in 1999.