Cheetham, D W (2000) Improving site safety: Enforcement of the cdm regulations. In: Akintoye, A (ed.) Proceedings of 16th Annual ARCOM Conference, 6-8 September 2000, Glasgow, UK.
Abstract
The development of legislation that seeks to change the safety culture on construction sites is described. The content of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 1994 is briefly described along with the changes that the CDM Regulations have introduced to architectural and construction industry practice. The enforcement of the CDM Regulations by the Health and Safety Executive is analysed. While the industry is not being unreasonably persecuted and has been given time to adapt to the requirements of the regulations, clients are now being prosecuted if they have failed to appoint a planning supervisor or principal contractor.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | human resources; health and safety; cdm regulation |
| Index terms: | regulation, principal contractor, enforcement, construction site, safety culture, health and safety executive, supervisor, construction industry practice, legislation, health and safety, human resource |
| Subjects: | management, practitioner, work location, legal systems, health safety and environment, political science |
| Topics: | Human Resources, Roles and Professions, Governance, Legal Issues, Health and Safety, Site Management, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here