Construction (Head Protection) Regulations scrapped

The Construction (Head Protection) Regulations 1989 (CHP) imposed a duty on employers to ensure that so far as reasonably practicable, every worker at work on a site covered by the regulations wears “suitable head protection” unless there is no foreseeable risk of injury to the head other than by falling.

The regulations were introduced following years of union campaigning and are credited with helping to reduce the death rate from head injuries by three-quarters, from 48% to 14%. The HSE acknowledges that “prior to their introduction, concerted efforts to increase voluntary use of head protection had been made but with little effect” and that “the wearing of head protection has subsequently become culturally embedded in most parts of the industry, and its use is generally a site rule”.

The Löfstedt review proposed revoking the CHP regulations. Unions argued that this would send the dangerous and confusing message to workers and employers that head protection was not important. However, as a result of the Health and Safety (Miscellaneous Repeals, Revocations and Amendments) Regulations 2013, which came into force on 6 April 2013, the Construction (Head Protection) Regulations 1989 have now been scrapped. The HSE says that scrapping the regulations removes legislation that has been overtaken by more up-to-date law, is redundant or does not deliver the intended benefits. The rationale for revoking the CHP Regulations is that workers are already protected by the Personal Protective Equipment at Work Regulations 1992 and the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007.

It says that it is working with the construction industry (particularly small contractors) to ensure that the sector understands the continuing need for employers to provide hard hats and ensure they are worn on construction sites. The Personal Protective Equipment Regulations 1992 have been amended so that they cover the provision and use of head protection on construction sites.

But construction union UCATT argues that construction is a non-compliant industry and that extra measures are needed to ensure that the scrapping of the regulations does not result in construction workers being placed in danger.