Health and safety for charity board members

Edward Braisher, GGI Special Adviser—Health & Safety Governance, sets out the essentials for third sector board members

Charities have a moral duty to think about the health and safety of their employees and volunteers. It is hard to imagine a situation where it would be justifiable to treat volunteers in a less favourable way than employees. In addition, there is a duty of care under common law to take reasonable care to avoid harming others. Charities have this duty of care towards employees and volunteers. A charity and its board members could be liable if an employee or volunteer is injured.

The board should set the direction for health and safety. Board members need to ensure that they establish an effective health and safety policy and ensure that the communication of health and safety is embedded.

In addition, the board should give the executive team freedom to develop new policies and procedures where new risks are introduced and should ensure that steps are taken to reduce the likelihood and seriousness of injuries to employees and volunteers, including giving appropriate H&S information, training, safety clothing or equipment and adequate supervision.

Health and safety should appear regularly on the agenda for board meetings and boards should consider naming a champion for health and safety.

Since it is a corporate governance issue, charities should consider integrating health and safety into their other main governance structures – for example, their audit committee.

The health and safety committee will be the main decision-making body and will often be a subset of the board and chaired by a board member who can make sure that key health and safety issues are addressed.

There are many recurring themes that board members should familiarise themselves with when challenging health and safety at executive level and throughout the wider realms of a charity. Some of the key risks include fire management, lone working and events involving members of the public to support charities that have the potential for repercussions should things go wrong. This is where it is key to ensure that all these risks are effectively managed. It is not just the legal implications of when things go wrong but the potential fallout from adverse publicity that can have an impact on the charity’s reputation.

Cautionary tales

The HSE (Health and Safety Executive) prosecuted a charitable trust after a volunteer lost his life when a section of wall collapsed on them in a canal lock.

Wiltshire and Berkshire Canal Trust had failed to ensure the safety of volunteers. The temporary propping of the wall was inadequate and there was no clear method on how to safely install or remove the props.

The trust routinely used volunteers to assist in work to undertake tasks, including clearing rubbish and overgrowth from various canal sites and general gardening-type duties but had increasingly used volunteers for light construction works.

The trust was fined £30,000 and ordered to pay £10,822 in costs at Swindon Magistrates’ Court on 24 June 2024.

And back in 2010 a mental health charity was fined £30,000 and ordered to pay £20,000 in costs after failing to protect an employee after they were stabbed to death by a paranoid schizophrenic.

Mental Health Matters pleaded guilty in Newcastle Crown Court to a breach of s. 2(1) of the Health and Safety Act 1974 for failing to do all that was reasonably practicable to ensure her safety. The charity had been aware of the perpetrator's history of violence, his refusal to take his medication and that his condition was worsening. But the employee, Ashleigh Ewing, was nevertheless sent to visit him alone at his house.

The prosecution accepted that her death was not caused by Mental Health Matters but said further risk assessments and training should have been carried out to protect her. Prosecutor Kevin Donnelly said, “Mental Health Matters failed to identify and respond to the increasing risks to which Ashleigh Ewing was exposed in the course of employment.”

The Health and Safety Executive said that if Mental Health Matters had carried out a risk assessment, it would have resulted in the visiting arrangements being reviewed.

As you can see from the above examples, there is often a weakness of management monitoring to proactively identify shortcomings and failings in a health and safety management system. This often comes about due to a lack of ownership at local sites and a lack of monitoring, verification and follow-up of any issues.

To summarise, the board should be seeking assurance around a charity’s safety management system. This is not just about ensuring that policies and procedures are in place to manage health and safety, but that at a local level there is effective implementation of the system.