http://www.broadcastnow.co.uk/techfacils/production-feature/putting-safety-back-in-front/5044472.article
Falling
budgets have led to some productions cutting corners on health and
safety, but it could prove more costly in the long run. Adrian
Pennington speaks to the experts.
Serious
health and safety incidents in TV would appear to be in decline, but
there’s no room for complacency, as the perennial squeeze on
budgets can create the biggest risk of all.
“People
who work in TV have a good commitment to safety and are doing the
best they can, but they are under more pressure than employers in
other industries like construction and manufacturing. I expect we
will see more accidents as a result,” says Olivia van der Werff,
managing director of health and safety adviser Beyond Dispute.
Awareness
of safety has changed for the better over the past decade, suggests
anecdotal evidence and official figures from the Health and Safety
Executive (HSE).
The
number of non-fatal injuries reported by employers has been dropping
consistently since 1998, standing at 115,379 in 2010/11.
Self-reported non-fatal injuries have also fallen in that time, the
Labour Force Survey estimates.
While
film and TV can be expected to chime with that trend, breakout
statistics are harder to come by. “For an industry based on
freelancers, that is serious, so we do need data to be
collated,” says Clem Leneghan, film and TV adviser at Safety Guys.
Fear
of speaking out
There
are accounts of injured parties refusing to co-operate with the HSE
for fear of the reputation they may gain.
“In
other industries, people are keen to find a ‘no win, no fee’
lawyer, but the TV business is a small world, and people fear they
won’t find work again if they sue,” says Van der Werff.
As
in the broader workplace, rather than the more obviously hazardous
environments, the most common accidents in TV involve manual
handling, tripping and falls from a height. “High risks tend to be
well managed simply because it is obvious what to do,” says Bob
Forster, who runs 1st Option Safety Services. “Incidents of people
falling down the steps of a location van or over cables tend to cause
frequent injuries that can keep people out of work for months.”
The
biggest problem is the continuous downward pressure on budgets and
the knock-on effect on set-up times, planning and recces - challenges
that are more acute for smaller companies, which lack the resources
or the confidence of bigger outfits to challenge broadcaster demands.
Including
a health and safety check in the production budget is not an option
but there are few regulations outlawing any specific practice on
safety grounds. Producers could face a civil suit if they are shown
to be acting negligently, such as employing an incompetent stunt
co-ordinator. Potentially more serious, carrying imprisonment as an
ultimate penalty, is falling foul of the Health and Safety at Work
Act (1974).
“If
you get it wrong, the consequences are much more serious than just
getting sued or fined,” says Leneghan. “The law doesn’t
specify, for example, that there is a limit on falls of 20ft. The
onus is on the producer to risk-assess whether the situation is
‘reasonably practicable’. That obscure legal phrase essentially
means the more risk involved, the more effort you need to make to
ensure the risk is minimised.”
H&S
issues in film and TV differ from most other work environments and
pose particular dilemmas.
“Imagine
building a factory with a budget of £10m for a building that has to
last 25 years,” says Leneghan. “You wouldn’t think twice about
putting a £10,000 handrail around the roof for safety during
maintenance.
“For
film and TV, you may be asking people to site themselves on a rooftop
for maybe five minutes or half an hour. The nature of the risk is
temporary and the economics of erecting a safety rail don’t stack
up.
“Since
the law makes no allowances for lack of time or money, the choice is
whether or not to send a crew into a dangerous situation knowing that
you don’t have the money and resources to make it as safe as you
would like.”
It’s
the job of H&S specialists to advise on what ‘reasonably
practicable’ means. “There is a culture of cynicism towards
H&S, which has come about because some institutions have taken a
risk-averse and literal approach to the law,” says Leneghan. “By
risk-assessing absolutely everything, it becomes seen as a
bureaucratic exercise and even a joke, with the danger that this
attitude extends to practices on set.
“We
take the view that risk assessment is a tool to help producers make
decisions to keep their teams out of hospital - and themselves out of
court.”
Forster
backs this view. “H&S should be in support of production,” he
says. “If a safety adviser’s first response is ‘no’, then
change the safety adviser. If the insurer’s initial response is
‘no’ or they want a load more money, find another insurer. The
reality is you can do almost anything you want, provided you
understand the risk. Problems arise where people do not have the
necessary experience and confidence, support or advice.”
Established
practice
Caroline
Daly, freelance production manager and secretariat of the Film
Broadcast Health and Safety Group, says H&S is now embedded in
the production culture at grass roots, with all members of the team
thinking through risk assessments and policies from the start of
production.
Arguably,
this practice is more ingrained than in the film industry, where
temporary shell companies set up for a particular project lack a
history of H&S.
Skillset
administers the Production Safety Passport (PSP), a database that
logs the H&S qualifications of industry professionals. Running
since October 2010, it has clocked up a quarter (3,500) of the
registered base of people working in TV production roles. It is
working with employers to deliver a unified H&S framework that
ties in the PSP with Skillset-developed qualifications and the Joint
Industry Grading Scheme (JIGS), which embraces special effects,
stunts and rigging.
Skillset
can also approve individual grants for H&S training, provided
there is evidence of need. In 2011, it funded 53 individuals, at an
average of £207 each. This year, it is releasing funding for TV
freelancer training in three lots of £100,000 to cover craft
technical areas, producer skills and H&S, with the first tranche
already allocated.
Nonetheless,
the pressure of working long hours may take its toll. “It’s only
a matter of time before we see a really bad accident as a result of
tiredness,” predicts Van der Werff. “It will probably happen as a
result of someone driving home. It will be a junior person because
they are asked to work crazy hours, and it will probably not be
reported as an H&S incident at all.”
RISK
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
People
Are the crew and contractors physically and technically competent?
What risks will public contributors bring, and what additional level
of support and advice is needed?
Equipment
From cameras to generators, what kit is needed and what risks does
that entail?
Task
What could go wrong with any particular task, from rigging a set to
stunt work?
Environment
Assess the location for risk. Is there potential for violence? What
is the weather condition? Are explosives involved? Is it shot in a
studio, a housing estate or down a mine?
DAREDEVILS:
LIFE ON THE EDGE PLAYING IT SAFE
Channel
4’s Daredevils: Life On The Edge (Christie HQ/Renegade Pictures)
explores why people engage in extreme sports. Filming involved some
high-risk scenarios for both contributors and crew. In one sequence,
presenter and stunt cyclist Danny MacAskill races at 150mph on the
back of TT racer Guy Martin’s motorbike. The show’s safety
adviser, Clem Leneghan, explains the steps taken to ensure their
safety.
“The
motorbike had to be modified by an expert mechanic and then tested.
We also had to ensure that the onboard minicams weren’t going to
interfere with the safe operation of the bike - again, this needed a
specialist to install and check the kit.
“We
explored several options to make Danny feel more secure, especially
when leaning into the corners. We discussed using a strap to attach
him to Guy but, in the end, they both felt more comfortable going
low-tech - in other words, Danny held on very tightly. We also looked
in detail at the set-up on the track, including camera positions,
marshalling, control of access to the track, comms and emergency
procedures.
“On
similar shows in the past, we might have been physically present for
all of the recces and filming, which obviously involves cost for the
production. Now we will stop and think twice before telling the
client that they have to spend that money - by having very regular
[phone/email] contact and being very selective about when we are
needed on location.
“We
can still be a real support for the production team, but at a lower
cost.”
