Putting safety back in front

Broadcast

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.”