The following details have been supplied by the TUC:
The families of people killed at work have said they are 'furious' at the government's 'dangerous' and 'inaccurate' slant on the laws protecting young people on work experience. In a scathing rebuke to ministers, Families Against Corporate Killers (FACK) said their open letter to employers had set out to 'mislead' them into believing there were no special duties to protect young people at work. A 21 June Department of Work and Pensions news release, posted on the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) website and which included quotes from insurers and employers' lobbyists but no workers' advocates, said: 'The latest stage of government's commitment to debunking health and safety myths, and slashing burdensome rules, has seen ministers today outline plans to make it as easy as possible for employers to take on work experience students.' It added: 'Employers have been hampered in the past by thinking they have to do special risk assessments for young people, and even having to repeat the same assessment for every young person they give a chance of work experience, even though the circumstances were exactly the same.' Minister for employment Mark Hoban said: 'Too often in the past, the crazy cornucopia of confusing rules discouraged employers from taking young people on. That's why we have been working across government to make sure the rules are clear and easy to understand.' A FACK spokesperson commented: 'We have no problems with making laws easier to understand to keep children safe. But this DWP statement is an ideological, fact-free, business-friendly, inaccurate, misleading and dangerous statement from the government. It is inaccurate on the law on health and safety for children on work experience placements, and by encouraging employer complacency may further endanger children.' She said in 2011/12, four under-19s were killed in work-related incidents and 671 suffered a major injury. FACK said indications young people should be treated just like any other worker were 'just plain wrong... Suggesting that employers do nothing because they have already done a risk assessment before, is not a legally correct option.'
