The construction industry is one of the largest industries in the United kingdom employing 2.2 million of the united kingdoms population which is 1 in 14 of the united kingdoms workforce (source www.connexionsbedfordshire.org.uk). According to corporatewatch.org the United Kingdoms construction industry is worth around £65 billion per annum generating an output of £81.9billion in 2002.
These statistic confirms that the construction industry is the largest within the United kingdom which is soon thing for the industry to be proud of as a gloss earner for the United Kingdom. But being the largest employer the United Kingdom as come with a price that important overweighs the amount of money it generates annually. “It is also one of the most dangerous” (www.hse.gov.uk). In the year of 2008 to 2009 there were 254.1 Major injury rate per 100 000 employees(www.hse.gov.uk). During the period between 2008 to 2009 1.2 million people that worked last year suffered illness caused by their current or past work. there where also 180 workers killed at a rate of 0.6 per 100 000 workers and 131895 other injuires to workers reported under RIDDER at a rate of 502.2per 100 000employees.The labour force survey concluded that their were 246 000 reportable injuries between 2008 and 2009 at a rate of 870 per 100 000 workers. This high rate of injury and illness had caused 29.3 million working days to be lost which is a rate of 1.24 days per worker. It was found that 24.6 million of these lost days where caused due to work related illnesses and 47.7 million due to work related injuries (www.hse.gov.uk). These statistics are of major interest to the government, construction firms, and construction industry clients. This is due to the lives, time and revenue that have been wasted because of the weakness in the construction industries health and safety legislation. To the client and project managers are usually working to a tight budget so going beyond and above what is required from legislation is not of major concern within the construction site culture.makeing the most amount of profit possable within the shortest time possable is sadly the main concern of a client and project manager. “No matter how big or small your property development is, health and safety should be seen as something that helps a development run smoothly and successfully, not as a cost that can be cut” (Grant Prior www.contractjournal.com). This way of thinking has coused the client lacks in his jutie to provide a safe place of work and the principle contractor not checking and creating adequate safe systems of work for each activity onsite specific to the site. The construction industry safety legislation is continuously developing reacting to new and old safety issue. But its true legislations are only as affective as the people implementing then.
Get Help With Your Essay
If you need assistance with writing your essay, our professional essay writing service is here to help!
The cultural behaviour of the construction industry site environment can bring limitations to the efficiently of legislation but can the legislation room for broad interpretation could be the cause for this culture. A stricter legislation would influence construction industry workers to be more observant in their approach to construction projects and thereby changing the construction industries culture has a result help to reduce the rate of injuries and fatalities in the industry. It my view that the revised regulations Construction Design and Management 2007 still needs improvement before it implementation can actually achieve the objectives set out for it to to improve health, safety and welfare in the industry. By amending the current construction design management regulation 2007 to create better guidelines for the control and co-operation for passing on information to support the Health and safety plan system of work. (www.hse.gov.uk)
Aims and Objectives
In this dissertation using research I will demonstrate that construction deign management regulation (CDM) 2007, affect construction projects throughout their duration and require serious reviewing to reduce the amount of accidents on construction sites per annum .
The aim of the study is to trace the development of CDM 2007 Regulations, and demonstrate that the new regulations have significant merits, but been ineffective in completely achieving their objectives.
The purpose of this research is to evaluate the areas where CDM 2007 Regulations have been limited in scope and make suggestions for. The following objectives shall be explored:
To demonstrate CDM 2007 Regulations and previous regulations affect project management outcomes.
To explore the efficacy of CDM 2007 implementation plans and guidance.
To explore options for improvement of CDM 2007 congruent with the construction industry’s requirements.
The purpose is to explore options available for project team members to reduce the rate of incidents, fatalities and injuries in a construction project.
Scope of Dissertation
In my research I will explain the historical development of construction Design Management Regulations progression over the 18 years. The research will show that the amendments and attempted improvement of construction design management has not achieved it maximum potential.
I will evaluate the roles and responsibilities of site team members on a Construction design management regulations project. I will explain how the job roles responsible under could change to improve their capacities’ to over come problems that conflict them in general activities. This dissertation aims to purpose is to add ideas for the improvement of the construction industries construction design management regulation without taking away any thing positive which is in implementation at present.
Methodologies
The methodology for this dissertation is going to be based on observations and experiences and research which I will attempt to interpret. I the factual evidence found though research and used what I have found to support or dispute the point and arguments made.
In this dissertation I’m doing to be looking at the components of Construction Design Management regulation 2007 Regulations and the project members that are contributors to the regulations and those who are affected by it. The idea is to investigate the regulations and attempt to interpret it from the implementers prospective rather than from the regulators implementation objective.
To achieve this I will use primary and secondary resources in my analysis of the construction and design management regulations 2007. All my primary research will come from legislation and government literature. The secondary research will come from internet websites, blogs, magazines, reports and press articles using these research method I will the following approaches:
(www.marketresearchworld.net/ www.howto.co.uk)
Purpose and History of CDM
The construction design management regulation is a government legislation created to raise the standards of health and safety in the building and construction industry. this is to be achieved by improving co-ordination between are various parties involved at the preparation stage of a construction project and also while work is being carried out.
The construction design management regulation 2007 originate from the Health and Safety at Work Act of 1974 which was implemented as a regulation for contractors to implement at construction sites for the safety and health of its workers. Before 1974 there were no laws legislating health and safety. The welfare of workers was governed by the common law of the Factories Act 1961. The Construction Regulations 1961 was by way of law introduced to control the construction industry, while the 1974 Act was useful in risk assessments and statement of methods for everyday activities at factories, but not specifically construction activities.
The Construction Design Management 1994 took effect in 31 March. the Construction Design Management regulations 1994’s applied to “All demolition work where safety is enforced by the HSE All building and maintenance work which is notifiable to the local HSE (i.e. lasts more than 30 days) or which involves 5 or more workers But not work on domestic premises or minor work in occupied offices, shops or similar premises”. (www.lhc.org.uk)
The roles that had responsibilities under CDM 1994 were the client, Planning Supervisor designer the principle contractor for all building and maintenance work notifiable to the local HSE which are stated above. (Source: www.lhc.org.uk)
“Since the original CDM Regulations were introduced in1994 concerns were raised that their complexity and the bureaucratic approach of many duty holders frustrated the Regulations’ underlying health and safety objectives. These views were supported by an industry-wide consultation in 2002 which resulted in the decision to revise the Regulations.” (source: www.hse.gov.uk)
The revision of the Construction Design Management was pending which gave birth to Construction Design Management regulation 2007. CDM 2007 has been evolutionary, according to HSE, rather than revolutionary. It stems from the demand for the “identification, reduction, management and communication of project-specific health and safety hazards.” (www.constructingexcellence.org.uk)
The Construction Design Management regulations 2007 is a combination of the Construction Design Management 1994, Approved Code of Practice and the Construction Health Safety and Welfare regulations of 1996. The objectives of CDM 2007 are to:
Simplify the regulations and improve clarity
Maximise their flexibility
Focus on planning and management, not ‘The Plan’ and other paperwork
Strengthen requirements on co-operation and co-ordination- encourage better integration
Simplify competence assessment, reduce bureaucracy and raise standards
Value of CDM
Construction Design Management regulations 2007 are in place to insist on duty holders to positively contribute to reduction of accidents and fatalities the fact remains – the principle contractor is still held responsible for all aspects of accidents. Since CDM 2007 Regulations are based on the Workplace Safety and Health Act. The intention of the regulation is the principle contractor should eliminate hazardous work and reduce risks or otherwise face legal and financial consequences. The problem with such regulations is that these cannot eliminate accidents or risks entirely through application. To change the old culture of blaming the principle contractors management team Construction Design Management 2007 Regulations would have to be more stringent in their approach for health and safety practices.(www.ies.org.sg)
The Construction Design Management Regulations 2007 was revised to improve on the limitations of Construction Design Management regulation 1994. The areas that have been changed include simplification of regulations, flexibility, focus on planning and management; strengthen requirements for cooperation for integration into the construction supply chain, and raising the standards for achievement. But the effectiveness of their implementation is compromised because:
The client who is one of the most influential entities in the construction project is not competent to make decisions referring to routine construction procedures such as composition of the project team, skill pool, health and safety issues and the roles of designers, contractors and coordinators.
The CDM Coordinator is often engaged at a later stage. The coordinator then receives relevant information on the construction project later than scheduled making the planning process longer than required.
Designers are still unaware of their responsibilities under CDM 2007 Regulations pertaining to health and safety issues. They have little training or education on work practices. Also they do not consider health and safety issues like maintenance, repair, clean up, refurbishment or demolition concern them. This lack of concern also stems from the culture of pre-design for approval at the planning stage. Since the designs are prepared with detailed costs before the planning stage, the CDM coordinator has less control over the changes.
The duty of appointment of workers, tender for materials, and appointment of subcontractors rests on the principal contractor who is engaged at the planning stage. Delay results in increased project costs and, at times, forces the team to launch the project with lesser consideration for risks of lives.
The principal contractor often operates separately from the client’s team. They tend to be hostile and protect their team regardless of the risks of health and safety planned by the client or advised by the principal.
Alos the Construction Design Management Regulations 2007 efficacy is compromised by the construction lifecycle and value to the client. Projects are dependent on planning permissions client’s commitment to investment and finding buyers for the developed structure. The requirement for focusing on the planning stage like the appointment of a CDM coordinator, design. The client’s competence is less important. The things takes dominant concern is the tenders, appointment of principal contractors, budgeting and getting the project to take flight. Issues like maintenance, cost of health and safety arrangements, and post-maintenance features are neglected. These elements not only impact the outcome of the project but also impact the work in progress. (www.ciob.org.uk/…/PRLCCDMpresentaiontoCIOBoffice972.pdf?ref).
Analyses
The Construction Design Management Regulations 2007 has been implemented for more than two years. The question that arises is whether it has been effective in achieving the set out for it objectives:
Simplify the regulations and improve clarity
Maximise their flexibility
Focus on planning and management, not ‘The Plan’ and other paperwork
Strengthen requirements on co-operation and co-ordination- encourage better integration
Simplify competence assessment, reduce bureaucracy and raise standards
Before I answer this question I will needs to analyse Construction Design Management Regulations 2007. At the beginning of the study I established the following objectives for CDM 2007 Regulations. These are discussed below based on the findings from the literature review:
The Construction Design Management and previous regulations affect project management outcomes
The construction industry is one of the major industries of the UK economy with contribution of up to 8 percent of GDP and £17 billion in financial terms. Yet, it is perhaps one of the most hazardous too, with, according to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) “Disproportionate level of fatals, major injuries and incidents of ill-health”. It is for this reason that regulations for health and safety have been implemented to regulate it. The latest regulations, CDM 2007 are improvements over the old ones with the view to eliminate the previous limitations and ensure more focused implementation. However major industry leaders, players and practitioners are of the view that the CDM 2007 Regulations have both negative and positive impacts on construction as a whole.
The value of the impact is great and can be estimated as costs incurred to the society from accidents, human lives and legal litigations.
According to www.opsi.gov.uk (2007, for the 10-year period appraised, the number of reported injuries in the construction industry is £7.9 billion, while minor injuries accounted for £216 million, and ill-health equalled to £10.2 billion. However, with the improvement over CDM 1994 Regulations the industry and government have hopes to gain from the change, as shown in Appendix 4. Earlier in 2006, the UK had one of the lowest incidence rates among EU countries.(Appendix3) www.hse.gov.uk/construction/cdm/session1.PPT/ http://www.hse.gov.uk/construction/phase1.pdf)
After the implementation of CDM 2007, the 2008 provisional estimates of fatality rate have fallen sharply, signifying the effectiveness of the regulations. However, it must also be noted that the change has not met the desired estimated target (See Appendix 2, 5, 6) (www.hse.gov.uk).
Instead Construction design management affected professional have new roles and responsibilities assigned which earlier had been vague. On paper these changes can be said to have a positive impact on the industry’s culture but the reality is that it has created negative perceptions of CDM 2007 Regulations more than positive ones. According to a survey of construction practitioners, 47 percent are of the view that the duty holders of the Regulations are not competent of their assigned duties. In fact, they are of the view that practitioners may vouch for the positive effect of CDM 2007 on the industry but how effective is it for implementing on project is another case. The culture of paperwork for drafting policies and procedures may continue but practical it has a long way to go (www.cdm2007.org).
As a result, Construction Design Management Regulations 2007 has a superficial effect on projects in developing a culture of responsibilities on paper for the current time. In fact Construction Design Management 2007 requirements have lengthened the process of pre-construction planning and designing. The role of the client, for example, is central in construction project but it can be observed that the client is distant or unaware of construction activities. Even though the role of CDM-Coordinator has been emphasised for advice and guidance, the client often engages them at a later stage when advice is too late for proper implementation. In this situation, it can be said that the Construction Design Management Regulations 2007 have slowed down rather than helped project management in the construction industry.
To explore the efficacy of CDM 2007 implementation plans and guidance.
As much as 59 percent of the CDM 2007 Survey indicates that executives at organisations recognise the importance of CDM 2007 as a policy for implementation, but to which depth they follow this policy is yet to be seen. Elements like leadership and communication for creating awareness, training and educating practitioners are usually absent from construction projects, but present at construction organisations. This means that construction organisations, especially contractors, designers and building managers, are aware of the positive impact of CDM 2007; but such awareness is not present at the clients’ end. The survey also indicates that as much as 62 percent have support and resources to adopt CDM 2007 duties (www.cdm2007.org).
I understands that the CDM 2007 Regulations are improvements over the CDM 1994 with change of roles to improve health and safety incidents through the effective implementation of roles and by eliminating paper trail. According to www.hse.gov.uk study (See Appendix 4, 5 6 and 7) incidents of fatalities and injuries have decreased significantly in the years that CDM 2007 Regulations have been implemented. But more importantly it has not impacted the productivity of construction. The overall production level has increased, while the incidents rate has decreased. In this context, it can be said that CDM 2007 Regulations have been effective in their objectives.
Despite these facts, according to discussion the section regarding affect project management outcomes people affected by the construction design management regulations 2007 in the construction industry are still feeling their way around new regulation. They recognise the importance of Construction Design Management 2007 for the improved health and safety environment in construction, but not sure construction professional affected are equipped to effectively implement the regulations. Tje reason for this this inefficiency is because of the lack of guidance and means for adopting CDM 2007 Regulations. For example standards for health and safety measures are outlined but construction workers under the construction design regulation 2007 are not guided through the process. Clients, who are not well-versed in construction activities, may assume health and safety measures. Designers who do not have concerns with health and safety issues are not trained to plan or participate in their implementation. Also the role of the Planning Supervisor, who has been replaced by the CDM Coordinator has minimal impact on the process of implementing health and safety regulations because the coordinator often find out about the project after the planning process due to the client’s unwillness to appoint them at the inception stage in most cases to save money . This leaves the designers and principal contractors to relegate health and safety communication to members on the project. In such a scenario, it is expected that CDM 2007 implementation is likely to fail.
Find Out How UKEssays.com Can Help You!
Our academic experts are ready and waiting to assist with any writing project you may have. From simple essay plans, through to full dissertations, you can guarantee we have a service perfectly matched to your needs.
View our academic writing services
Options for improvement of CDM 2007
The implementation authority for Construction Design Managment 2007 Regulations is the HSE. In Construction Design Management Regulation 1994 the monitoring and controlling authority had been well-defined, but required much paperwork. In the latest Regulations, however, the monitoring authority has a punitive role while the internally-appointed duty holder, the principle contractors and the CDM-coordinator have secondary roles because they are dependent on the client for pay and approval. This leaves less room for authoritative monitoring and executive decisions for designing or planning a safe work environment.
The framework for implementing Construction Design Management Regulation 2007 Regulations (See Appendix 8) can be improved, but requires more attention to project management practice. According to HSE prediction, health and safety directly impact the productivity of the industry. To improve productivity, improvement in the work environment is essential. Elements like program for increasing employee satisfaction, safe work environment, training, and investment in skilled human resources with high qualifications and background can add value to the project. But more importantly construction companies and projects which adopt these practices can improve in performance as well. Some of the options for integrating improvement in the construction work environment are outlined in the Construction Design Management Regulation 2007, but have to be guided and outlined for dutie holders to adopt:
Development of campaigns for CDM 2007 implementation to ensure that the right guidance and options for adoption are communicated to the duty holders.
Educating the client should become a priority for the contracting organisation and the authority to make sure that the client is clear of their duties. If required, training can also help the client to understand the process of construction and project management. This way they would be able to effectively manage the team responsible for project outcome.
Key duty holders should be made aware of their roles and responsibilities, but more importantly, they need to adopt their duties at the inception stage. This should be made mandatory so that they know their responsibilities right from the beginning. Duty holders like the CDM coordinator and designer should have some executive decisions to carry out their roles more responsibly and effectively.
The inspection system is essential for implementing CDM 2007. This is because they would have an unbiased role to play in the construction project. This should be carried out by a third party or from the HSE organisation, and appointed on the project for regular review of health and safety procedures. These are but some options available to construction expert in project management.
5 Conclusions
The above research study has been carried out with the view to evaluate how Construction (Design and Management) Regulations affect a construction project. It is clear that CDM Regulations have a long history with improvements over old laws to achieve the objectives of managing risks and reducing accidents at construction sites. The current Construction Design Management Regulation 2007 is far from perfect although they are much better than the previous ones. They have achieved their objectives of stress on planning and managing risks, reduction of risks, bureaucratic system of reporting authority and paper trail. Even statistics indicate that the rates of fatalities, injuries, and ill-health have improved significantly over the past few years (Appendix 1).
This should satisfy the industry experts and duty holders of CDM 2007 – client, contractor, designer, coordinator, and building manager.
My view the main objective of a safe and healthy work environment as compared to other industries in the UK has not materialised as planned. There is still room for improvement. From the above analysis it is clear that accidents continue to happen at construction sites. Duty holders are still clueless of their roles and responsibilities. As a result Construction Design Management Regulations 2007s application still requires improvements. Some of the options have been outlined in the analysis section but one must bear in mind that the list is not exhaustive. As practitioners go along implementing Construction Design Management Regulations 2007 they will find that client dissatisfaction employees caution of health and safety issues, and the continual rate of accidents will motivate them to devise ways to improve the work environment. But in the meanwhile the UK government, along with the construction industry’s leaders should develop guidelines with examples for implementation of the Construction Design Management Regulations to speed up and improve implementation processes in the next amendment of the Construction Design Management Regulations.
Bibliography
http://www.uwic.ac.uk/ltsu/u_area/studyskills/unit11.html
http://www.howto.co.uk/business/research-methods/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methodology
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bureaucracy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factory_Acts
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&cr=countryUK%7CcountryGB&ei=wNrySpzJNNKrjAe98PimDg&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&ved=0CAYQBSgA&q=cdm+case+studies+refurbishment&spell=1
http://www.hse.gov.uk/construction/index.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_United_Kingdom
CDM regulations explained 2001, By Raymond Joyce
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=QCl1ydfh24QC&printsec=frontcover&dq=cdm+regulation+explained&cd=1#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://www.marketresearchworld.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=810
References
http://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/tables/ind1.htm
http://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/overpic.htm
11:05 23 Feb 2009 Grant Prior http://www.contractjournal.com/Articles/2009/02/23/65131/hse-targets-refurb-death-sites.html
www.berr.gov.uk/whatwedo/sectors/construction/index.html+dti+construction+industry+largest&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&client=firefox-a
Donaghy 2009 www.hse.gov.uk/construction/cdm/session1.PPT
Published by construction skills
The site manager’s safety training scheme for the building and civil engineering industries (course notes) New Edition 2007
Introduction to Health and Safety at Work
By Phil Hughes, Ed Ferrett
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=YhlKT43FNRAC&pg=PA444&lpg=PA444&dq=the+Factories+Act+CDM&source=bl&ots=Bhdi-0cFm3&sig=jlL-ETNDkhzdl3pEDLkeN-Cfg9c&hl=en&ei=dePeS6W_GY7w0wTCjZ3IBw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CCUQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=the%20Factories%20Act%20CDM&f=false
www.lhc.org.uk/members/pubs/factsht/51fact.htm)
http://www.hse.gov.uk/construction/cdm/legal.htm
http://www.constructingexcellence.org.uk/pdf/final_cdm_guidance_21June07.pdf
http://www.ies.org.sg/enewsletter/Report_UK_CDM_Regulations_Implementation.pdf
Bill McKenzie
Lord McKenzie of Luton http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2007/em/uksiem_20070320_en.pdf
http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/one-death-is-too-many-response.pdf
CDM survey http://www.cdm2007.org/Press/Default.aspx
Appendix 1
Appendix 1 Estimated prevalence rates of self-reported illness caused or made worse by the current or most recent job, per 100 000 people working in the last 12 months
Appendix 2
Fatal and injury trends
(Percentage incidence rate changes against targets)
www.hse.gov.uk/construction/cdm/session1.PPT
Appendix 3
http://www.hse.gov.uk/construction/phase1.pdf
Appendix 4
Bill McKenzie Lord McKenzie of Lutonhttp://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2007/em/uksiem_20070320_en.pdf
Appendix 5
http://www.hse.gov.uk/construction/phase1.pdf
Appendix 6
http://www.hse.gov.uk/construction/phase1.pdf
Appendix 7
http://www.hse.gov.uk/construction/phase1.pdf
Cite This Work
To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:
