1 Two workers in a group of 12 were not wearing their hard hats in a dangerous area.

2 The noise level in one department was very high as compared to the law.
3 Ministry of Foreign Affai has refused to show one worker his medical record even
though this is a request from the worker and the trade union
4 UTL laid off one worker for 3 weeks without pay for refusing the supervisor’s order to
perform a dangerous task
Protest from UTL:
1 They do their best to enforce the hard-hat and have evidence to prove that
disciplinary action has been taken.
2 They require all employees in the noisy department to wear earplugs.
3 The company doctor felt that this particular worker’s mental health would threaten if
shown his medical record.
4 This task was always being performed with no injury to workers.

Question: If I were the review Commissioner, how would I rule on the four citations?
What is the reasoning behind each ruling?
INTRODUCTION

Occupational safety and health (OSH) is a cross-disciplinary area concerned with

protecting the safety, health and welfare of people engaged in work or
employment and entrants. As a secondary effect, Occupational Safety and
Health may also protect co-workers, family members, employers, customers,
suppliers, nearby communities, and other members of the public who are
impacted by the workplace environment. Occupational health aims at promoting
and maintaining of the highest degree of physical, mental and social well-being of
workers in all occupations; the prevention amongst workers of departures from
health caused by their working conditions; the protection of workers in their
employment from risks resulting from factors adverse to health; the placing and
maintenance of the worker in an occupational environment adapted to his
physiological and psychological capabilities; and, to summarize, the adaptation of
work to man and of each man to his job."

The reasons for establishing good occupational safety and health standards are
frequently identified as:

• Legal - Occupational safety and health requirements may be reinforced in

civil law and/or criminal law; it is accepted that without the extra
 "encouragement" of potential regulatory action or litigation, many
organizations would not act upon their implied moral obligations.

According to the Occupational Safety and Health Act, 2006, an employer who
has at least 20 (twenty) workers at a workplace shall prepare, and as often as
may be appropriate, revise a written statement of policy with respect to the safety
and health of employees while at work; and make arrangements for carrying out
the statement of policy; and also bring the statement of policy and any revision of
it to the notice of all the employees.

According to the Safety Policies, employee’s safety is regulated by both the

federal and state governments, however employers need to go beyond the
policies in order to accept that safety and health care needed at work places.

According to the Act, the employer should nominate safety representatives from
among the employees. It is both the work of the employee and employer to
abide by the Health and Safety procedures and rules.

1
Two workers in a group of 12 were not wearing their hard hats in a
dangerous area. The company protested all that they do their best to
enforce the hard-hat rule and have evidence to provide that disciplinary
action has been taken.

As a review commissioner, I will use both reports to investigate on Uganda

Telecommunication Limited (UTL) and get more facts about Occupation Safety
and Health at UTL:- I will visit, UTL and find out the following:-

Safety and Health Policy at UTL: Does UTL have a comprehensive and clear
policy on Safety and Health. If yes, are all employees aware about it and does
UTL carry out regulars review. Does UTL involve employees when drafting or
reviewing the policy. Is the policy in a language which is understood by the
employees.

Hard-Hat Rule: I will read the UTL rule on Hard-hat – to exactly know what it
entails.

Record Keeping: UTL is saying they do their best to enforce the hard-hat rule
and have evidence to prove that disciplinary action has been taken. I will
request for the following from UTL:-

Accurate records with respect to number of accidents, occupational illness
and lost workdays.

Documents concerning the disciplinary action taken and the type of
disciplinary action taken. If the disciplinary action is stringent, then the 2
workers would not have been found without hard hats.

Staff Representatives: I will be interested in knowing how the staff

representatives are appointed – whether by management, recognized trade
unions or employees themselves. I will talk to the representative, to find our

2
whether he or she understands his or her responsibilities, how often he or she
does supervision. If supervision is done regularly, then staff would be
implementing the rules.

Management: I will be interested in interviewing some Top Management to find

out whether they know their responsibilities.

Employees: I will talk to some employees to find out whether they are aware
about the policy.
Accident Analysis: Whether it is one ie cost of supervisors and staff in
investigating, recording and reporting.
How many times does a Safety and Health committee sit: I will be interested
in knowing the times the committees sits and also review the minutes of the
proceedings.
Training of staff: Are employees trained in safety matters for them to be
capable of avoiding risks. Are they informed of risks in language they
understand. Are staff re-oriented about policies and how often.
Supervision in Safety matters: Is it done, by who?
Risk Assessment Exercise: Is it done and the records of the previous
exercises.
The type of safety devices and clothing which UTL has: Check the types of
devices and clothing UTL has – whether it accepts performance of the job or
make the employee uncomfortable.
Consideration of the possible effect of safety scheme, if workers frequently
remove safety guards or adopt dangerous practices in order to earn high
bonuses, it may be necessary the scheme and pay time rates only if the
company can find no way of making the process completely safe.

Ruling: General duty Rule:

3
Employer: According to the Act 9: Page 19: 15: It is the duty of every
employer to consult a safety representative in the making and substenance of
arrangements, which enable the employer and the workers to co-operate
effectively in promoting the development of measures to ensure that safety and
health of employees.

Employees: Have a duty to take responsible care of themselves or others and

they must cooperate with employers in meeting statutory requirements.

Ruling:

The reasoning behind

The employer have the overall responsibility of ensuring that employees abide by
the Occupational Health and Safety. If the disciplinary action given was
stringent, the 2 employees would not have been found without the hard-hat.
The Staff Representative would have ensured that all workers have their gears.
The Human Resource Department should have endeavored to explain the
consequences of not putting on their work gears (the hard hats). Therefore there
is a level of doubt about the disciplinary action taken by UTL.

However, under the civil law, in the law of torts; the employees also have a duty
to obey their employers and if anything happens they are charged with
negligence.

Ruling:
Section 99(b) pg 65 of Occupational Safety and Health Act (2006), under Part
XIV – Offences, Penalties and Legal Proceedings: A person commits an offence
who refuses to use the means or appliance provided for securing the health or
safety of workers.

4
The noise level in one department was very high as compared to the law.
The company protested that they require all employees in the noisy
department to wear earplugs.

Noise means any unwanted and annoying sound that is intrinsically objectionable
to human beings or which can have or is likely to have an adverse effect on
human health or the environment.

According to The National Environment (Noise Standards and Control)

Regulation, 2003; Part II – Permissible Noise Levels: section 6 (2): The
maximum noise levels of continuous or intermittent noise from a factory or a
workshop, to which a person may be exposed shall not exceed the level
specified in Column 1 of Part II of the First Schedule, for the time specified in
Columns 2 and 3 of that part.

Table 1: Maximum Permissible Noise Levels for General Environment:

Facility Noise Limits dB (a)
(Leq)
Day Night
Any building used as hospital, Offices, home of the 45 35
aged, sanatorium and institutes of higher learning,
conference rooms, public library, environmental or
recreational sites.
Residential buildings 50 35
Mixed residential (with some commercial and 55 45
entertainment)
Residential and industry or small scale production 60 50
and commerce
Industrial 70 60

5
Due to excess noise at UTL, it will cause negative effects on that particular
department which includes:

Gradual deafness due to prolonged noise. Deafness may occur slowly
that the worker would not notice.

Putting on ear plugs constantly may cause ear infections.

UTL is not concerned about the future effects of their actions on staff, but they
are exploiting staff.

Ruling:

Section 7 (1) subject to these regulations, no person shall, for an activity

specified in regulation 6 (above) emit noise in excess of the permissible noise
level, unless permitted by a license issued under these regulations.

Any person who contravenes subregulation (1) commits an offence.

It would be advisable that UTL rather than providing ear plugs because they can
be uncomfortable to wear throughout, and besides they may cause ear infections
hence a health hazard, therefore it would be wise for UTL to abide by the law as
stated in the table below.

UTL has refused to show one worker his medical record even though this
is a request from the worker and the trade union. The company protected
that the company doctor felt that this particular worker’s mental health
would threaten if shown his medical record.

6
As the concept of accident prominence is now largely discredited safety
programmes concentrate as far as possible on ensuring that the employee is
suitable for the job and that work is conducted in a safe environment.

There should be careful selection of new employees to eliminate those who are
physically and mentally unstable.

As a Commissioner, I will be interested in knowing whether one worker is new in

the organization and hence a company policy to check new staff before they are
offered employment or whether he is an old staff and the company wanted to
carry out routine check ups for their staff.

Rule:
UTL after knowing that one of their staff is sick, one way of protecting staff would
have been to call that person, offer him or her counseling and talk to him about
his or her status.

By keeping the records, they are protecting their organization and not the person
because the earlier you disclose one’s health status, the better for him or her to
seek treatment.

UTL laid off one worker for 3 weeks without pay for refusing the
supervisor’s order to perform a dangerous task. The company protested
that this task was always being performed with no injury to workers.

The General Duty Clause”: The main provision of OSHA states, that each
employer has a general duty to furnish each employee a place of employment
free from recognized hazards that cause or are likely to cause death or serious
physical harm. (4)

7
Bill No. 29: Occupational Safety and Health bill: Duty to report dangerous
situations to immediate supervisor: It is the duty of a worker to report
immediately to a supervisor any situations which the worker has reasonable
groups to believe presents an imminent or serious danger to his or her life or
health or others in the premises.

Rights of Employees: Employees have a right to seek a safe work place without
fear of punishment – Section 11c of the OSHA. The law says employers shall
not punish or discriminate against workers for exercise their rights to complain to
an employer, filing safety or health grievances.

Ruling:
If an employee is exercising his rights, the employer is not allowed to
discriminate against that worker in any way. By laying off the worker for 3 weeks,
UTL will be violating the law and the worker can sue the employee and under the
…. Law and recover his or her money.

According to the Act: Bill No. 29: Occupational Safety and Health bill:
Worker’s right to move away from dangerous situation.
A worker who removes himself or herself from a work situation which he or she
has reasonable justification to believe presents an imminent and serious danger
to his or her life or health shall not be published or subjected to undue
consequences, provided the danger is confirmed by the Commissioner.

8
REFERENCE:

1. Uganda Labour Laws:Compiled by Federation of Uganda Employees

2. The Occupation Safety and Health Act, (2006): The Republic of

Uganda.