Online anti-harassment video training for managers & supervisors

Harassment supervisor video training screenshot

Everyone has the right to work free of unlawful discrimination or harassment. But this does not always happen. Sexual harassment is one of the most pervasive forms of unlawful discrimination and it can impact every business and every person. Many laws have been passed to try and stamp out sexual harassment, and over the last few decades, courts have been taking ever harsher measures against companies that fail to prevent harassment in their workplaces.

VinciWorks has released four online video courses that are relevant for all staff, with an additional hour of training for all managers and supervisors.

Harassment video training 1: Definitions

This course takes users through the common phrases and legal definitions of sexual harassment. It describes the two major forms of sexual harassment, the legal background, important cases, hypothetical scenarios, quizzes and learning assessments. By the end of this course, users will understand the important definitions of sexual harassment.

Try now

Continue reading

SRA releases guidance to help you better understand the key changes in the SRA Standards and Regulations

Ahead of the 25 November release of their new Standards and Regulations, the SRA has published a suite of guidance and support materials, designed to help you better understand any areas of significant change compared to our existing rules or areas of new opportunities.

Register for upcoming SRA Standards and Regulations webinar

The guidance has been divided into four different sectors:

  • Accounts Rule 
  • Authorisation 
  • Unregulated Organisations 
  • Other
Continue reading

August news roundup

Events company fined £161k after worker injured by a forklift

An events company that also manufactures event materials such as exhibition stands and installations has been fined £161k after an employee was seriously injured during an on-site operation at Woodcorner Farm, Coventry.

A work crew from the company had sought to move a 4.2m wide park home chassis through a 3.9m door opening with the aid of two forklifts. When the attempt failed, workers began to push down on one side to angle it through the entryway. The chassis slipped off the fork of the truck and struck one of the employees on the shoulder.

The employee was thrown back by the impact and hit a wall 2m away. The force was so great he was knocked unconscious and suffered a broken collarbone.

An investigation carried out by the HSE found that managers had failed to adequately plan the operation and conduct a risk assessment of the dangers.

The company pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974. They were ordered to pay a £161,000 fine and £1,345 in additional costs.

HSE inspector Christopher Maher, who oversaw the case said: ‘Those in control of work have a responsibility to devise safe methods of working and to provide the necessary information, instruction and training to their workers in the safe system of working’.

Read the full story

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Construction company fined £1m and employee sentenced for 6 months

A construction company and one of its employees have been sentenced after another worker was fatally injured during an operation at a construction site in Stratford.

An excavator, operated by the on-site supervisor, struck the worker as he disconnected lifting accessories from a metal pile and pushed him against a concrete wall, where he suffered from fatal crushing injuries. Another worker standing nearby was able to escape.

An investigation by the HSE found that the construction company failed to assess risks and failed to take the safety of its employees into account.

Both the construction company and the site supervisor pleaded not guilty to breaching the Health & Safety at Work Act 1974. The construction company was fined £1,000,000 and ordered to pay costs of £108,502. The employee received a 6-month custodial sentence, suspended for 12 months and ordered to pay costs of £15,000.

Lead HSE inspector Darren Alldis said: ‘This death was wholly preventable and serves as a reminder as to why it is so important for companies and individuals to take their responsibilities to protect others seriously and to take the simple actions necessary to eliminate and minimise risks’.

Read the full story

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Manufacturing company sentenced after worker injured by machinery

A manufacturing company based in Oldham has received a sentence after a 34-year-old agency worker suffered severe injuries to her hand.

The staff member was only on her second shift with the company when she attempted to remove a blockage from a filling machine. Her hand came in to contact with an open rotating fan, causing her to lose sections of her fingers on her right hand.

Skin grafts taken to repair some of the damage proved unsuccessful, leaving the victim with additional scarring on her stomach. A subsequent health report confirmed that the worker suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder as a result of the incident and has been unable to return to work.

An investigation by the HSE found a number of major failures in the companies operations and procedures. They found that appropriate risk assessments and equipment checks were not carried out and that the fan lacked any proper guarding.
They concluded that the company had also failed to provide first aid training to its workers or have first aid provision immediately available.

The manufacturing company pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) and 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and Regulation 3(2) of the Health and Safety (First Aid) Regulations 1981. The company was fined £28,000 and were ordered to pay additional costs of £7,771.

Read the full story

 

Annual compliance questionnaires – reporting and tracking challenges

Many businesses, such as law firms and accountancy firms, need to collect and analyse data from employees for regulatory and compliance purposes. While many firms carry this out annually, some may do it more often. VinciWorks spoke to several firms to learn how they collect, analyse and track responses from the annual declarations questionnaire, often referred to as annual compliance questionnaire, to uncover the key challenges in the process. What we learnt helped us develop our annual declaration reporting portal.

Compliance Questionnaire Definition

An annual compliance questionnaire is a document typically used by organisations in the UK to assess and verify compliance with relevant laws, regulations, policies, and industry standards on an annual basis. It serves as a tool to gather information from individuals or entities regarding their adherence to specific requirements.

By completing the annual compliance questionnaire, individuals or entities provide a self-assessment of their compliance status and disclose any potential compliance breaches or issues. This process helps organisations to monitor and manage their compliance risks effectively, identify any non-compliance, and take appropriate remedial actions.

What do the annual declarations questionnaires include?

There are no regulations guiding the specifics of what information an annual declaration questionnaire should collect. The declaration might include information on the following:

Conflicts of interest

Staff should declare whether they have had any business dealings for the firm whereby their own interests are served. If there is a conflict of interest, this must be declared in the questionnaire.

Continue reading

VinciWorks releases GDPR refresher training with specialised modules

Compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is an ongoing process. Organisations should regularly review and update their policies and data collection processes, as well as take training. The best way to refresh staff’s knowledge is to enrol them in a new course around once a year, rather than simply ask them to take the same course they took a year ago. With GDPR now having been in force for over a year, VinciWorks will be adding a new course to the GDPR training suite that includes both refresher training and role-specific advanced modules.

How does the course work?

The recommended use of GDPR: A Practical Overview is to put all staff through the basic six modules, and to add advanced modules for specialised staff in certain departments. Personalisation questions at the beginning of the training means staff in roles that require advanced training, such as HR, IT and marketing, can choose to take job-specific modules. The basic modules cover the basics of data, keeping data safe, working from home, data subject rights and data breaches, with review questions included within each module.

Continue reading

The five basic data privacy rules for US compliance

The five data principles

The meaning of data can be as broad as any information, from health records to a lunch order. Different kinds of data are subject to different laws with varying levels of severity. Data about a person’s health, for example, is subject to a strict set of regulations known as HIPAA. Here is some guidance on protecting your clients’ and colleagues’ data through five basic data privacy rules.

Data privacy law in the US

Data privacy rules apply to any information that can be used on its own, or in combination with other clues, information, or context, to identify, contact, or locate an individual. 

Data covered by data privacy rules is any information related to a person that could be used to identify that person, either directly or indirectly.

It could be a name, photo, email address, date of birth, ethnicity, religion, financial record, medical information, or employment history. It could even be posts on social networking sites.

Different countries use different terms to describe this kind of data. In the US, it’s known as personally identifiable information (PII).

The key data principles

While specific rules on data privacy can vary by state and jurisdiction, there are some basic rules that should always be followed. You need to be aware of these because everyone in an organization is responsible for protecting the data held on employees, customers and clients.

Continue reading

Harassment and Bullying at Work: MyStory – new version released for US compliance

Last year, we released a new harassment course that was inspired by the #MeToo movement. The interactive, story-based course brings to life the real impact of bullying and harassment at work through hard-hitting stories, connects users to a global movement, and gives them a chance to have their story heard too.

We have now released a new linear version of the sexual harassment course. The new course takes users through four key sections, with questions along the way to test users’ knowledge and understanding of the topic. The course is fully compliant with US federal and local harassment laws.

Demo the course

Continue reading

SRA Standards and Regulations 2019 whitepaper – What’s changed?

On 25 November 2019, the new SRA Standards and Regulations come into effect. Replacing the SRA Handbook, the SRA Standards and Regulations stipulate the behaviours, standards and requirements expected by solicitors and other SRA regulated people.

VinciWorks has produced a whitepaper that outlines what the new Standards and Regulations will include and the challenges it presents to firms.

The whitepaper covers:

  • Key differences between the SRA Code of Conduct and the new SRA Standards and Regulations
  • The requirements of the Insurance Distribution Directive
  • VinciWorks’ SRA Standards and Regulations training suite
  • The relationship between training and continuing competence

Download whitepaper

Continue reading

The UK has a new Prime Minister – Regulatory Agenda for July 2019

Regulatory agenda for July 2019
The implications of Brexit feature heavily in July’s Regulatory Agenda

To help businesses keep track of updates in UK legislation and policies, VinciWorks regularly publishes a short regulatory update. Since our last update in June, the UK has gained a new Prime Minister. Boris Johnson has pledged to ensure the UK leaves the European Union by 31 October 2019.

The Regulatory Agenda is designed to provide an overview of regulatory changes or new regulations recently passed, proposed, or on the agenda which are relevant to key compliance areas of VinciWorks’ clients in the UK. It is divided by the main sources of UK policy and does not include provisions which have been dropped.

Main topics from the regulatory agenda:

  • EU developments
  • Acts of Parliament
  • Bills before Parliament
  • Draft Bills
  • Secondary legislation
  • Consultations – Open
  • Consultations – Closed
  • Queen’s speech
  • On the horizon
  • Manifesto commitments

You can download the regulatory agenda for July by clicking here.

July News Roundup

Restaurant owner fined after workers exposed to asbestos fibres

An Essex based restaurant was converting the rooms above the restaurant into flats. During the conversion process, an asbestos insulation board was removed and broken up by the workers – exposing them to asbestos fibres. An asbestos survey was only carried out after the disturbance.

An investigation by the HSE found that the work was not undertaken by a licensed asbestos contractor. Also, asbestos management, refurbishment and demolition surveys were not carried out prior to the conversion.

The owner of the restaurant pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 4(3) of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012 and was fined £3,000 and ordered to pay full costs of £6,293.

HSE inspector David King said: ‘Those in control of works have a responsibility to manage the risks from asbestos in non-domestic premises. To achieve this the duty holder must ensure that a suitable and sufficient assessment is carried out as to whether asbestos is or is liable to be present in the premises.’

Read the full story

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Car manufacturer fined £1 million after two employees suffer chemical burns

Two workers of a car and commercial vehicle component manufacturer were cleaning a distillation tank with a highly flammable chemical. During this process, the chemical ignited and exploded, resulting in both workers suffering severe burn injuries. One of the workers’ injuries were severe enough that he had to stay off work for over 2 months.

An investigation by the HSE found that no risk assessment had been carried out for the process of cleaning the tank with flammable chemicals. There was also no safe system of work in place.

The car component manufacturer pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2 (1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974. The company was fined £1,000,000 and ordered to pay costs of £9,374.

HSE principal inspector Paul Thompson said: ‘Those in control of work have a responsibility to devise safe systems of work, and to provide the necessary information, instruction and training to their workers in those systems, as well as the substances they use’.


Read the full story

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Building contractor fined after wall collapses onto homeowner

A group of boys were playing on the gate of an underground car park in Leeds. One of the boys was opening and closing the gate by pushing it – the gate was pushed beyond the stopping point. As the gate did not have an end-stop, it came off the track and fell over onto the boy. This resulted in the gate trapping and fatally crushing the boy.

An investigation by the HSE found that the electric gate company failed to install an end-stop and that nobody involved in the maintenance and commissioning of the gate ever noticed the defect of the gate.

The electric gate company pleaded guilty to breaching Section 3 (1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 and was fined £30,000 and ordered to pay full costs of £12,411.46.

HSE inspector Julian Franklin commented: ‘This was a tragic and wholly avoidable incident, which could have been prevented by a thorough commissioning check before handing the gate over to the building occupier’.


Read the full story