Risk Management
Getting away from it all
The imprisonment of a teacher following the death of a pupil in 2002 appeared to signal the end for school trips. But detailed risk management preparations are the key to their survival, says David Collard
In May 2002, ten-year-old Max Palmer drowned while taking part in an activity known as ‘plunge pooling’, in the waters of the Glenridding Beck in the Lake District. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has just published its report into the case which resulted in geography teacher, Paul Ellis, being sent to prison. Mr Ellis was in charge of the trip and pleaded guilty to manslaughter at Manchester Crown Court.
The repercussions of this and other cases involving teachers on school trips have prompted many to argue that school trips are just too risky.
Taking care
In March 2005, the NASUWT produced a further statement confirming its original stance on school trips, advising its members to avoid taking children out of the school on educational visits.
“In an increasingly litigious society, which no longer appears to accept the concept of genuine accident, our first responsibility must be to protect our members’ interests”, said the NASUWT general secretary, Eamonn O’Kane.
Legal protection
The Government has been quick to try and reassure teachers, with former DfES secretary Ruth Kelly announcing “new detailed guidance… (that) will cover the fair treatment of school staff. It will seek to ensure that staff that take reasonable care and follow employer guidelines are, in the event of an unfortunate accident, protected by the law”.
It is widely agreed that independent schools and colleges generally travel further and undertake a greater range of activities than their maintained school counterparts. Despite this, the risk management process is of equal importance to both.
Official help
Risk management information is provided centrally by the DfES, the HSE and by local authorities, in the case of maintained schools. Although not bound by these guidelines, it seems eminently sensible for independent schools to at least be aware of their existence. The DfES website (www.dfes.gov.uk) is worth viewing. The official report into the Glenridding Beck tragedy can also be found on this site (also try www.teachernet.gov.uk/wholeschool/healthandsafety/visits for useful guidelines).
The overwhelming majority of educational visits are carried out safely and responsibly by teachers who take the time and effort to get things right. The benefits of these trips to children are immense. They are particularly valuable where the opportunity is taken to make children “risk aware” rather then “risk averse”.
In contrast to these well-run visits, the Glenridding tragedy occurred when the promised activity went ahead, despite the appalling conditions and the warnings of others. Lack of planning was a major contributory factor. The trial Judge described the leader’s actions as “reckless in the extreme”.
Contingency planning
One of the features common to a number of the recent tragedies on school visits has been the need to meet the expectation that an activity will be delivered. In particular, there was no structured alternative programme for the Glenridding visit.
“Most school insurers think it extremely unlikely that teachers face a high risk of prosecution, provided that they follow the recommended protocols.”
An important part of planning is therefore to identify reasonable alternative activities (‘Plan B’) and to be equipped to carry them out if need be. It is also important to make the parents aware of the alternatives because of the need for consent and to inform the children so that they know in advance that while the planned programme may not be deliverable if circumstances are unfavourable, there will be other activities on offer.
Emergency cover
The other aspect of contingency planning is emergency planning. Those who plan for emergencies are less likely to have them. In the case of Glenridding Beck, the leader had no emergency plans. He was not equipped to recover anybody from the pool, prevent or deal with hypothermia or to deal with the foreseeable risk of his being incapacitated as a leader. Such a lack of preparedness turned his gross error of judgement in allowing the pupil to jump into the pool into a tragedy when he was unable to get him out.
There is always the possibility in a mountainous environment of a genuine accident, for example a child tripping and breaking a limb. The HSE considers that the leader of a party who is able to take effective control of a situation through good planning and training will have little to fear from the criminal law. They are also likely to have a robust position in the event of parents questioning their conduct.
Have no fear
Despite the media coverage of accidents on school trips, schools and their advisors have been keen to reassure teachers that legal protection is in place for those who follow the official guidance and undertake proper planning. The HSE, the DfES and other bodies hold the view that leaders who act conscientiously will have little to fear.
“Independent schools and colleges generally travel further and undertake a greater range of activities than their maintained school counterparts.”
Most school insurers think it extremely unlikely that teachers face a high risk of prosecution, provided that they follow the recommended protocols. Indeed, Adrian Rawlings, complex injury co-ordinator at loss adjuster Cunningham Lindsay, says that stress, bullying, failure to educate and trips and slips, are far more worrying to insurers in terms of claims generated.
A quote from the Glenridding enquiry summarises the view of most: “Teachers and helpers who give their time and energy to follow good practice and do the job properly should be applauded – long may well-planned educational visits continue”.
David Collard is marketing manager of HSBC Insurance Brokers specialist education division. He can be contacted on enquiries.school@hsbc.com or through www.schools.hsbc.com
Return to Risk Management
