PFD report

David Alexander MOBS​​BY · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 11 Mar 2019•Brighton and Hove

Report record

Published report and response evidence

This page connects the concerns raised in this report with statements found in recipients’ published responses. A link shows a clear evidence connection; it does not assign responsibility.

View original report
Concerns
10

Raised in this report

Recipients
2

Named on the report

Responses found
0

Of 2 recipients

Stated actions
0

Described in responses

Recipients and published responses

Source document

Full report text

This is the full text from the original published report.

Open published report

Concerns and recipient responses

Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

Concerns raised10

  1. Lack of management training for managers
  2. Unavailability of first-aid or designated emergency personnel on site
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to provide adequate first aid where emergency assistance may be neededPart of recurring concern: Unreliable on-site emergency medical and first-aid response arrangements
  3. Failure to undertake risk assessments for work tasks
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to assess risks before hazardous work tasks
Responses linked to these concerns

Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.

No linked response statements

No respondent-stated action or position is clearly linked to these concerns.

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Lack of management training for managers

Wider context from the report

“(1) Brighton and Hove City Council were “advising” Blatchington Mill School (BMS) on health and safety. They were apparently using a template which made no mention of work at height when considering the health and safety of the facilities (caretaking/cleaning) department at BMS. This is dangerous and may have led to the fact that neither of their audits of 2014 or 2018 made any mention of the risks associated with and training requirements regarding working at height. (2) Although Mr MOBS​​BY was employed either by Brighton and Hove City Council or BMS or a combination of the two, he was not monitored or instructed in his work. He was allowed to choose how, when and where he worked. Even though anyone who knew his job description or knew Mr MOBS​​BY was aware that he was using ladders and step ladders he was untrained with regard to working at height. • On the 3rd August 2018 he was unchallenged when he announced his work programme for the day. • His line manager’s did not instruct him with regard to the jobs he did, even though those jobs were considered to be unnecessary by the managers. • No methodology was explored when he announced his job for the day, there was no discussion about the equipment that he was going to use. • There was no risk assessment undertaken in respect of any of the jobs that he did. • He was allowed to work alone and unsupervised. He lay alone and unconscious for 9-10 minutes before he was spotted. It was over 20 minutes before CPR was started. There was no first aider or designated person on the school site that day. • His working environment on the 3rd August 2018 meant that he was working with ambient temperatures of around 26 degrees centigrade. • He was not wearing a hat and he worked in the heat initially and then in direct sunlight latterly, from 0848 hrs until his fall at 1255 hrs having taken one forty minute break at 1100 hrs. • It seems clear that working at BMS formed a huge part of Mr MOBS​​BY’s life. He had been there for many years and was probably set in his ways and not amenable to being managed. • Those managing him were all relatively new to their managerial posts and yet none of them had received any management training. It was clear they had no idea how to deal with him. • They were not assisted by the fact that it was supposed to be the case that every employee was appraised annually. • There was no evidence at all to suggest that Mr MOBS​​BY had ever been appraised. I am concerned that this situation which was demonstrated to be in existence at BMS could well be replicated, not only throughout Brighton and Hove, but throughout England and Wales and this is the reason why this Report has been sent to the Department of Education and I think the matters raised in it should have wider discussion throughout the Country. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Unavailability of first-aid or designated emergency personnel on site

Wider context from the report

“(1) Brighton and Hove City Council were “advising” Blatchington Mill School (BMS) on health and safety. They were apparently using a template which made no mention of work at height when considering the health and safety of the facilities (caretaking/cleaning) department at BMS. This is dangerous and may have led to the fact that neither of their audits of 2014 or 2018 made any mention of the risks associated with and training requirements regarding working at height. (2) Although Mr MOBS​​BY was employed either by Brighton and Hove City Council or BMS or a combination of the two, he was not monitored or instructed in his work. He was allowed to choose how, when and where he worked. Even though anyone who knew his job description or knew Mr MOBS​​BY was aware that he was using ladders and step ladders he was untrained with regard to working at height. • On the 3rd August 2018 he was unchallenged when he announced his work programme for the day. • His line manager’s did not instruct him with regard to the jobs he did, even though those jobs were considered to be unnecessary by the managers. • No methodology was explored when he announced his job for the day, there was no discussion about the equipment that he was going to use. • There was no risk assessment undertaken in respect of any of the jobs that he did. • He was allowed to work alone and unsupervised. He lay alone and unconscious for 9-10 minutes before he was spotted. It was over 20 minutes before CPR was started. There was no first aider or designated person on the school site that day. • His working environment on the 3rd August 2018 meant that he was working with ambient temperatures of around 26 degrees centigrade. • He was not wearing a hat and he worked in the heat initially and then in direct sunlight latterly, from 0848 hrs until his fall at 1255 hrs having taken one forty minute break at 1100 hrs. • It seems clear that working at BMS formed a huge part of Mr MOBS​​BY’s life. He had been there for many years and was probably set in his ways and not amenable to being managed. • Those managing him were all relatively new to their managerial posts and yet none of them had received any management training. It was clear they had no idea how to deal with him. • They were not assisted by the fact that it was supposed to be the case that every employee was appraised annually. • There was no evidence at all to suggest that Mr MOBS​​BY had ever been appraised. I am concerned that this situation which was demonstrated to be in existence at BMS could well be replicated, not only throughout Brighton and Hove, but throughout England and Wales and this is the reason why this Report has been sent to the Department of Education and I think the matters raised in it should have wider discussion throughout the Country. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to provide adequate first aid where emergency assistance may be needed; Unreliable on-site emergency medical and first-aid response arrangements.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Failure to undertake risk assessments for work tasks

Wider context from the report

“(1) Brighton and Hove City Council were “advising” Blatchington Mill School (BMS) on health and safety. They were apparently using a template which made no mention of work at height when considering the health and safety of the facilities (caretaking/cleaning) department at BMS. This is dangerous and may have led to the fact that neither of their audits of 2014 or 2018 made any mention of the risks associated with and training requirements regarding working at height. (2) Although Mr MOBS​​BY was employed either by Brighton and Hove City Council or BMS or a combination of the two, he was not monitored or instructed in his work. He was allowed to choose how, when and where he worked. Even though anyone who knew his job description or knew Mr MOBS​​BY was aware that he was using ladders and step ladders he was untrained with regard to working at height. • On the 3rd August 2018 he was unchallenged when he announced his work programme for the day. • His line manager’s did not instruct him with regard to the jobs he did, even though those jobs were considered to be unnecessary by the managers. • No methodology was explored when he announced his job for the day, there was no discussion about the equipment that he was going to use. • There was no risk assessment undertaken in respect of any of the jobs that he did. • He was allowed to work alone and unsupervised. He lay alone and unconscious for 9-10 minutes before he was spotted. It was over 20 minutes before CPR was started. There was no first aider or designated person on the school site that day. • His working environment on the 3rd August 2018 meant that he was working with ambient temperatures of around 26 degrees centigrade. • He was not wearing a hat and he worked in the heat initially and then in direct sunlight latterly, from 0848 hrs until his fall at 1255 hrs having taken one forty minute break at 1100 hrs. • It seems clear that working at BMS formed a huge part of Mr MOBS​​BY’s life. He had been there for many years and was probably set in his ways and not amenable to being managed. • Those managing him were all relatively new to their managerial posts and yet none of them had received any management training. It was clear they had no idea how to deal with him. • They were not assisted by the fact that it was supposed to be the case that every employee was appraised annually. • There was no evidence at all to suggest that Mr MOBS​​BY had ever been appraised. I am concerned that this situation which was demonstrated to be in existence at BMS could well be replicated, not only throughout Brighton and Hove, but throughout England and Wales and this is the reason why this Report has been sent to the Department of Education and I think the matters raised in it should have wider discussion throughout the Country. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to assess risks before hazardous work tasks.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Failure of health and safety assessment templates and audits to address work at height

Wider context from the report

“(1) Brighton and Hove City Council were “advising” Blatchington Mill School (BMS) on health and safety. They were apparently using a template which made no mention of work at height when considering the health and safety of the facilities (caretaking/cleaning) department at BMS. This is dangerous and may have led to the fact that neither of their audits of 2014 or 2018 made any mention of the risks associated with and training requirements regarding working at height. (2) Although Mr MOBS​​BY was employed either by Brighton and Hove City Council or BMS or a combination of the two, he was not monitored or instructed in his work. He was allowed to choose how, when and where he worked. Even though anyone who knew his job description or knew Mr MOBS​​BY was aware that he was using ladders and step ladders he was untrained with regard to working at height. • On the 3rd August 2018 he was unchallenged when he announced his work programme for the day. • His line manager’s did not instruct him with regard to the jobs he did, even though those jobs were considered to be unnecessary by the managers. • No methodology was explored when he announced his job for the day, there was no discussion about the equipment that he was going to use. • There was no risk assessment undertaken in respect of any of the jobs that he did. • He was allowed to work alone and unsupervised. He lay alone and unconscious for 9-10 minutes before he was spotted. It was over 20 minutes before CPR was started. There was no first aider or designated person on the school site that day. • His working environment on the 3rd August 2018 meant that he was working with ambient temperatures of around 26 degrees centigrade. • He was not wearing a hat and he worked in the heat initially and then in direct sunlight latterly, from 0848 hrs until his fall at 1255 hrs having taken one forty minute break at 1100 hrs. • It seems clear that working at BMS formed a huge part of Mr MOBS​​BY’s life. He had been there for many years and was probably set in his ways and not amenable to being managed. • Those managing him were all relatively new to their managerial posts and yet none of them had received any management training. It was clear they had no idea how to deal with him. • They were not assisted by the fact that it was supposed to be the case that every employee was appraised annually. • There was no evidence at all to suggest that Mr MOBS​​BY had ever been appraised. I am concerned that this situation which was demonstrated to be in existence at BMS could well be replicated, not only throughout Brighton and Hove, but throughout England and Wales and this is the reason why this Report has been sent to the Department of Education and I think the matters raised in it should have wider discussion throughout the Country. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unsafe work-at-height operations.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Failure to control lone and unsupervised working

Wider context from the report

“(1) Brighton and Hove City Council were “advising” Blatchington Mill School (BMS) on health and safety. They were apparently using a template which made no mention of work at height when considering the health and safety of the facilities (caretaking/cleaning) department at BMS. This is dangerous and may have led to the fact that neither of their audits of 2014 or 2018 made any mention of the risks associated with and training requirements regarding working at height. (2) Although Mr MOBS​​BY was employed either by Brighton and Hove City Council or BMS or a combination of the two, he was not monitored or instructed in his work. He was allowed to choose how, when and where he worked. Even though anyone who knew his job description or knew Mr MOBS​​BY was aware that he was using ladders and step ladders he was untrained with regard to working at height. • On the 3rd August 2018 he was unchallenged when he announced his work programme for the day. • His line manager’s did not instruct him with regard to the jobs he did, even though those jobs were considered to be unnecessary by the managers. • No methodology was explored when he announced his job for the day, there was no discussion about the equipment that he was going to use. • There was no risk assessment undertaken in respect of any of the jobs that he did. • He was allowed to work alone and unsupervised. He lay alone and unconscious for 9-10 minutes before he was spotted. It was over 20 minutes before CPR was started. There was no first aider or designated person on the school site that day. • His working environment on the 3rd August 2018 meant that he was working with ambient temperatures of around 26 degrees centigrade. • He was not wearing a hat and he worked in the heat initially and then in direct sunlight latterly, from 0848 hrs until his fall at 1255 hrs having taken one forty minute break at 1100 hrs. • It seems clear that working at BMS formed a huge part of Mr MOBS​​BY’s life. He had been there for many years and was probably set in his ways and not amenable to being managed. • Those managing him were all relatively new to their managerial posts and yet none of them had received any management training. It was clear they had no idea how to deal with him. • They were not assisted by the fact that it was supposed to be the case that every employee was appraised annually. • There was no evidence at all to suggest that Mr MOBS​​BY had ever been appraised. I am concerned that this situation which was demonstrated to be in existence at BMS could well be replicated, not only throughout Brighton and Hove, but throughout England and Wales and this is the reason why this Report has been sent to the Department of Education and I think the matters raised in it should have wider discussion throughout the Country. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable safety arrangements for lone workers.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Failure to plan work methods and equipment

Wider context from the report

“(1) Brighton and Hove City Council were “advising” Blatchington Mill School (BMS) on health and safety. They were apparently using a template which made no mention of work at height when considering the health and safety of the facilities (caretaking/cleaning) department at BMS. This is dangerous and may have led to the fact that neither of their audits of 2014 or 2018 made any mention of the risks associated with and training requirements regarding working at height. (2) Although Mr MOBS​​BY was employed either by Brighton and Hove City Council or BMS or a combination of the two, he was not monitored or instructed in his work. He was allowed to choose how, when and where he worked. Even though anyone who knew his job description or knew Mr MOBS​​BY was aware that he was using ladders and step ladders he was untrained with regard to working at height. • On the 3rd August 2018 he was unchallenged when he announced his work programme for the day. • His line manager’s did not instruct him with regard to the jobs he did, even though those jobs were considered to be unnecessary by the managers. • No methodology was explored when he announced his job for the day, there was no discussion about the equipment that he was going to use. • There was no risk assessment undertaken in respect of any of the jobs that he did. • He was allowed to work alone and unsupervised. He lay alone and unconscious for 9-10 minutes before he was spotted. It was over 20 minutes before CPR was started. There was no first aider or designated person on the school site that day. • His working environment on the 3rd August 2018 meant that he was working with ambient temperatures of around 26 degrees centigrade. • He was not wearing a hat and he worked in the heat initially and then in direct sunlight latterly, from 0848 hrs until his fall at 1255 hrs having taken one forty minute break at 1100 hrs. • It seems clear that working at BMS formed a huge part of Mr MOBS​​BY’s life. He had been there for many years and was probably set in his ways and not amenable to being managed. • Those managing him were all relatively new to their managerial posts and yet none of them had received any management training. It was clear they had no idea how to deal with him. • They were not assisted by the fact that it was supposed to be the case that every employee was appraised annually. • There was no evidence at all to suggest that Mr MOBS​​BY had ever been appraised. I am concerned that this situation which was demonstrated to be in existence at BMS could well be replicated, not only throughout Brighton and Hove, but throughout England and Wales and this is the reason why this Report has been sent to the Department of Education and I think the matters raised in it should have wider discussion throughout the Country. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unsafe selection and execution of work methods exposing employees to hazards.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Failure to monitor and instruct staff undertaking work

Wider context from the report

“(1) Brighton and Hove City Council were “advising” Blatchington Mill School (BMS) on health and safety. They were apparently using a template which made no mention of work at height when considering the health and safety of the facilities (caretaking/cleaning) department at BMS. This is dangerous and may have led to the fact that neither of their audits of 2014 or 2018 made any mention of the risks associated with and training requirements regarding working at height. (2) Although Mr MOBS​​BY was employed either by Brighton and Hove City Council or BMS or a combination of the two, he was not monitored or instructed in his work. He was allowed to choose how, when and where he worked. Even though anyone who knew his job description or knew Mr MOBS​​BY was aware that he was using ladders and step ladders he was untrained with regard to working at height. • On the 3rd August 2018 he was unchallenged when he announced his work programme for the day. • His line manager’s did not instruct him with regard to the jobs he did, even though those jobs were considered to be unnecessary by the managers. • No methodology was explored when he announced his job for the day, there was no discussion about the equipment that he was going to use. • There was no risk assessment undertaken in respect of any of the jobs that he did. • He was allowed to work alone and unsupervised. He lay alone and unconscious for 9-10 minutes before he was spotted. It was over 20 minutes before CPR was started. There was no first aider or designated person on the school site that day. • His working environment on the 3rd August 2018 meant that he was working with ambient temperatures of around 26 degrees centigrade. • He was not wearing a hat and he worked in the heat initially and then in direct sunlight latterly, from 0848 hrs until his fall at 1255 hrs having taken one forty minute break at 1100 hrs. • It seems clear that working at BMS formed a huge part of Mr MOBS​​BY’s life. He had been there for many years and was probably set in his ways and not amenable to being managed. • Those managing him were all relatively new to their managerial posts and yet none of them had received any management training. It was clear they had no idea how to deal with him. • They were not assisted by the fact that it was supposed to be the case that every employee was appraised annually. • There was no evidence at all to suggest that Mr MOBS​​BY had ever been appraised. I am concerned that this situation which was demonstrated to be in existence at BMS could well be replicated, not only throughout Brighton and Hove, but throughout England and Wales and this is the reason why this Report has been sent to the Department of Education and I think the matters raised in it should have wider discussion throughout the Country. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Failure to carry out annual employee appraisals

Wider context from the report

“(1) Brighton and Hove City Council were “advising” Blatchington Mill School (BMS) on health and safety. They were apparently using a template which made no mention of work at height when considering the health and safety of the facilities (caretaking/cleaning) department at BMS. This is dangerous and may have led to the fact that neither of their audits of 2014 or 2018 made any mention of the risks associated with and training requirements regarding working at height. (2) Although Mr MOBS​​BY was employed either by Brighton and Hove City Council or BMS or a combination of the two, he was not monitored or instructed in his work. He was allowed to choose how, when and where he worked. Even though anyone who knew his job description or knew Mr MOBS​​BY was aware that he was using ladders and step ladders he was untrained with regard to working at height. • On the 3rd August 2018 he was unchallenged when he announced his work programme for the day. • His line manager’s did not instruct him with regard to the jobs he did, even though those jobs were considered to be unnecessary by the managers. • No methodology was explored when he announced his job for the day, there was no discussion about the equipment that he was going to use. • There was no risk assessment undertaken in respect of any of the jobs that he did. • He was allowed to work alone and unsupervised. He lay alone and unconscious for 9-10 minutes before he was spotted. It was over 20 minutes before CPR was started. There was no first aider or designated person on the school site that day. • His working environment on the 3rd August 2018 meant that he was working with ambient temperatures of around 26 degrees centigrade. • He was not wearing a hat and he worked in the heat initially and then in direct sunlight latterly, from 0848 hrs until his fall at 1255 hrs having taken one forty minute break at 1100 hrs. • It seems clear that working at BMS formed a huge part of Mr MOBS​​BY’s life. He had been there for many years and was probably set in his ways and not amenable to being managed. • Those managing him were all relatively new to their managerial posts and yet none of them had received any management training. It was clear they had no idea how to deal with him. • They were not assisted by the fact that it was supposed to be the case that every employee was appraised annually. • There was no evidence at all to suggest that Mr MOBS​​BY had ever been appraised. I am concerned that this situation which was demonstrated to be in existence at BMS could well be replicated, not only throughout Brighton and Hove, but throughout England and Wales and this is the reason why this Report has been sent to the Department of Education and I think the matters raised in it should have wider discussion throughout the Country. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Exposure of workers to heat and direct sunlight

Wider context from the report

“(1) Brighton and Hove City Council were “advising” Blatchington Mill School (BMS) on health and safety. They were apparently using a template which made no mention of work at height when considering the health and safety of the facilities (caretaking/cleaning) department at BMS. This is dangerous and may have led to the fact that neither of their audits of 2014 or 2018 made any mention of the risks associated with and training requirements regarding working at height. (2) Although Mr MOBS​​BY was employed either by Brighton and Hove City Council or BMS or a combination of the two, he was not monitored or instructed in his work. He was allowed to choose how, when and where he worked. Even though anyone who knew his job description or knew Mr MOBS​​BY was aware that he was using ladders and step ladders he was untrained with regard to working at height. • On the 3rd August 2018 he was unchallenged when he announced his work programme for the day. • His line manager’s did not instruct him with regard to the jobs he did, even though those jobs were considered to be unnecessary by the managers. • No methodology was explored when he announced his job for the day, there was no discussion about the equipment that he was going to use. • There was no risk assessment undertaken in respect of any of the jobs that he did. • He was allowed to work alone and unsupervised. He lay alone and unconscious for 9-10 minutes before he was spotted. It was over 20 minutes before CPR was started. There was no first aider or designated person on the school site that day. • His working environment on the 3rd August 2018 meant that he was working with ambient temperatures of around 26 degrees centigrade. • He was not wearing a hat and he worked in the heat initially and then in direct sunlight latterly, from 0848 hrs until his fall at 1255 hrs having taken one forty minute break at 1100 hrs. • It seems clear that working at BMS formed a huge part of Mr MOBS​​BY’s life. He had been there for many years and was probably set in his ways and not amenable to being managed. • Those managing him were all relatively new to their managerial posts and yet none of them had received any management training. It was clear they had no idea how to deal with him. • They were not assisted by the fact that it was supposed to be the case that every employee was appraised annually. • There was no evidence at all to suggest that Mr MOBS​​BY had ever been appraised. I am concerned that this situation which was demonstrated to be in existence at BMS could well be replicated, not only throughout Brighton and Hove, but throughout England and Wales and this is the reason why this Report has been sent to the Department of Education and I think the matters raised in it should have wider discussion throughout the Country. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Lack of working-at-height training

Wider context from the report

“(1) Brighton and Hove City Council were “advising” Blatchington Mill School (BMS) on health and safety. They were apparently using a template which made no mention of work at height when considering the health and safety of the facilities (caretaking/cleaning) department at BMS. This is dangerous and may have led to the fact that neither of their audits of 2014 or 2018 made any mention of the risks associated with and training requirements regarding working at height. (2) Although Mr MOBS​​BY was employed either by Brighton and Hove City Council or BMS or a combination of the two, he was not monitored or instructed in his work. He was allowed to choose how, when and where he worked. Even though anyone who knew his job description or knew Mr MOBS​​BY was aware that he was using ladders and step ladders he was untrained with regard to working at height. • On the 3rd August 2018 he was unchallenged when he announced his work programme for the day. • His line manager’s did not instruct him with regard to the jobs he did, even though those jobs were considered to be unnecessary by the managers. • No methodology was explored when he announced his job for the day, there was no discussion about the equipment that he was going to use. • There was no risk assessment undertaken in respect of any of the jobs that he did. • He was allowed to work alone and unsupervised. He lay alone and unconscious for 9-10 minutes before he was spotted. It was over 20 minutes before CPR was started. There was no first aider or designated person on the school site that day. • His working environment on the 3rd August 2018 meant that he was working with ambient temperatures of around 26 degrees centigrade. • He was not wearing a hat and he worked in the heat initially and then in direct sunlight latterly, from 0848 hrs until his fall at 1255 hrs having taken one forty minute break at 1100 hrs. • It seems clear that working at BMS formed a huge part of Mr MOBS​​BY’s life. He had been there for many years and was probably set in his ways and not amenable to being managed. • Those managing him were all relatively new to their managerial posts and yet none of them had received any management training. It was clear they had no idea how to deal with him. • They were not assisted by the fact that it was supposed to be the case that every employee was appraised annually. • There was no evidence at all to suggest that Mr MOBS​​BY had ever been appraised. I am concerned that this situation which was demonstrated to be in existence at BMS could well be replicated, not only throughout Brighton and Hove, but throughout England and Wales and this is the reason why this Report has been sent to the Department of Education and I think the matters raised in it should have wider discussion throughout the Country. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unsafe work-at-height operations.

Open source report
Back to top

Information checked against the published report and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations

Data last updated 7 September 2026