Sat 1
You are right in thinking that but wrong in the reality of how the HSE manage the legislation in the workplace.
There is evidence to support the fact that the HSE do not recognise that the inside of the aircraft hold is the responsibiulity of the operator, they see the control of this working environment as the responsibility of the employer of the worker. Part of the rationale in this is the difficulty the HSE would have in processing any enforcement notices/prosecutions issued to a foreign operated aircraft. it seems that the Act does not cover this; another example would be Embassies of foreign powers, as small pockets of foreign land, are also not covered by the Act.
It gets further complicated by the bag hall (normally Airport owned and operated) and airline use of 3rd party ULD's.
The ground handling industry has tried very hard to pursuade the HSE to either issue enforcement notices or bring prosecutions against UK owned airlines where there is clear evidence of breaches in HSE legislation but they are VERY reluctant to do aso and, to the best of my knowledge, have never issued such an enforcement notice nor prosecuted any UK airline for a breach of HSE legislation relating to an issue with regard to a third party employee within an aircraft hold. They have, however, taken action against employers of workers injured whilst working within an aircraft hold. It also has to be said that the UK airlines generally do not support the UK handling companies in their efforts to get this changed; some of the biggest UK based carriers are very strong in their challenge that it is not within their powers to control this environment in the real world.
Examples of where I believe they could take action, but have failed to do so, would be an airline that did not maintain their inhold handling system to a reasonable standard; airlines who do not maintain the hold floor; airlines who insist on using damaged and dangerous ULD's; airlines who, by the terms of thier contracts, do not control the individual piece weights of either baggage or cargo.
The Ramp is a veery complicated area of operation in relation to responsibility in terms of H&S.
Take an example:
Airline A operate B738's and has a contracted bagagge allowance of 25kgs per passenger and allows pooling for groups. They also have a a 32kg maximum item limit.
Airline A contract check to Handling Agent 1.
Airline A contract Handling Agent 2 to provide ramp services.
A group of 4 check-in.
They have 3 bags; 1x22kgs 1x 31kgs 1 x 34kgs
The check-in agent fails to notice that one bag is 34kgs and ladso fails to HEA tag both the bags of 31kgs and 34kgs.
During the loading of the aircraft a loader inhoild damages his lower back having positioned the 22kg bag and the 34kg bag he feels his back pop whilst lifting the 31kg bag into position.
Who is at fault?
The airline for operating an aircraft where manual handling of anything over the 5-7kgs range has been proven to be dangerous to the individual by the HSE manual handling experts?
Boeing for manufacturing an unsafe tool?
Handling company 1 for not controlling the check-in correctly and refusing the 34kg bag and failing to HEA tag the 2 bags?
Handling agent 2 for not having a system of work that allows it's employees to check weigh any item before handling it?
The airline for not controlling it's sub-contractored handling agents?
I could go on...and on...
This is why the HSE are reluctant to get involved.
Ah, for the easy life!!
GH