Article
Managing health and safety across multiple sites
Every new site adds risk assessments and inspection dates – and the risk that each location develops its own rules. This article shows how to distribute responsibility clearly while keeping a reliable overview.
Updated 4 min read
Key takeaways
- Overall responsibility for health and safety stays with top management, even when tasks are delegated to site managers.
- Delegation should be in writing, with clearly defined tasks, authority and resources.
- Many duties attach to the individual site, such as first aiders, emergency plans and – in Germany – the safety committee.
- A hybrid model works best for most organisations: central standards, local implementation, common KPIs.
- Cross-site internal audits improve comparability and spread good practice.
Who is responsible?
The employer is responsible for health and safety – in a company, that means the board or managing directors. This responsibility cannot be handed off, but it can be organised. Under German law, for instance, the employer may delegate duties in writing to reliable and competent persons who then perform them under their own responsibility (section 13(2) ArbSchG). Similar principles apply in most European jurisdictions.
For a multi-site organisation this means: site and plant managers receive their duties in writing, with a clear scope and the necessary authority and resources. Top management retains the duty to select, organise and supervise. Whoever delegates must regularly check that delegated tasks are actually being performed.
Duties that apply per site
Many requirements relate to the individual establishment rather than to the company as a whole. Using German law as an example, each site needs to clarify:
| Duty | Legal basis (Germany) | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Safety specialist and occupational physician | ASiG, DGUV Regulation 2 | Scope depends on headcount and type of operation |
| Safety committee | ASiG § 11 | Required above 20 employees; meets at least quarterly |
| Safety representatives | SGB VII § 22, DGUV Regulation 1 § 20 | Above 20 employees; number also reflects geographic spread |
| First aiders and fire wardens | DGUV Regulation 1 § 26, ASR A2.2 | Number depends on headcount and risk |
| Risk assessment, inspections, training | ArbSchG, BetrSichV, DGUV Regulation 1 | Always site-specific, because premises, equipment and tasks differ |
| Escape and rescue plan | ArbStättV § 4, ASR A2.3 | Per building, depending on layout and use |
Sites abroad are subject to their own national law. Within the EU, the Framework Directive 89/391/EEC provides a common baseline, but the details differ from country to country.
Central, decentralised or hybrid?
Multi-site organisations usually choose one of three models:
| Model | Characteristics | Suited to |
|---|---|---|
| Central | A central EHS function sets standards, supports all sites and keeps documentation centrally | A few similar sites close to each other |
| Decentralised | Each site organises itself; headquarters only collects results | Very different business units |
| Hybrid | Central standards, templates and KPIs; implementation and accountability on site | Most organisations with several sites |
The hybrid model combines local knowledge with the comparability of central steering. It requires a shared foundation: a common structure for risk assessments, the same rating scales and the same KPIs.
Setting common standards
- a uniform risk assessment structure and a shared risk matrix
- group-wide templates for inspections, operating instructions and training topics that sites can extend but not replace
- consistent inspection intervals for similar equipment
- an approval rule for new hazardous substances that applies at every site
- shared definitions for KPIs and reporting channels
Steering with KPIs and audits
Headquarters does not need every detail, but it needs reliable signals. A few KPIs per site have proven effective – overdue actions, inspection compliance, training coverage and risk assessment currency – supplemented by injury figures.
Internal audits add comparability. Cross-audits, in which specialists from one site audit another, are particularly effective: they bring a fresh perspective and take good solutions back to their own site.
Software for multiple sites
With one spreadsheet per site, an overall picture takes a lot of manual work. In EHS Go all sites live in one environment: site managers work within their area, the central EHS team sees every site side by side, and roles define who can view and change what. Templates, checklists and rating scales apply consistently, while actions and deadlines stay assigned to the respective site.
Frequently asked questions
Can responsibility for health and safety be delegated to site managers?
Tasks yes, overall responsibility no. Delegation is made in writing to reliable and competent people. Top management remains obliged to select them carefully, support them and supervise their work.
Does every site need its own safety committee?
In Germany, a safety committee is required in every establishment with more than 20 employees. Whether a site counts as a separate establishment depends on how it is organised; if in doubt, clarify this with the authority or accident insurer. Other countries have their own thresholds.
How can sites be compared fairly?
Through consistently defined KPIs with the same base, such as per million hours worked, and through leading indicators that depend less on chance than injury figures.
This article provides a general overview and does not constitute legal advice.
