Small and medium sized business can benefit from the same cost advantages of electric vehicles (EVs) as larger fleets, but many still have concerns about how long they take to charge.

A new report found that a typical small business could recoup the inflated upfront costs of buying an EV within three years.

More than a third of business owners surveyed as part of the research stated that charging times was the biggest barrier for adoption, however.

For small vans, the report estimates that the total costs of adopting an electric vehicle and operating it for three years average £55,730 for a typical sole trader. These costs encompass the purchase of the vehicle and a charge point and three years’ worth of depreciation, recharging costs, and maintenance.

The analysis concludes that would be almost £12,000 cheaper than an equivalent petrol or diesel vehicle.

For a large fleet, with 1,000 vehicles, the operating costs for EVs would be £55 million, a saving of £11 million.

The analysis recognises that there are large upfront costs to purchasing a fleet of EVs but concludes that these can be offset over time by lower refuelling costs, among other factors.

It states that the existence of such upfront costs can be sufficient for drivers to delay the switch between petrol or diesel vehicles and their electric counterparts. This sentiment was captured via a bespoke survey.

When asking respondents that do not currently drive an electric van about their reasons for doing so, the upfront purchase cost was the second-most commonly cited option, being selected by 37.7% of the sample.

Also of note was the relationship between business size and electric van adoption. There was a generally positive relationship between business size and the likelihood of having already adopted an electric van. For instance, just 2.2% of sole traders in our sample stated that they currently drive an electric van, while 13% of those at large enterprises reported usage.

There were other commonly cited barriers among those who have not yet switched to a fully electric van. The most common response was charging time, which was selected by 38.1% of those yet to switch.

Concerns over vehicle range or battery life was the third most commonly cited barrier across the whole sample, selected by 31.7% of those to have not yet switched to an electric van, while availability of public charging infrastructure was selected by 29% of respondents.

Despite the barriers to current adoption, those yet to switch to an electric van were largely positive about their plans to do so within the next five years. Amongst those yet to switch, a majority (58.6%) said that they were at least somewhat likely to switch to an electric van over the next five years. Within this figure, 15% said that they would definitely switch.

The FSA have asked that we share with members, a letter they have sent to importers regarding foods that do not conform with UK food legislation. Please see below.

We are writing to you, as an importer and food business operator, over concerns that the Food Standards Agency (FSA) have in relation to some food and drink products imported from outside of Great Britain (GB).

We have reason to believe that a number of imported products are not formulated for the GB market and may contain unauthorised additives or may not comply with GB food information requirements, meaning consumers could be at risk from:

• missing/incorrect allergen labelling,
• the inclusion of ingredients that don’t meet GB food safety standards,
• the inclusion of ingredients that are not permitted for use in GB, and /or
• food additives at levels that exceed the permitted maximum use level in GB.

The attached Annex 1 provides a list of examples of unauthorised additives and potentially non-compliant products where these additives are commonly found. These have been identified through import surveillance sampling and the occurrence of food incidents.

Non-compliant products must not be placed on the GB market, and we are working with local authorities to tackle offending behaviour to ensure such products are removed from the market and potentially destroyed.

We would like to remind you of your responsibilities as an importer under food law – please see Annex 2 for the relevant legislation. Failure to comply with legal requirements is an offence and may lead to enforcement action, including destruction of non-compliant imported goods. Supplying non-compliant food products can lead to financial, legal and reputational risks for a business, who may be required to recall and withdraw products from the market, risk breaching business contracts and in instances where an allergen fatality occurs, risk being the subject of a criminal investigation.

If you have any queries, please contact the Trading Standards or Food Safety team at your local authority.

BFFF raises awareness of the dangers of unprotected sun exposure and looks at ways member companies can help prevent workers developing skin cancer.

UV exposure from the sun is one of the main causes of skin cancer and also one of the most preventable. According to data from the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer, the global total number of new melanoma cases will reach 413,100 per year by 2030. This is an increase of over 27% on the 324,635 cases registered a decade earlier in 2020. Melanoma mortality is predicted to reach 74,750 in 2030, a 31% increase on the 57,043 deaths in 2020.

Those working in the sun and heat are at an increased risk of UV exposure. However, a YouGov survey (undertaken in April 2023) of 4,435 respondents, of whom 558 were outdoor workers, found that a third of outdoor workers never apply sunscreen at work, and 34% of them claimed nothing would encourage them to do so. A third of those who never use UV protection at work said that they didn’t think it was necessary and 28% stated that they didn’t burn easily in the sun, citing this as their reason.

Under the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 (HSWA), there is a legal duty on every employer to ensure, as far as reasonably practicable, the health of their employees. The Management of Health and Work Regulations 1999 also require the employer to conduct a suitable assessment of the risks to the health of their workforce, including those risks from UV radiation from natural sunlight.

It is essential that employers educate staff about the health risks. Key actions to take:

· Include sun exposure and heat stress within risk assessments as appropriate to the work.

· Where there appears to be a significant risk of heat stress, carry out a more detailed risk assessment with occupational health advice if necessary.

· Where the level of risk demands:

o Take action to reduce exposure to a safe level, e.g. by the timing of work, managing exposure times, providing shelter.

o Increase the number of rest breaks in cool/shaded locations. A cooled rest area may be required indoors.

o Provide PPE, such as safety glasses with UV protection.

o Consider the risks of heat stress when selecting clothing and PPE.

o Provide cool drinking water and encourage workers to drink plenty of water regularly to prevent dehydration.

o Ensure that contractors are also aware of the risks and are taking preventative actions.

· Give sun protection/heat stress advice to staff and managers.

· Take account of sun and heat stress risks in first aid provisions.

· Consult with workers when undertaking risk assessments and before introducing new ways of working.

For more information, visit: https://www.hse.gov.uk/skin/sunprotect.htm