Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By Joe Ridley
Hi there,
I have an enquiry regarding contractors working on roofs in realtion to health and safety responsibilities. At the moment we have a leisure facility that requires roofing work to be carried out, the building was built in 1987 prior to CDM regulations. My question is who would be responsible for making sure the roof is safe prior to work being carried out. Would it be the contractor?
Any thoughts/comments would be appreciated
Thanks
Joe
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Gavin Gibson
It is your duty to inform the contractor of the status of the roof and any hazards, so as to enable them to take into account any hazards when creating their method statement.
The contractor's method statement will detail how they plan to mitigate against these hazards and you should check it
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By douglas erskine
further to Gavin's response get a copy of HSE 33 G Safety in Roofwork it details all that is required for safe working on roofs
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Joe Ridley
Thanks for the information, its very much appreciated, it has cleared a few grey areas.
Cheers
Joe
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Stuart Nagle
CDM would apply to the maintenance work on the roof if;
1) 5 or more persons employed
2) 500 person hours or more involved in the work
3) 30 days or more
If it applies as above it is notifiable work and the HSE must be advised (see CDM regs)
If not it may still be CDM work, but not notifiable (check CDM regs)
The 'employer' is responsible for ensuring that safe working is carried out. You ned to;
1) ask about the skills/competency of their employees (e.g. training & certification)
2) details of any sub-contractors (i.e. scaffolding etc) and ditto requirements
3) obtain risk assessments and safety method statements etc
4) ensure that if CDM work all relevant information is gathered from 'client' 'designer' 'principal contractor' and 'contractors' and health and safety plan formulated and sent to all by appointed 'planning supervisor'
5) set dates for commencment, completion etc
and include CDM and H&S requirememts in contract documentation
6) certain information under the CDM regs (and if not CDM then MHSAW regs) must be posted and complied with (for example fire safety) and also construction health, safety and welfare regs.
I could go on but won't.... Check it all out is the best thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ken Taylor
The client has a duty to inform the principal contractor of any known information with regard to the safety of the roof. Where information is not known it is most advisable to inform the principal contractor of this fact. The principal contractor then has a duty to ensure that his/her employees and sub-contractors have a safe workplace and working conditions when on the roof. This information would be expected to appear in pre-tender and construction phase health and safety plans (where applicable).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By David Brede
CDM forms an effective basis from any construction or maintenance work of this sort.
As client you have a clear list of responsibilities (as indicated by others) for safety and making contractors aware of the condition of the roof and other information relevant to the work. If this is not known then a survey will be required so that the contractors have clear information as to what they are dealing with.
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
Just to stir the waters a little more the Client duty is to provide what is known OR can be reasonably ascertained - I suspect that many will forget that the undertaking of a qualified survey is a reasonable step - You cannot just pass it to the contractor and think you have complied with the client duties under CDM
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ken Taylor
Now that we have entered the stirred waters, it is interesting to note that the 'duty to inform':
arises under the CDM Regs where it applies only to CDM work;
makes the Planning Supervisor the recipient;
refers only to information relevant to the functions of the Planning Supervisor; and
relates only to 'information that the Client has or could ascertain by making enquiries which it is reasonable for a person in his position to make'.
With regard to the latter point, presumably we can take it that the position of the Client will be a determining factor in deciding what enquiries are reasonable in the circumstances of a case - which sounds rather like 'reasonably practicable'. Just how far to go with these enquiries would seem to be a matter for careful decision. For example, we have buildings that were built centuries ago and added to and altered over subsequent centuries. Whilst surveyors have surveyed what is accessible and we can impart their findings, it would not be possible to discover all the possible hidden secrets without something akin to demolition - and so we remind the Planning Supervisor of the type of hazards that may be present in buildings of this nature and ensure that the pre-tender H&S plan makes the position clear and the need to exercise caution, etc to the Principal Contractor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
I know we are off the point a little but it is probably worthwhile. I hold the view that intrusive surveys are important and reasonably practicable where it is known that the structure is to be penetrated. It is required should the work be classed as major refurbishment if only under MDHS 100 for the possibility of asbestos, the HSE have after all set a year of 1998 as the cut off for the potential of asbestos presence to be disregarded. Yes the technicality is that the PS receives this information and passes it on via the pre tender H&S plan contractor must be made aware.
It is not the clients responsibility, once a competent contractor has been selected to define the safe methods of work on the roof, the duty is to provide the information such that safe methods can be devised. Monitoring is something which may be done, depending on the skill base of the client.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Dave Wilson
I think the phrase
"he who introduces the risk controls the risk" says it all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ken Taylor
You should see the 'hoops' we have to 'jump through with English Heritage and Planning for work on these buildings. They even have to agree the shade of lime mortar to be used for repointing. Work is then carried out by approved contractors with experience of the type of building involved and may well be doing both the investigation and the work. Fortunately, they didn't seem to want to use asbestos products from the 13th to the 19th centuries - but neither was there much in the way of planning and building controls.
On the general point of safe working on roofs by contractors, whilst not defining the work method, we require method statements as part of the selection process and then monitor their performance. In practice, performance can be somewhat different from promise if you don't keep an eye on them - particularly as very few operatives are direct employees these days and sub-contractors may claim to be unaware of 'the paperwork'. If we can ring-fence a site for the contractor's control we will do so but often we will have staff, pupils, clients, residents, public, etc in proximity and areas of shared control and so we can't just hand over and leave it to the contractor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Jim Walker
to pick up on kens point regarding contractors actually adopting the safe system of work that is presented before the workm commences.
I had a roofing contractor in, great systems - on paper. Bloke put on a harness and disappeared up on the roof. I had to go to an adjacent site to observe him at work and not once did he fasten the harness to the anchor points. I called him off the roof and explained I was not satisfied with the fall restraint - he just kept saying "I've got me harness on like the boss told me".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
As a matter of fact Reg 6 of CHSWR requires edge protection where practicable and this means most of these harness arrangements and methods probably indicate a breach of the regs. But how often do we see methods which have immediately jumped to this solution - I know the reason is cost - so how fares the client?
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ken Taylor
I would expect them to follow the hierarchy of controls set out in HSG33 to arrive at the practicable. However the Client should be seen as accepting a tender and not dictating a work method - but we must discharge our own duties and protect our own interests too.
As we are recounting interesting events, I once saw a worker on a roof, with a pole ladder over one shoulder, walking along the top of a 15th century parapet on the wrong side of one of our fixed safety lines in order to take a short-cut - nearly a short-cut to destiny!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.