Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

PPE
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Admin  
#1 Posted : 23 November 2004 12:36:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Malcolm Hogarth
I have just recieved a Draft of the updated company staff handbook from my Boss (Director)and been asked to look at the Health and Safety details. I just had to share one bit with you and invite your comments. (I have already highlighted the paragraph TO DISCUSS!)It goes like this:

"The Company will provide appropriate protective clothing for your use when required. Make sure you wear it as instructed". (Fair enough so far) It goes on
"If you fail to do so disciplinary action is likely to be taken and the Company will not be held accountable for any consequences of your not complying with this instruction (sic)

This second part has appeared in the Draft document and wasn't in the original staff handbook. I don't know who dreamt it up! As I say I have formulated a response but it just shows what we are up against doesnt it?
Admin  
#2 Posted : 23 November 2004 17:12:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By R Hindle
PPE, is deemed as the last resort in protection, 1st train staff in the correct wearing of PPE, get employee involvment, if they feel they took part in any procedure on PPE, then disciplinary action would not be needed.

Ron
Admin  
#3 Posted : 23 November 2004 21:09:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By John Murgatroyd
In many companies, ppe is the first and only line of defence.
The first line for fumes and dust should be suppressing same, or ventilation, but too often it is rpe instead.
Admin  
#4 Posted : 24 November 2004 10:49:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Stuart Nagle
Malcolm.

I agree with both the above responses, but I guess your more interested in the statement on not taking responsibility for the outcomes of employees not wearing PPE.

In reality, this statement is not worth the paper its printed on, as responsibility for the safety of employees is the employers legal duty however you look at it. The only difference it may make is in the form of the negligence of an employee contributing to their own injury in such an event.

I would suggest, simply to prevent your employer looking silly, that this phrase is removed and section included concerning the legal requirements of employees to look after their own health and safety and comply with the reasonable requirements of the employer in to ensure the health and safety of employees, such as the wearing of relevant PPE where required.

It is also of assistance to include PPE requirements, to guard against residual risks, to be included in risk assessments that are supplied to/available to employees etc. Also don't forget that PPE assessments need to be undertaken for employees to ensure that PPE provided is suitable to individuals and compatable with any other PPE or personal proetction employed.

Regards...

Stuart
Admin  
#5 Posted : 24 November 2004 11:46:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Malcolm Hogarth
Stuart,

Your response was the one that I expected. My reply to the Boss was much the same as yours and I drew their attention to Regulation 10 of the PPE Regs that talk about the requirement to demonstrate adequate levels of supervision. I also made the point that it is not sufficient just to give somebody PPE and let them get on with it.

Since the PPE episode I was sent another beauty about alcohol and drugs which I need't share at this point but made a statement about what action we will take about staff being drunk or under the inflience of drugs. I posed the question of who would be making the judgement of whether a person was drunk etc and have advised on rewording and the need for caution when formulating policies. Of course as the health and safety manager it would have been nice to be included in the drawing up the draft documents!

Also... Another gem about the use of mobile telephones and driving. Similar comment about not taking responsibility etc. I explained the duty of the employer and introduced the subject ofvicarious liability. Of course I then advised accordingly (No mobile phone use when driving including hands free = no problem!!)
Users browsing this topic
Guest
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.