Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By Martin Taylor
Looking for some help in trying to settle a difference of opinion.
We operate a standard log and tag system for machinery isolation.
One of my managers operates the system with identical locks and keys and refuses to change the system to individual keys with a masterkey.
Which is most common and what arguments can I use to persuade a change if such is required - thanks
Martin
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By chris duncan
In my opinion he's on very dangerous ground. Basically he's performing a multiple lock off regardless of how many persons are working on the machine. The only way to be 100% is every employee having his/her own danger board, they attach it and they remove it with they're own key(spares kept by safety rep?) Multiple lock offs are available castel locks I think they're called? which allow multiple danger boards to be attached.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ken Lucas
Quite simple Martin: your Managers method fails to danger as opposed to fail safe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Merv Newman
Individual locks. NO spare keys. Exchange of locks at shift change. If someone goes home and forgets then they are called back or SENIOR management authorises lock to be cut off.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Frank Hallett
Hi Martin
If the above responses don't convince your Manager that it's not acceptable then get him to go through the lock-off procedure using his system and then [having made absolutely sure that no-one is at risk] demonstrate what could happen to him if someone else has the same keys and takes the locks off - this best done as a desk-top exercise rather than for real!!!
Reinforce the above result by demonstrating that HE will then be the person being cautioned and having to answer the extremely difficult questions in court.
Frank Hallett
Frank Hallett
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
Better still ask him to do the work when someone else is deciding if production is a priority and see if he feels secure in the system.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Hugh J. Maxwell
To further enforce these comments, my father worked as a maintenance engineer for a number of years. About 20 years ago, he lost the tip of a finger working on a locked off machine where a multi-user key and padlock system existed.
With different shift practices on large machines, the fitter coming on failed to recognise that the equipment was still being worked on by someone else. In hindsight other things were also lacking - Permit to Work control etc.
Accident would have been avoided had individual lock off keys and padlocks been in use.
It could have been far worse and the system soon changed to one person one key thereafter !
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Stephen Boardman
The idea of individual lock off systems is to prevent one person inadvertently overriding the safe system. the way your manager is operating this system defeats the object, you may as well have one lock for what good numerous locks with the same key for each is doing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Gerry Knowles
the whole idea around having a lock off system is to prevent injury due to an inadvertant restart of machinery or due to machinery being live during a maintenance operation. This provides part of a safe system of work.
The system must have single key locks with tags. The keys must be retained by a responsible person (Area Manager or his designate). In addition I have always encourage the use of individual isolation locks so that a person can lock off on the same isolation point as the managers. this ensures that a person cannot be forgotten.
Gerry Knowles
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Stuart Nagle
Martin.
If you manager wishes to operate this system and will not change, he is unlikely to be persuaded by other means. he obviously feels that he would be put in an awkward position by backing down and his authority chalenged and possible feels he would loose face.
In this situation I would suggest that in addition to the lock-off procedures in place, each employee is issued with their own (and unique) locks and keys that are put on to lock off and isolate - in addition to the locks the manager is using. This will involve expenditure, but adds to the safety and security of the system, whilst letting the manager retain his authority.
The challenge here is to make him think it was his idea and an addition safety measure that he thought up to improve the system.
Stuart
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Merv Newman
Actually Stuart, your suggestion is similar to some systems I have known in which the FIRST lock placed and the LAST lock removed is that of the supervisor. Then it is one additional lock per maintenance (or other) worker. (personal locks, unique keys as always)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Tom Doyle
Hello All,
I realize that Canadian standards are not applicable in Europe but the Canadian Standards Association has just released a new standard regarding Lock-out, Tag-out, and the Control of Hazardous Energy. I believe it costs around $90 Canadian. It provides guidance on simple lock-out, complex lock-out, and controlled entry. It could be used as a guide, at least, for those countries that do not have an appropriate standard to follow.
Cheers,
Tom Doyle
Industrial Safety Integration
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.