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

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Admin  
#1 Posted : 15 December 2005 13:54:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Richard Chalkley
I am looking for some good material to present to a bunch of scientists to underline their s7 responsibilities as we are hitting the brick wall of 'what's it got to do with me' or 'I'm too busy to worry about H&S'.

I am focusing on PPE and most of the material is construction related.

HELP!

Richard.
Admin  
#2 Posted : 15 December 2005 14:14:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Jonathan Sandler CMIOSH
Refer to COSHH, MHASAW Reg 3, failing that ask them how much would it cost to replace an pair of working eyes?
Admin  
#3 Posted : 15 December 2005 14:24:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Richard Chalkley
Tried that one. Quoting the law does not work, they are PhD scientists and think they are immune (OK it is a minority but a significant one).

The one about replacing eyes. It is not real to them. I need to make it real.

Richard.
Admin  
#4 Posted : 15 December 2005 14:40:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Liam Mc Conalogue
It should be in your Policies & Procedures- they will realise they have no option but to co-operate otherwise......
Admin  
#5 Posted : 15 December 2005 14:46:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Richard Chalkley
It is all there. I can have management start to hand out warnings etc if we have to but this breeds resentment. I want to present some shocking material if there is anything relevant first. I would rather they buy in than bludgeon them with procedure.

If we have to we will though. I am taking on the culture rather than the individual. I hope that this is more effective long term.

Richard.
Admin  
#6 Posted : 15 December 2005 14:54:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Liam Mc Conalogue
Richard,

What type of work are we talking about here- what substances being used?
Admin  
#7 Posted : 15 December 2005 14:58:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Richard Chalkley
Laboratory environment. Main hazard, Radionuclides, soft beta emitters (33-Phosphorous).
Admin  
#8 Posted : 15 December 2005 15:15:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Jonathan Sandler CMIOSH
Would pass this over to the head of the section, failing that Director level, failing that, whistle blowing, DEFRA, lab would not like that.
As long as you can prove that you, as a member of IOSH,have done all that you could do, refer to membership terms and conditions, thet are the only door open to you.
Do not forget Sect 8 as well!
Admin  
#9 Posted : 15 December 2005 15:24:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Richard Chalkley
Johnathan,

In reality the hazard from what they do is quite low. I am trying to instill good practice in the staff. Some buy in, others do not.

If you go round beating them with proverbial big sticks they do what they want when you are not there.

The big sticks are available and I am ready to use then if needs be, I was just hoping for an effective, long term solution.

Richard.
Admin  
#10 Posted : 15 December 2005 15:29:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Tony Brunskill
Sack one that usually does the trick - amazing attention grabber for supposedly intelligent individuals. Added benefit is reduced cost in business, reduced risk exposure - less people, reduced risk exposure - volume of work undertaken. Less ear-ache from whining individuals - Stop I am becoming a cynic.

Try the "Scientist to Scaffolder analogy" Scaffolder you talk to will never acknowledge the risk of falling off, "It will not happen to me". But they have all got friends that have falled of and been killed. Sadly those that fall cannot join the debate.
Admin  
#11 Posted : 15 December 2005 15:34:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Jonathan Sandler CMIOSH
Richard.
As I now know which way to advise, try them on this:

Perceptions of risk can be raised so that people do feel the need for improved personal safety. This can be achieved by helping people to learn from the experiences of others, e.g. communicating information about accidents resulting from unsafe behaviour.
People are usually highly motivated by personal growth and development. Participation and involvement in safety improvement can therefore provide motivation, there are, therefore, a number of things that organisations can do to motivate employees to adopt safe working practices: Raise perceptions of risk by involving all employees in risk assessment and communicating information about accidents, etc ensure adequate standards to clarify what behaviour is required make commitment to safety at the highest levels very clear ensure that monitoring for compliance with safe working practices is visible consistently deter unsafe behaviour and comment on safe behaviour provide frequent feedback on performance deal with any obstacles that make it difficult to work in a safe manner involve all employees in the safety improvement and monitoring process take advantage of all situations when individuals might be influenced, e.g. induction training, promotion, performance review following an accident.
It has been shown that almost all of the factors that influence behaviour are, to some extent, within the control of the organisation and its management system.
Conclusion
There is no single route to promoting safe behaviour, but there are six approaches that can be used simultaneously:
Example, senior managers must set a good example and always follow the rules, procedures and safe systems of work that exist. This reinforces the need for all employees to do the same, failure to do so devalues the standards and procedures that exist.
Compelling, clear responsibilities, accountabilities and standards of performance that are consistently applied. The perceived risk of disciplinary action can be greater than the perceived risk of injury.
Rewarding, reward systems based on reducing the number of reported injuries can have a negative effect; discouraging employees from reporting accidents. Reward schemes based on compliance with performance standards might be more beneficial. Simply recognising and commenting on safe behaviour can help.
Facilitating, making safe behaviour easy and removing obstacles, e.g. ensuring that adequate waste bins are provided to allow employees to dispose of rubbish easily.
Informing, raising employees' understanding of the reasoning behind precautions and performance standards.
Training, developing competence, influencing attitudes and reducing the risk of mistakes. Both the employer and employees will learn from their own experiences and it is in the nature of risk that unsafe behaviour does not always result in injury. Unfortunately, unsafe practices are reinforced every time we "get away with it".

Closing part of my esay ‘Discuss and illustrate how the needs, behaviours, human nature and risk perceptions of individuals may influence an organisation’s health and safety strategy.’

If you would like this on word please email me.

Regards
Admin  
#12 Posted : 15 December 2005 15:41:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Jonathan Breeze
A knowledge of the fates of Marie & Pierre Curie and Rosalind Franklin may help nail the fallacy that they are immune to the effects of radiation.

All were researchers who's output was somewhat prematurely curtailed by lab exposure.

Who knows, they may even be so flattered by the comparisons, that they listen to you more often.
Admin  
#13 Posted : 15 December 2005 16:06:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Richard Chalkley
Thanks to all. I do like the analogy to the Curies... Mind you if they are clever they will spot that Radium is a darn site more hazardous...


We are going to give the 'soft' approach a bit more time then gradually turn up the heat.

Richard.
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.