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 : 02 March 2006 17:03:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Edel i have received a complaint from teachers working in a school that has just been built. its in respect to the omittance of plaster and paint from block walls. they say that its a health and safety risk and worsens asthma sufferers working conditions. i dont think they have a strong case but dont know how to prove that its not an additional health risk (lots of building like this one, university dorms are not event plastered)
Admin  
#2 Posted : 03 March 2006 21:42:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Chris Pope Ask the British Occupational Hygiene Society - they have a website
Admin  
#3 Posted : 04 March 2006 09:48:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Paul Leadbetter I am an occupational hygienist. I can't answer the query myself but have posted it on the UKOH forum to see if anyone else can help. Paul
Admin  
#4 Posted : 04 March 2006 20:28:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Chris Packham What paint was being used? If it was water-based check whether it contained a preservative. Many do, and these can often be isothiazolinones or formaldehyde releasers. Both of these are sensitisers and can trigger asthmatic reactions. In one study report in Contact Dermatitis it was found that isothiazolinones wre being released from a painted surface 240 hours after the paint was applied! Apparently the release tends to be higher in gloss paint, although I am not sure why.
Admin  
#5 Posted : 05 March 2006 10:01:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Ron Impey It is highly unlikely that cement or breeze blocks will release a significant amount of dust under normal conditions. Certainly, if there was to be cutting or grinding of the blocks without proper controls, sufficient dust might be generated to trigger asthma attacks in some sufferers. I recall an incident in one local authority school just after the introduction of LMS, when the Headteacher employeded a cowboy contractor to remove graffitti from the interior concrete block walls by grit blasting. They used no dust control measures and it went everywhere. It was several days before the school could be reopened. Possibly also if there was very serious deterioration in the condition of the blocks causing them to crumble, dust levels might be a concern. Might be worth measuring dust levels in the affected rooms and comparing it to the normal background level somewhere where there are no bare blocks. Ask the teachers who informed them of the alleged hazard.
Admin  
#6 Posted : 06 March 2006 11:08:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Ron Hunter The Teacher does have a case. Regulation 9(2) and application of associated guidance from the Workplace Health, Safety & Welfare Regulations 1992 - good practice - suggests these blocks should be painted to enable the surfaces to be kept clean. I would expect any Teaching Union safety rep. to be aware of and seek compliance with this requirement.
Admin  
#7 Posted : 06 March 2006 12:17:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Gary L I don't think a claim could be made under Reg 9(2) .."The surfaces of the floors, walls and ceilings of all workplaces inside buildings shall be capable of being kept sufficiently clean." There's no requirement to ensure that bricks/blockwork are painted, only that they should be capable of being kept clean. Regards, Gary
Admin  
#8 Posted : 06 March 2006 15:39:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Paul Leadbetter Following my posting of the original message on the UKOH Forum, I have received this reply: As a Mother of a son with a dust allergy, I think the staff at the school have every right to be concerned. Just because other institutions have used the same cost cutting building design, does not mean that it does not have its problems. Would a first year student in a hall of residence and suffering from a dust allergy have any voice in the matter? I also once stayed in a hotel with rough walls and made a mental not to stay there again as I considered it revolting to stay in a room with walls that are uncleanable. As a housewife, I know that even smooth walls collect a great deal of dust, and a rough wall is impossible to clean. Just because you can't see it, it doesn't mean to say the dust isn't there. As an occupational hygienist, most of the dust in the classroom I guess would be paper and skin, the skin portion, with the associated mites, fungi spores etc being the root of any problem. These are respiratory sensitisers and as such should be kept as far below any limit as is reasonably practicable and with walls you cannot clean this is patently not so. After some while, any settled dust will become airborne in draughts and when the children brush against it. With normal walls, the dust would fall to the floor and be swept up at the end of the day, the walls probably being cleaned at the end of term. It would be interesting to know if the staff have personal experience in the past of the walls' deficiencies or whether it is just 'gut feeling'. They may have read something in the teaching press which may mean that there is a traceable reference. Paul
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.