Rank: Guest
|
Posted By AJM
Hi Just a short one i hope. About one of the hardest tasks for us safety chappies.
I am in the process of setting up a control of contractors policy and Permit to work system.
I just wondered when talking about getting Risk assessments or method statements from the contractors before work, would you advise that they MUST supply a risk assessment and method statement for every single job no matter how small.
For instance just coming on site for an hour to do a simple repair. Or just demand them for the dangerous work covered on the permits like working at height or working on live equipment or big full day repair work.
The thing is all contractors that will be working on site will have to sign a permit to work as well as the visitors sign in book. I am just trying to look at the practicability's here.
Or would it be simple to just say all contractor work on site requires risk assessment and method statement. Bare in mind I am setting everything up from scratch here.
Regards
Alan
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Raymond Rapp
Alan
I would suggest that a MS should be required for each and every job, in principle that is. Obviously if the task is so small and simple then one may not be required. But make sure you have a copy of their RAs.
RAs are normally attached to MS and tend to be generically orientated, otherwise if you are using the same set of contractors, then once they have supplied a generic set of RAs there is no need to provide them for every task. Even 'stealth and hasty' has a modicum of commom sense!
Regards
Ray
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Richard Altoft
to issue a permit to work you need to be sure those undertaking the work are aware of the risks and have a safe system of work that reduces risk to them and others around them incl no doubt your own employees ALARP. Hence you need RA plus MS for whatever the PTW covers. If it is so low risk not to need RA plus MS then why the PTW??
Contractor signs onto PTW to accept it but you issue it so by setting them to work so your call.
As to extent then suitable and sufficient of course comes to mind
R
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By David Whaley
If you would like to email me I can send you details of our contractors pack. While it would need personalising it would be a good starting point and save you alot of time.
David
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By AJM
Thanks for all the advice as usual, but looking at it as a lot of health and safety it can be taken in different ways and very hard to draw that difinative line.
To simply say yes risk assessment for all tasks or not is not as easy as it seems.
Thanks anyway
Alan
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Mark Simpson
AJM
Is a robust permit to work system not a suitable control measure in itself, without the need to have additional documentation to cover every task?
MS
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Tony Bish
However detailed the contracotrs method statements and risk assessments (generic or task specific) may be, they are worthless if his staff,or sub contracotrs carrying out the work do not observe them. It may be worth ensuring the contractors provide you with a list of his employees who he confirms will comply.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By steven bentham
As part of the 'how far', you may wish to consider the risks involved:
Are you a low or high risk industry?
Is the contractor carrying out low or high risk work?
My view would be the degree of control should relate to the amount of risk. Probably worth considering that no amount of paperwork makes high risk work safe.
|
|
|
|
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.