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 : 08 December 2006 16:32:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Martyn Hendrie If an employer in establishing his H&S management arrangements (having regard to HASAWA and MHSW regulations) decides that he should establish a series of workplace/ site rules. Could he than be found in breach of legislation if he did not correctly implement, monitor and supervise the application of the rules he deemed were needed?
Admin  
#2 Posted : 08 December 2006 16:50:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Catman Yes. Lawyers depend on it during a lot of injury claims, 'yes we know the claimant signed the workplace rules issue sheet before breaking the rules, but we have a statement from another employee saying they were not enforced'.............
Admin  
#3 Posted : 11 December 2006 13:04:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Dave Wilson s2 Safe systems of work! Common law reasonable foresight and then taking reasonable steps! If he identified them and then did nothing that's even worse than not knowing in the first place!
Admin  
#4 Posted : 11 December 2006 13:11:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By JPK Question... Why would you set site rules and then not enforce them?
Admin  
#5 Posted : 13 December 2006 11:11:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Martyn Hendrie I have come across a number of occasions whilst auditing, where middle/senior management have set rules that are not fully implemented by their subordinates. As an example I know of two major employers where senior management have made a policy decision that at every site all personnel will be required to wear suitable gloves. There is not 100% compliance with this rule. My question was trying to seek the opinion of the contributors as to whether or not breaching such a (general) rule would give sufficient grounds for a prosecution by the enforcing authorities if a reportable accident occurred.
Admin  
#6 Posted : 13 December 2006 11:30:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Darren J Fraser May not give cause, but I can imagine it being a contributing factor from the viewpoint of......if the site rules are being flouted / not enforced, what other parts of the system are failing?
Admin  
#7 Posted : 13 December 2006 13:10:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Austin. U This is an issue that just came up on our site this morning.Workers carrying out excavation work were not washing up before going to the canteen,this is against the site rules. I informed the manager and told him of the need for enforcement of the rule but he is of the opinion that we should continue negotiating this unhygienic practise with the workers. Can someone please tell me the best way to enforce this rule(s) on site considering a managers approach of continious negotiation because he do not want work delayed. Many Thanks, Austin.
Admin  
#8 Posted : 13 December 2006 13:17:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Allan St.John Holt Austin, There won't be a delay. Just tell the diggers that it's really simple to understand. No wash up, no canteen use. Their choice. Why would there be a delay? Allan
Admin  
#9 Posted : 13 December 2006 16:20:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Ross Hunter Austin I would suggest that if site managers are having difficulty policing the washing of hands then the policing of access to the canteen maybe just as difficult. I would suggest what may occur is that site opperatives eating where they shouldn't e.g. inside building plots, the back of vans/vehicles and anywhere other than the canteen. A practice that may encourage vermon on to site which is the very thing that washing their hands is all about! I work in the construction industry and would also suggest that whether an operative was or wasn't washing his hands prior to eating after working in the environment you describe probably figures some way down the site managers list of priority. We have to look at 'Significant Risks' and prioritise accordingly. I would think that, in fact I know that his main concentration would be on higher risk work. That is not to say that washing your hands prior to eating is not important, just that there are somethings that operatives must take responsibility for for themselves. Yes we supply the information, training, guidance etc, but management can't be everywhere especially checking on grown mens' hygiene habits which is something we have all learned from childhood.
Admin  
#10 Posted : 14 December 2006 00:46:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Dave Sparrow I agree with Austin about the focus on enforcing controls for low risks but on a general "enforcing site rules" trip; we carry out pre order interviews with our subcontractors where we address all areas of their work (provision of tools, access equipment, inspection and recording of etc). They are issued with copies of the site rules and specific requirements for that project and it becomes a part of the contract requirements. Failing to abide will result in removal from site. Although a sledge hammer approach, this drives the sub contractor management team to enforce these requirements without confrontation with our site managers. In most cases it works well. What we've realised since taking this approach is that the general H&S awareness and readiness to manage their own H&S risks has significantly increased. With that and better worker consultation, we've reduced lost time to accidents by over 60% in 12 months.
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.