Posted By Roger Bragg
What are the distinguishing features of risk assessments, method statements and safe systems of work? How are they linked and how do they differ? Are they all part of the same continuum?

Posted By Raymond Rapp
A Method Statement is an annotated Safe System of Work and vice versa. A Risk Assessment is a formal process of identifying and recording the significant risks and the control measures arising from an activity.

Ray

Posted By DaveW
"are they all part of the same continuum?"

I would say most definately; yes.

It won't be possible to compile an effective and appropriate method statement unless the risk has been assessed, hazards identified and controls put in place to minimise the risk and remove the hazards. The mechanism for doing this is the method statement or safe system of work.

This will include of course; details of the safe method of work along with additional control requirements such as appropriate equipment and PPE.

Risks identified as being unnacceptible via assessment will be controlled via the safe system of work.

I would say that "safe systems of work" are integral to risk assessment control mechanism.

Posted By Jim Walker
Roger,

Can you get hold of Allan St Johns "principles"

Available from IOSH

Sets it (them) out in clear terms for me.

Aidan, Maybe you might want to read it too

Posted By Andy Brazier
Whilst not providing a definition of the terms, maybe considering how these items are used in practice may help understanding. This is how I understand the sequence of events. Anye care to comment?

*Define the task + identify where it is to be carried out.

*Identify the hazards and potential hazards (activity + location).

*Assess the risks.

*Remove hazards and reassess risks.

*Implement physical barriers and reassess risks.

*For remaining hazards that cannot be totally controlled by physical barriers, develop safe system of work that defines how activity is to be performed and hence what tools, equipment, competencies, procedures and supervision are required.

*Confirm that safe system of work is practical and will achieve risks that are tolerable and/or as low as reasonably practicable.

*Develop method statement that describes what the people involved in the activity are going to do.

*Ensure all other elements of the safe system of work are in place (i.e. things not covered by the method statement because they are either not activities or are not performed by the people involved in the activity).

*Do the work.

It sounds long winded, but the degree of rigour should be relative to the risk.

Posted By Chris Packham
Andy

May I add two items to your list, particularly where we are looking at hazards from chemicals?

- Monitor to see if your safe working practices are actually working as you intended.

- Health surveillance to ensure that should a problem arise this is identified at the earliest possible stage and appropriate action taken to minimise any consequences.

Chris

Posted By Allan St.John Holt
Aidan,

You're absolutely right - they're all me own work. As you say, there is no common definition that everybody is happy with, and that's why authors often do the right thing by stating their own terms in the way that they will then use them (hopefully) consistently throughout their work.

I remember well a similar debate within ASSE some years ago, when they produced a dictionary of accepted definitions. It took a long time, and even when published there was a lot of diagreement amongst the faithful about whether they had got it right after all their careful debating.

The outcome is of course the important thing. As long as there is no confusion, there should be no problem. But I do get worried when words like 'risk' and 'hazard' are interchanged as equivalents by 'professionals' - part of that comes from our normally sloppy use of language in normal conversation. You only have to think about the word 'inflammable' - what that means to the person on the Clapham omnibus is likely to be the complete opposite to what it means to the safety community. Does it really matter? I suspect not.

Allan