Posted By Andrew M
Have just had a report from OH that one of our CNC employees will no longer be able to lift aload of more than 5 kilos. There are unlikely to be any jobs in the plant that employee can do. We already have a large hospital ward of people on light duties.

Personally I am not impressed with the OH report - it would appear that they are just covering their backs.

It appears they want an employee specific manual handling risk assessmenr for each task!

Has anyone had experience of this before and could i get some guidance?

Thanks in advance

Posted By Paul Leadbetter
Andrew

Since you already have 'a large hospital ward of people on light duties', it would appear that you do need individual manual handling risk assessments. Since we are all different, I have always considered MH assessments to be individual anyway.

Paul

Posted By Andrew M
I know we have man handling issues. My problem is with the limitation of 5kg. There's very little that a person could do in a Man Eng environment that would fit into that category.

My question is where do you draw the line - in response to being fit for work? without being ageist and our work force has has significantly reduced longevity.

Reduced capability is a natural part of the aging process. Are we supposed to do manual handling assessments for octogenarians?

I know i'm coming off as a bit right wing but our employees are well looked after - manual handling has been an issue but it starting to come under control.

Whatever happened to sa far as is reasonably practicable?

What happens when they say no more than 1Kg?

Posted By Ron Hunter
Andrew, you have my sympathy on this one. You have already got out your cheque book and engaged an expert - the Occupational Health Provider.
I can only suggest a constructive dialogue with the OH people, challenging the basis for their conclusion. Why 5kg? Why not 10kg? Is that 5kg close to the body or at arms length? Occasional or repetitive?

If further expert opinion is required then all parties should be honest enough to say so.
The old chestnut "You'll have to do a Risk Assessment" really gets my goat!

Posted By Andrew M
Thanks guys.

Will sit down with OH provider and try and find a more amcable solution - if that doesn't work may ask to audit OH providers competencies.

Posted By Andrew M
Darren,

Yes and no. The original OH person had not. But they had an accident (ironic? - not on my site though!) and the OH provider gave us interim cover and I took them to see the main tasks. They then recommended the limit.

Their could be an issue with continuity and
But you're right there are issues with the OH not understanding the nature of the work we do.

Which is why I would prefer a permanent OH on site 5 days but cash constraints.....

Posted By J Ridley
Hi Andrew
I hope I can muddy the waters further so I will apologise now and get it over with.

First of all there is no such thing as a weight 'limit' in the Manual Handling Regs as the load has to be assessed in relation to the individual, the task and the working environment.

I suspect that your OH guys may have got the 5kg recommendation from Appendix 3 in the Guidance to the Reg's. If they did, then this is only an indicator as to whether a detailed MH risk assessment has to be done or not and is not a 'limit' as such. The answer to your question as to whether a risk assessment has to be done for every task is no, but only if they fall ouside the boundaries set in the filter i.e. where 'hazardous' MH exists.

In essence manual handling only includes the "transporting or supporting of a load in a static posture". Human effort other than that used for the transporting or supporting a load is, according to the reg's, not manual handing.

Where it is MH, then generic assessments are perfectly acceptable as long as the task, load, environment have been considered and you have employed reasonably fit employees i.e. the risks are common. If there is reason to believe an individual is suffering from ill-health/injury i.e. an individual informs you that he is suffering a health condition, you will have to take this into account for that individual e.g. light duties.

Now for the killer... we have just had a judgement against us where the Judge stated that moving a load by human effort, irrespective of its weight, then the employer is liable for any injury as a result e.g. opening a door and pulling a muscle. In my opinion, this goes against the intent behind the Reg's and inevitably has an impact on the H&S profession when we provide advice to guys like yourself. Now I just don't know what to advise and sometimes this just ain't our fault.

I hope this helps, but probably not eh?

Cheers
John

Posted By David Whaley
John,

I am surprised by the judgement, is it possible to obtain a copy of the full judgement via the case no.? Was this Civil claim? If so the criteria is different from a criminal case and there is always sympathy for an injured person. But it does beg the question of how it is possible to defend against this type of case.

David

Posted By Kieran J Duignan
John offers a revealing illustration of the very elusive nature of these problems.

I also learned a hard way as an expert witness (safety ergonomist and psychologist) when twice the same legal firm saw how cases were unfolding and, on behalf of their clients, conceded liability and challenged the claimant to 'prove' causation. This puts the argument into complex areas where rheumatologists and orthopaedic surgeons make different assessments.

Having had opportunities to carefully study loads (literally) of evidence about these issues, I concluded that the most cost-effective and fruitful way of using available resources for most employers is to invest in improving the culture of safety and in training all employees and managers to use the most up-to-date behavioural observation and feedback methods.

I believe that the payoff is that such training can be dovetailed with performance management training increasingly used in HR so that the critical skills are not costed solely as H & S overhead.