Posted By David Bannister I have noticed in my everyday work and on reading postings on these forums that there seems to be a reluctance by some to deal with the first part of H&S and a greater level of comfort in the safety bit. Perhaps this is partly to do with the fact that we can rapidly see the results of our safety interventions and failures, whilst those from health related interventions and omissions are often not apparent until later. Maybe too it is that our training and education is more focussed on safety. I made the decision some time ago that my education was at that time lacking in health issues and took steps to improve it. What do others think?

Posted By JimE There is no occy health where I am H&S adviser.Colleagues rarely come to me about health issues that may be work-related. I don't know if it is embarrassment,unsure of relevance to H&S or reluctance because of fear of losing their job (I know that shouldn't happen but the fear still exists in some folks minds). I would gladly take on more training and expand my knowledge and even my role in this small business but finances rule it out at the moment. Heres to the future.... JimE

Posted By CFT Isn't this being taken a bit to literally? If you help manage the safety of others to prevention and elimination are we not therefore protecting the health? Does not COSHH controls that we have protect health? Do we not safely manage asbestos to protect health? What of safely accessing drains via man-entry and taking potential gas reading, breathing equipment, is not health based as well as safety for the individual? What of epidemiological studies that we may carry out? DSE & eyesight, is this not health? Manual handling, healthy bodies, keeps them safe and also healthy, no strains, breaks, fractures by limiting loads creating engineered controls etc. Smoking (oh no did I really mention that one?) Who in your organisation was tasked with dealing with recent legislative changes, is this not to the health benefit? Lepto/legionella; what of health surveillance, and so on and so forth. For me the two are so closely interlinked I never really bother to separate them. CFT

Posted By Ali I think you and some of the comments below have hit the nail on the head. Many managers I come across are competent when it comes to safety issues, investigating accidents etc. When it comes to noise, vibration etc and health surveillance their eyes glaze over. Training is a key issue and for that I am deeply indebted to Salford Uni, where I studied for my Post Grad diploma in OSH. The safety part maybe "common sense", but Occ Health is about knowledge.

Posted By water67. Hi my job our section is health, safety and well-being.. given that absence for "accidents" is less than "ill health" includes mental health. The answer must be yes, I am heavily involved in the health and well-being of staff. Cheers

Posted By David Bannister Thanks for some great and thought provoking responses. JimE, I have no knowledge of your organisation but would be surprised if there is a complete absence of health risks. Whilst no issues may be raised by colleagues are there possible exposures that are unrecognised? Ron, I agree that we should be educating employers but how many of us have the confidence and up to date knowledge to do so? CFT, the issues you have mentioned are exactly those which I believe are tackled by only a small proportion of organisations, i.e. those who have access to truly competent advice in these areas. My experience is that most smaller organisations will make a reasonable job of recognising the obvious safety risks and show willingness to tackle them when reminded, but have a worrying lack of understanding of the health risks of some of the substances they have present, the nature of noise and vibration risks, repetitive motions, manual loads etc and all too often stress is seen as a joke. In my work I often draw attention to health risks that have previously been unrecognised, provide advice on how to control them but have no executive powers to implement the controls. Too often the advice remains “on file” partly I believe because current managers (and exposed employees) are likely to have moved on when the affects may become apparent, partly because health is seen as belonging to the medical profession, partly because there is an unwillingness to accept that the work may be causing harm and partly “ostrich syndrome”. In some cases I accept that my persuasive powers may be inadequate and sadly I have no authority to kick the exposed posteriors. Looking forward to some more views and opinions on the subject.

Posted By Brian Hagyard I will not name the offending programme again but a Local Authority Officer was criticised on this forum not so long ago when shown on TV for trying to deal with the glues used in nail bars. Some members of this forum thought she was being petty! Brian

Posted By Garry Adams David Very interesting Post, I have worked for numerous Scaffold Organisations over the years and have raised the issue of repetitive strain injury and the chronic cumulative trauma associated with the prolonged use of the manually operated Scaffold Spanner. I acknowledge that there has been a marked improvement in the ergonomic design of the Spanner in recent times. However, I would rather see further developments include a hand held powered Spanner. The general consensus of opinion within the ranks of the Scaffold Erectors is favourable...however, the Board Room Policy and Decision Makers cannot recognise the long term benefits, as many contributors to this thread have identified, education is the answer at both Shop Floor and Board Room Level. Health and Morals are just a relevant as Safety. Garry...

Posted By Raymond Rapp David I think that the health bit is the 'bridesmaid' of this industry for several reasons. First of all, it easier to focus on the more immediate risks that safety presents. There is some overlap of course. Many health issues are not typical of a practitioners working day and therefore some new learning may be required or in some cases refreshing. Some health issues require a degree of knowledge that may be beyond your average practitioner. For example, I have been assisting a student put together a cogent report for MMA welding. I know nothing of the hazards, LEV, RPE or OELs required for the activity, but with some research I could understand those issues. Difficulties include occupational exposure limits, which require a degree of knowledge and expertise to make sense of the data. Finally, for some aspects of occupational health the use of an expert in that field is more desirable than someone fudging around with issues that they are not familiar with. As I have said before, this is a very diverse industry dealing with health, safety, quality, risk, environmental issues and so on. You can't be an expert in every one of them. So, no I am not frightened of health issues, but I am also acutely aware of my limitations and time constraints. Ray

Posted By John Richards That bad looking then ?