Rank: Guest
|
Posted By john thos 147
i have done a H&S audit today and was advised by an employee that the flooring in his area is raised.
i have looked at the flooring in my view there is a risk that he could trip.
To rectify the flooring will cost several thousand pounds. ( it is steel flooring)
The trip hazard is not in my view a "significat risk" but it is their and obviously the employee has now highlighted it. He currently has a claim in for something similar when he tripped over a raised floor.
(At the time i did not believe the accident to be genuine but obviously couldnt disprove it.
The engineering department will be adverse to following my reccomendations to repair
i would like peoples views on this i can also provide some pictures of the flooring to give people an idea of the problem
many regards
john p
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By stephen d clarke
Hi,
Do you mean a slip probem? Solutions to slips/trips look at: cleaning, lighting, obstructions, footware and flooring.
Steve
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Mike DF
How does this employee cope with stairs? How does he go up kerbs?
Seriously, if it is permanent step onto a flat surface what is the problem. Maybe the lighting could be improved or the step painted white
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By David Bannister
By coincidence I was at a client's site yesterday where there is an ongoing claim where an employee alleges a trip over a flooring fault and consequent damages for pain & suffering and lost wages etc.
It is said to have taken place at time when nobody was around. It was reported internally and a RIDDOR report was submitted after 3 days absence. There was an unevenness in the flooring in the area stated. No witnesses. There is great scepticism surrounding the whole issue. The individual has previously made a successful claim in dubious circumstances.
The possibility of a defence is slim for other reasons too and the employer is "not best pleased"
John, take whatever lessons you can from this.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By graeme12345
John, as long as your company have done what any reasonable company would be expected to do in this situation you cannot go far wrong, remember it is an insignificant risk (you could just ID the hazard with tape or paint)
You need to carry out an assessment and ensure all know about it.
Your assessment controls should be suitable and sufficient for the foreseeable risk.
Fully understand exactly what "reasonably practicable" means and apply it thoroughly.
I try to "foresee" what a judge would ask me if things did go wrong and i was in the dock, when assessing risks.
HTH's
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ron Hunter
Such a hazard should have been picked up during a routine safety inspection - not during a formal audit.
Local problem = local solution. You say this is in an engineering department- can't they fix it then?
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By A Campbell
Hi John,
It looks like you and the employee have hit things off swimmingly!
Just a couple of areas to ponder on.....
Shame it had to be highlighted during an H&S audit, as these areas could also be picked up at safety tour, routine inspections etc.
I wonder what the department Manager has to say... before placing away his sunglasses!
You have been informed of a possible safety hazard - That is a positive sign
You have assessed the hazard and likelihood of someone tripping
You have informed your department to have it assessed in regards to repair/replace that involves time effort & cost
Have you... warned others of the hazard?
Can you... initiate a temporary repair?
Can you cover, cordon off, mark/paint in bright colour the area?
If the cost is high for repairing the floor, that is a business decision (after taking all into account)....
But the costs may be also high if you do not do what is reasonably practicable (as described above)?
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Andrew Meiklejohn
John.
I feel you are between a rock and a hard place on this one. You are aware of the trip hazard and a claim has already been successful. Some employees will exploit this.
This is where sensible risk assessment gets knocked on the head because when it comes to claims it would appear that the employee has no obligation to look where they are going.
Andrew
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Sally
By how much is it raised? I guessing from your description that the floor is steel plates and one is out of alignment.
Agree with others if it is a small height difference just make people aware or could it be leveled with a small in-fill plate giving a small slope rather than a 'step'
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Safe System
how much does a roll of yellow & black hazard tape cost to put on the area?? . .. just put some of that down and bring it to his attention - in writing...
its reasonable AND practicable!
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By john thos 147
The operative in question will be shot blasting products he will probably walk backwards (I do the same when pressure washing my car i.e. similar process) That is when I think the risk will be greatest.
Even so my other view is that as the operative knows of the increased risk of falling can that be classed as safety measure?
P.S The floor is flat steel grill mesh palte about half an inch thick it is put in, in sections .It is where the sections join that there is a step in their hieghts of approx 5-15mm. The flooring will be damaged regularly and is expensive to fix.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By john thos 147
In response to A Campbell and R Hunter,
we undertake audits every 2 weeks. This trip hazard was highlighted approximately 2 years ago.After it was ignored for a month the employee had the accident . Then the flooring was repaired/replaced. Since then it has not been reported/recoreded or noticed .
In the audit that i undertook today the same employee has advised again of the flooring I know that the maintenace manager will not repair the flooring (He is one stubborn GET)
Cant remember if i said but the employee has put a claim in for the last accident.
My view is now that he knows the fault is recorded within the Audit therefore i believe he could have another accident (when no one can see him) which will mean thst he can go on the sick for a few weeks put another claim in and use his most recent accident to reinforce his original claim .
As to black and yeelow tape . The flooring is within his working area cannot be sealed off as process will have to stop.
signs up to now seem an OK idea but would that be enough to defend a claim
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Tabs
Considering your last posting, I would urge repairs. The HSE's STEP online training package quotes toe clearance as low as 8.7 for average people, and suggest that a difference of 10mm between surfaces be treated as a trip hazard.
Given the person may be moving backwards, and that people may be carrying things or in conversation (both used to happen in workshops when I worked in them) warning tape or previous instructions would not be seen as reasonable.
The repairs may be a matter of providing a small ramp (very small) which can be tack welded into place, or even an angle grinder taken to the higher pieces to reduce the step difference - depending on whether it is structural or not.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By john thos 147
i understand that the area as decribed is a trip hazard .
tape will not work as it is a work area and the employee would be restricted further by the tape.
My concern is what do you do when you report something and people are resistant to following your advice.
I have come up with a solution which is to bolt all of the flooring together. Quite a simple solution.Which i have now got buy in for.
But i would still like peoples views on what to do next when in some respects you may be being undermined and by doing so putting people at risk.
I am also HR adviser so am completely aware of all disciplinary processes.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By MickN
John,
it's hard to come up with solutions without actually seeing the whole floor etc. but here goes.
My first solution is to raise the lower floor level so that both match. A couple of "shims" (thin wedges of metal underneath near the bolts) might do the job here. If you now say that this is too large an area you might consider elevating part of it, that way it's less likely that the operative walks backwards over the level change. I'd suggest getting the engineering dept. down there to have a look with you, they might come up with a simple solution.
The second possibility is to weld or bolt a handrail to the floor, along the level change so that there is a barrier preventing the trip/fall. If this restricts access or working room then so what, they'll find a way to work around it (it's a handrail, not a wall).
Forget the claim culture element, it's not our job to determine if a claim is genuine or not. The courts generally have a way of finding them out anyhow.
Mick
|
|
|
|
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.