Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By john thos 147
i do not intend to cummunicate all of the risk assements as to use a bad phrase they are "common sense". I will howerver make all of the risk assements avaiable for anybody who wants to see them such as Union Reps. All of the risks will be covered in a SSOW ( these are allready on display ) in the work areas and have been written from and based on previous RA's in conjubction with input of the operators concerned.
I have allready created the hazard register which is in fact what has genearted all of these RA's this will be displayed as a quick reference for employees.
the procedures are allready in place for the safe operating of plant and equipment again these were created by myself in conjunction with the employees.
obviously we carry out regular safety audits/inspections so the monitoring aspect is there.
The findings are reviewed if a failing is found then we change it or improve it by implementing further policies procedures.
I have shifted some of the ownership of managing these procedures and policies to the supervision team in the manner of daily walkrounds ( but there findings are not recorded which is something else that needs addressing)
Hopefully when everything is in place i should have a system that allows for continuous improvement. in some ways i have applied DMAIC
principles as i think they work well
DEFINE
MEASURE
ANALYSE
IMPROVE
CONTROL
the advice that i have recieved is also being extremely beneficial as it is giving a valuble insight into differnt peoples views cultures and practices.
At the end of the day we all do a thankless job and we all have our own views and interpreations of legislation and best practices so in its way everything that has been said or suggested will have an effect on what we are trying to do.
t
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By john thos 147
plese don not get caught up in the amount of RA's i have mentioned a lot are generic and do not need of work doing to them to use on other areas. For instance the following machines
4 laser machined all differnt
2 Plasma's
1 tecnicut.
are principlaly the same so i only have to do the specific RA's once i then modify them to suit the rest ( Does that make sense)
Enviromental aspects / noise moving machinery e-stops / isolation points are all the samme
but i will title them for each individual machine and tailor to suit
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Tanya Boyce
I think petes approach is a good suggestion. Similar to our one here, each lab has a folder containing the RAs for the processes in that lab only. That way they are always easily avaliable for people to reffer without the need for huge folders of information taht doesnt relate to teh activities in that area
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By john thos 147
Tanya unfortunately we cant put them in the areas as they will potentially become fire hazards due to us being a fabrications company i do intend to break them down into areas and subsequently seperate ring bimders though so that they can easily be regfernced
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Peter F
We display them in our fabrications workshop, why would they become a fire hazard, unless you had them right were they use the welder etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By john thos 147
It has always been company policy to keep combustables away from welding processes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By justgossip
I have not read all the replies, so excuse me if I repeat.
our method for this problem,
Conduct RA.
record the significant findings into the method statement.
use the method statement as the training tool which results in the employee recieving info on the significant hazards.
Employee signs method statement, trainer signs off.
Down the line, other trainer does an evaluation to confirm training did what it said on the tin.
SIGNAGE, who reads signage???
Toolbox talks, based on the RA
No I would not paper the RA's all over the place and I would not get everyone to sign.
I would give the safety reps a copy of all RA's
Garry
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By justgossip
I quote
someone then picks something up at over 45kg injures ( ahem ) themselves and its our bloody fault seriously does my head in.
I had the same problem in my early days, because my controls did not work.
The guy lifting ignored safety
THE SUPERVISOR was not doing his job.
Written warning to employee and to supervisor.
Supervisor then failed again and lost his job.
Supervisors now supervise and employees are not picking up heavy weights.
I will take the horse to the water and if it does not drink, well I drown it.
now that may not be the book answer, but it works.
garry
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By john thos 147
Garry,
Thats what i would like to do its even more annoying being that i am HR as well so there fore quite capable of doing it and with no repercussions.
sometimes the short sharp shock works.
I one worked in a company and their philosophy was to blame the employee for every accident and then discipline.
they had procedures that you couldnt work to but they made them law, then turned a blind eye when the guys flouted them but jumped on them when it wrong.
that was bad
regards
john
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By justgossip
With you on that John, had the same problem and moved company.
Now, the guys ceate the safe system with my input. having built it they have to follow it or come up with new improved version.
Hence if you get the odd awkward so and so the lads back me up when drop a few salvos in on the heaD.
Every accident I have looked at has been management at it source.
GARRY
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.