Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Seamus O Sullivan
Anyone have experience of " Construction Safety Code of Practice , for Contractors with three employees or less"
I have a copy here, and it states it sufficies with the legal duty of having a safety statement where the relevant SSWP is used.
I have a client who had one and it was not accepted by the safety officer, on the site, he required my client to have a safety statement.
I am aware the legislation allows their use , but are they being accepted on Irish sites by safety people?
any views?
Thanks
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Martin Daly
You seemed to be mixing up contractors and sub contractors.
A small contractor working directly for a client
can use a SSWP as a safety statement.
But a sub contractor working for a contractor must have a safety statement.
Martin Daly
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Seamus O Sullivan
Thanks for the reply Martin.
The publication which is issued by the H.S.A. contains a leaflet, which states the following
“ Please note where a sub-contractor employing three or less confirms their commitment to this code , then they are complying with the requirement to have a Safety Statement”
I understand this as meaning where the sub contractor signs, dates, and communicates Appendix E, titled 'Your commitment to safety', that this suffices.
I accept I may be wrong, but still think I am not.
The publication is useful because everyone with a recent safe pass should have a basic understanding of the SSWP.
Views??
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By D. Hilton
It may satisfy the HSA but it is a matter of choice of the client or appointed project supervisor to require a safety statement or addition requirements regardless of any derogation's.
Similarly, many sites require safety professionals to undergo the torture of safe pass even though this is not required in law.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Seamus O Sullivan
It also satisfies the requirement of having a safety statement under the 2005 act.
I really can not see how a person who has started a job, be informed that he now needs a safety statement, when he has what is accepted by the authorities as the equivalent.
Is this an attempt to ensure smaller sub contractors do not do the work?
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Solidgear
I'd call it a lack of knowledge, or someone has their head so far up their **** due to their ego.
:)
Dave, Instead of slamming small contractors, us H&S pros, should be working with them. How on earth is a culture supposed to be developed on-site, when subbies are approached wrongly from the start.
Dave
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By D. Hilton
This still does not prevent any particular client making a requirement to provide a safety statement rather than accepting the Construction work COP.
The issue is not helped when Regulation 24 of the Construction Regs makes no reference to the derogation and matters can be further clouded by the following information from the HSA.
Safe System of Work Plan - An Introduction
The Safe System of Work Plan (SSWP) complements the Safety Statement required under the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act, although it does not replace the requirement for such a Safety Statement. Specific Guidelines on Safety Statements are available from the Health and Safety Authority
Not sure I agree with the HSA reasoning behind the €50.00 charge for the COP either.
|
|
|
|
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.