Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By safetyamateur
Disappointed to see that the HSE's definition makes no real mention of 'severity'. This from their Risk Management pages
"What is risk?
A risk is the likelihood that a hazard will cause a specified harm to someone or something, eg if there are no guard rails on the scaffolding it is likely that a construction worker will fall and break a bone."
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Kevin Brown
Do we need guidance on severity? A risk is a risk is a risk. If I forget to buy milk I risk drinking black coffee tomorrow. If I miscalculate my insulin dose I risk a coma. I think I can differentiate between minor and major outcomes of the risk in each case. If severity is established by statute where does that leave the risk assessor?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Stuff4blokes
specified harm is surely the severity eg bone breakage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Dave Merchant
That's because, to be pedantic (and I am) a "risk" in HSE's use of the word has no severity. Risk is a statistical probability that something may or may not happen, whereas "severity" only applies to the outcome of the event.
You can be "severely injured" by falling off a ladder, but you cannot be "severely likely" to fall off.
It's why we have both columns on the risk assessment and don't try to add them into a single figure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ron Hunter
From INDG163, the HSE definition of risk:
"the risk is the chance, high or low, that somebody could be harmed by these and other hazards, together with an indication of how serious the harm could be."
i.e. likelihood and consequence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Eddie
It could be that Safetyamatuer and Ron are talking about two slightly different concepts.
Safetyamateur's risk is to do with whether an event can happen. eg Is it likely that I would get knocked over if I tried to run across a busy road?
Ron's definition is more concerned with the evaluation of that risk, eg The risk is high because of the probable serious injury involved in being struck by a fast moving vehicle.
Eddie
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Caitlin O'Connell
Is this the sort of thing you're looking for?
"The likelihood that the harm from a particular hazard is realised. The extent of the risk covers the number of people affected and the consequences for them. Therefore risk reflects both the likelihood and severity of the harm."
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Mark Eden
With regard to the HSE 5 step risk assessment
I think it is quite simply - if you identify a hazard that has potential to cause harm and you have identified people who may be affected then you must do what is reasonably practical to minimise the risk. Put it simply ,you have identified a hazard you do something about it.
I have seen a lot of risk assessments not worth the paper they are written on, sighting likelihood x severity been low no further action required. If the hazard is ever realized, and you have no or inadequate controls due to a infrequent likelihood,you are at fault and will have a lot of explaining to do
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Kenneth Patrick
"do something about it". The decision whether or not something needs to be done is based on your assessment of the level of risk both severity/likelihood and then a judgment as to what is "reasonably practicable"
ken
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Adrian Watson
"Risk is the possibility of danger”
R v Board of Trustees of the Science Museum [1993] ICR 876
“The risk has to be real; not fanciful or hypothetical.”
R v Porter (James Godfrey) [2008] EWCA Crim 1271
“There are two factors in determining the magnitude of a risk – the seriousness of the injury and the likelihood of the injury being in fact caused.”
Paris v Stepney Borough Council [1951] AC 367, HL
The (Health and Safety at Work) Act is not concerned with what work is done, but is properly concerned with how the work is done.
Langridge v Howletts & Port Lympne Estates [1996] EWHC Admin 282
Regards Adrian
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Phil Rose
Isn't severity the 'magnitude' of the hazard
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By safetyamateur
Interesting comments.
I'm definitely of the 'likelihood & severity' camp.
Something could be very likely but I'm going to do nothing about it right now because I have bigger fish to fry.
Don't know about you lot but I still get a lot people who get hung up on the trivial stuff. I rely on being able to add a bit of perspective based on 'severity'. It's a shame when you don't see it in places you expect it to be. That said, it looks like HSE are little confused themselves.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Raymond Rapp
I just knew this thread would provide a plethora of responses...mostly based on semantics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Adrian Watson
Dave,
Risk in a strict sense in the possibility of an outcome; for good or bad.
Risk in the health, safety and environmental sense, is the possibility of a defined adverse outcome from an event.
This possibility can be defined in terms of its probability (0.001) for all outcomes; frequency (1 in 1000); chance for and against (odds 1:999); or likelihood (remote). All the terms are similar.
The outcome may be described either as a specific harm (broken leg, arm, etc) or as a class of harm (Fatality, serious personal injury, significant injury, minor injury, trivial).
When assessing risk HSE consider both the consequence and its likelihood. Have a look at the Enforcement Management Model.
Regards Adrian Watson
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By J Knight
Morning,
In BS31100 2009 'Risk Management - Code of Practice' risk is defined very simply as the 'effect of uncertainty on objectives'. This definition is taken in its turn from ISO Guide 73 on a common risk vocabulary and is reflected in the new ISO 31000 Risk Management standard.
BS31100 is intended to apply common principles to all areas of risk in business, using the concept of Enterprise Risk Management, and it would apply to H&S risk. The 'effect of uncertainty' encompasses both the likelihood and the severity of harm, since the likelihood is uncertainty and the effect would include severity. If your objective in a particular case is to 'ensure, so far as reasonably practicable...' then nothing more needs to be said in terms of definitions,
John
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.