Rank: New forum user 
|
Hi
I have been asked to develop a Risk Assessment for one of our female employees on a large construction site. Any ideas about were to get some information?
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Sorry, but would the Risk Assessments be the same for a man and a woman, unless the woman was expecting, a young worker, or of foreign dessent etc, whereby her understanding of the english language was poor.
If your identified hazards and associated risks present a risk to the health and safety of a man, they would obviuosly be the same for a women.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Well now, I can see this thread becoming a bit contentious. Despite what some people may think in this PC world there are some differences between male and female...in a construction environment. The amount that women can safely lift is less than that recommended for men for starters.
Sorry Marc, I cannot assist you in your RA quest other than to suggest trying the HSE website.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Hi,
HSE recognise the difference e.g. manual handling risk assessment guidance chart for male/female but not in the MAC tool except to mention new/expectant mothers as a vulnerable group.
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Hang on hang on. The HSE chart is a guidance tool only. Some women can lift more than men safely. It depends on size and fitness.
Yes, MH RA's do need to take into account the 'person' (not just what sex they are but a range of factors) but you wouldn't have one for women and one for men that is far too limiting.
Also some chemicals need to take into account female users (if there are risks to unborn children etc), however these are unlikely to be used on a construction site.
But this sounds like a general construction RA being asked for and there shoud be no need for a different RA for women.
I am one of the most un-PC peole that I know. However, I can see no need for a female specific RA.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Hi all,
down get drawn into the "maximum" I can lift arguement. Its widely acknowledged that different size people, whether male or female, can lift more or less than the 25kg/16kg that is widely broadcasted. These figures come from a recommendation based on carry out a repetitive lift 30 times an hour, so is in no way a maximum weight.
Recently Manual Handling training has gone away from emphasising correct lifting techniques,(although its still an integral part of the training) to an appreciation of how your back works and how you damage it.
But thats not an answer to the origional question......unless there is a medical (or similar) reason to carry out a seperate RA for a female, then I'd treat her the same as the men! And make sure they all have Manual Handling training!
Holmezy
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user 
|
As a woman in construction I would only add that the welfare facilities need to be taken into consideration and the Welfare regs can help you with this with regards to locks on toilet doors and somehwere to change etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Surely, it is tasks that are risk assessed not individuals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Hang on hang on. The HSE chart is a guidance tool only. Some women can lift more than men safely. It depends on size and fitness.
So Clairel it's only a guidance tool is it?
Only recently you stated in the risk assessment topic you told me to have a look at the HSE example for an office risk assessment as if to say it is the best practice. Your reply #38.
What is it - guidance or more than that?
I agree with this reply by the way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Guidance IS best practice Chris. What's your point?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user 
|
Mainly make sure they have somewhere CLEAN and private to change and a separate toilet.
I also find it a problem getting PPE to fit being smaller than men the masks and gloves seem to be one size fits no-one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Kate wrote:Surely, it is tasks that are risk assessed not individuals. Here we go again! You cannot carry out a suitable and sufficient risk assessment of a work related task without considering the worker. There is another topic on risk assessment currently on the go, have a look at that. When looking at women in construction, and not being sexist, there is a difference in physique if nothing else. A risk assessment for (for instance) block laying including all aspects i.e. sand, cement, block cutting, manual handling etc. may show different findings when assessed for a woman than for a man. You can't use the same risk assessment for different people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
ChrisBurns wrote:Hang on hang on. The HSE chart is a guidance tool only. Some women can lift more than men safely. It depends on size and fitness.
So Clairel it's only a guidance tool is it?
Only recently you stated in the risk assessment topic you told me to have a look at the HSE example for an office risk assessment as if to say it is the best practice. Your reply #38.
What is it - guidance or more than that?
I agree with this reply by the way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Quote:
Here we go again!
You cannot carry out a suitable and sufficient risk assessment of a work related task without considering the worker.
I agree; but it is still the task that is risk assessed, taking the worker into account; not the worker who is risk assessed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Kate, why can't we do them both together?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I don't know what you mean, Chris?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Kate wrote:I don't know what you mean, Chris? I mean - do the risk assessment of the work task and include the worker in the assessment. It's the employee we are trying to protect not the work task.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Of course you include the worker in a risk assessment! But in this case, presumably there is already a risk assessment of the tasks and what is needed is not a separate risk assessment of the new worker nor a new risk assessment but a review of the existing risk assessments to take the new worker into account.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Safety Witch said:
"Mainly make sure they have somewhere CLEAN and private to change and a separate toilet."
There is no absolute requirement in law for separate facilities.
Is there a risk of a discrimination claim here?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Ron
this is a copy & paste from the regs
S20 Sanitary conveniences
20.—(1) Suitable and sufficient sanitary conveniences shall be provided at readily accessible places.
(2) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1), sanitary conveniences shall not be suitable unless—
(a) the rooms containing them are adequately ventilated and lit;
(b) they and the rooms containing them are kept in a clean and orderly condition; and
(c) separate rooms containing conveniences are provided for men and women except where and so far as each convenience is in a separate room the door of which is capable of being secured from inside
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Steve, I think that was what Ron was saying, that you don't actually have to provide seperate toilet facilites for women, they just have to be capable of being secured from the inside.
Chris, I still disagree with the concept that the additional MH assessment is becuase it is a 'woman' and therefore she will be weaker. That just isn't necessarily the case, especially nowadays. Many women are fitter and stronger than men (I can guarantee that I can do more full press ups than most of the men on this forum - becuase I can do more than most of the fit men I know, I happen to have above average upper body strength). The MH assessment should take into account the different MH capabilities of the 'person'. Being a woman is irrelevant. I'm not being PC about it. That's just the facts of todays society.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
clairel wrote:Steve, I think that was what Ron was saying, that you don't actually have to provide seperate toilet facilites for women, they just have to be capable of being secured from the inside.
Chris, I still disagree with the concept that the additional MH assessment is becuase it is a 'woman' and therefore she will be weaker. That just isn't necessarily the case, especially nowadays. Many women are fitter and stronger than men (I can guarantee that I can do more full press ups than most of the men on this forum - becuase I can do more than most of the fit men I know, I happen to have above average upper body strength). The MH assessment should take into account the different MH capabilities of the 'person'. Being a woman is irrelevant. I'm not being PC about it. That's just the facts of todays society. I didn't say women were weaker, you need to read what people write. I know that there are small men and large men, small women and large women. Everyone is different and I believe the worker should be integral to the assessment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Chris you said that women have a different physique and that the outcome of a MH RA may have different findings for a woman than a man.
The implication there is that women will be weaker.
Maybe you need to consider the implication of the written word due to the context that they are put in not just the literal meaning.
But aside, it doesn't change the fact that you are still saying that there should be different male and female MH assessments, instead of what I am arguing that there should be different person MH assessments based on individual capabilities as opposed to just their sex.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Clairel / Ron
I was wrong on this, I thought that it was a requirement to have separate toilets. You were right.
S20 of the regs states
(c) separate rooms containing conveniences are provided for men and women except where and so far as each convenience is in a separate room the door of which is capable of being secured from inside
HSE Guidance states
where possible, separate facilities for men and women _ failing that, rooms with lockable doors;
The ACOP doesnt help
Well, I have done some reseach on toilets and learnt something so I will reflect on whether I can claim CPD points.
thanks
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Hi,
Love this thread - as Harry Hill says there is only one way to find out - fight fight fight
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I don't know how anyone can read my mind when reading my replies here? However someone did once think I was a lot younger than I actually am so there must be something going on ha ha.
What you have to realise is this Topic is about women in construction therefore all replies will have a slant toward "women in construction". Marc0808 must think there is something to consider or the question would not have been asked in the first place.
The female of the species does have a different "make up" than the male so she will have to be viewed differently.
"vive la difference".
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.