Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
McGivern17073  
#1 Posted : 19 May 2010 16:23:56(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
McGivern17073

Our team of engineers have requested permission to wear shorts during the summer months in place of their cargo trousers. What are the risks we have to consider as part of the risk assessment? So far I have considered the use of sun block and its regular application each day. Cuts from gutting and subsequent infections (first aid boxes are in each engineers van). If we allow shorts I have considered supplying cargo style shorts to assist transportation of items especially when they work at height. I would appreciate your thoughts/feedback on the risks of the engineers wearing shorts. Cheers Gary
firesafety101  
#2 Posted : 19 May 2010 16:54:06(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
firesafety101

Cuts from gutting ? Not sure what you mean. I'm interested in this one - I suggest a proper risk assessment to include the style of shorts, get the engineers to take an active role in the assessment. Would it help to seek advice from similar workers in warmer climes overseas, i.e. UAE? Do the engineers install glass to frames or is it sealed units? As far as I am concerned workers wearing comfortable clothing is a bonus and would look at this positively.
Barrie(Badger)Etter  
#3 Posted : 19 May 2010 16:59:54(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Barrie(Badger)Etter

McG Having worked it the trade a few years back I would say the biggest problem is glass in any for, new, edged or cullet. Make it clear in your RA that full lenght trousers are preferred method of protection. Then get the blighters to read it and confirm what is said in the RA. From then on if they in sist on wearing short thats their issue if they injure themselves (so long as you have their signature to say they've read the document). Unfortunatlely if they hurt themselves it still comes back to the employer, but then you have evidence to prove you've done all you can. Badger
User is suspended until 03/02/2041 16:43:28(UTC) IanBlenkharn  
#4 Posted : 19 May 2010 18:22:13(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
IanBlenkharn

Of course, you could always do the risk assessment first, then use that assessment to formulate a decision. Not the other way round! Please, if you're a professional, use risk assessment as the foundation of an evidence-based approach to safety. RA is not appropriate as a veneer to a more cavalier approach and should certainly never be used to prop up an arbitrary or off-the cuff decision. Ian Blenkharn
firesafety101  
#5 Posted : 19 May 2010 19:34:48(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
firesafety101

Barrie I disagree. If you have a risk assessment that says trousers you have to stand up and enforce that. If you try what you suggest you are heading for a fall. Ian, employees should be involved in the risk assessment process and the employer should never prejudge and decide the result of an assessment prior to doing it. Is this what you are saying?
pete48  
#6 Posted : 19 May 2010 21:39:10(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
pete48

What are the cargo trousers provided for? Are they part of the ppe or not? If they are ppe what level and type of cut protection are they required to provide? If they have not been specified as ppe then changing to shorts is not an issue. If they are ppe then you need to assess the balance of risk between the potential exposure to cuts against risks arising from the discomfort of wearing trousers which is probably , but not necessarily a "no brainer". As a matter if general interest GIS 1 does not even mention leg protection as a a generic requirement, it mentions aprons but not leg protection. I wonder why? As others have said, what type of glass is being handled, in what circumstances. There is a world of difference between an operator manipulating and carrying a large sheet of annealed glass and an operator installing a double glazed unit or a toughened glass section. So what type of failure could occur, what type of injury might occur (e.g. slicing cut or penetration, multiple or singular, which part of the body is at most risk etc Get your context sorted and then decide. And to head off any misunderstanding--I am aware that many companies specify cut resistant trousers as part of their protection strategy and nothing in this post should be taken to suggest that I disagree with that position. p48
paul.skyrme  
#7 Posted : 19 May 2010 22:52:04(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
paul.skyrme

Look sorry to be a bore, but these guys are NOT Engineers by any stretch of the imagination. Please don;t refer to them as such, we would all be up in arms if anyone who has had a days H&S training was refered to as a H&S consultant. Sorry again but they are window fitters, glaziers, carpenters, joiners, tradesmen, but NOT by any stretch of the imagination engineers. Paul.
pete48  
#8 Posted : 19 May 2010 23:09:01(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
pete48

Oh I don't know Paul, can we be so sure of either point? I have a good friend who currently installs window components and he has an engineering qualification, so he is-although the job doesn't require it. Have you ever tried calling a maintenance engineer a fitter? It can result in an interference fit I am told. LOL Enjoyed the rant, good for us all once in a while, p48
PJG  
#9 Posted : 19 May 2010 23:26:46(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
PJG

Trousers… “to prevent a cut or penetration or not to prevent a cut or penetration? … that is the question”. If your existing RA’s do not require specific PPE trousers or full length trousers as a control measure to eliminate or mitigate risk then review your RA’s and make a decision. If trousers are supplied simply as uniform and not PPE, then start ordering the shorts. By the way, If we now get forty days of rain and a lousy summer… we know where to point the finger Mc17073!
paul.skyrme  
#10 Posted : 19 May 2010 23:44:10(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
paul.skyrme

pete48 wrote:
Oh I don't know Paul, can we be so sure of either point? I have a good friend who currently installs window components and he has an engineering qualification, so he is-although the job doesn't require it. Have you ever tried calling a maintenance engineer a fitter? It can result in an interference fit I am told. LOL Enjoyed the rant, good for us all once in a while, p48
Sorry, I had to have the rant. Your "friend" ;-) Has an engineering qualification, I have over a dozen of various sorts. Does my C&G in PAT testing, no entry qualifications, C&G level, less than a weeks course make me an Engineer? I don't think so, but my other qualifications do, and they entitle me to put letters after my name and, practice as an engineer in countries where the title is protected in law, just as a medical doctor is in this country. A globally recognised engineering qualification, to be globally recognised, as an engineer, is at least at first degree level. We should remember this if we wish to protect our professional recognition. I'm NOT CMIOSH, and would not pretend to be, I do give H&S advice to customers but within my competence, similar to my posts on here. I'm no asbestos expert, I have some limited experience, I would not give advice on a petrochem COMAH hazard as I have no real measurable competence, I may comment on areas where my competence can be paralleled though for “debate”. Sorry peeps! Please respect other professions. BTW, I have worked as a maintenance engineer in the past, and most of those I worked with were not engineers, nor was I at the time! A maintenance engineer may actually be a fitter or an electrician, but probably in all honesty NOT an engineer especially in the UK. Sorry. Rant over for now! :-)) Paul
McGivern17073  
#11 Posted : 23 May 2010 21:08:37(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
McGivern17073

Hi everyone. Many thanks for your feedback. Firstly can I apologise to Paul.Skyrme as I didn't mean to offend anyone's profession. For the purpose of this forum I will not refer to our replacement window fitters as engineers. That really wasn't the purpose of my question on the forum, I was looking for constructive advice as to the risks to consider before compiling a risk assessment for allowing (or not as the case may be) our replacement window fitters to wear shorts. The shorts are not part of their PPE. They have been supplied with suitable gloves/hand protection for transporting the window frames/glass, etc. In response to the question as to whether they fit glass or glass already mounted within frame - the answer is both. The majority of the time they are replacing a blown sealed unit with a new one. Sometimes they just replace the window furniture (handles, hinges, etc), replace poly carbonate roof sheeting and other similar works such as replacing fascia, soffits and guttering. All windows installed comply with Part L of the building regs. I fully intend carrying out a risk assessment but would appreciate constructive feedback on what to consider for the risk assessment. ChrisBurns - sorry typo error, this should have read 'cuts from guttering and associated infections from the debris found in guttering, etc'. Thanks for highlighting my typo. Thanks also for the idea of contacting those that work in UAE, this is the sort of advice I believe is warranted within this forum. Please keep your constructive advice, thoughts, comments coming. Regards Gary
firesafety101  
#12 Posted : 23 May 2010 21:56:26(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
firesafety101

paul.skyrme wrote:
Look sorry to be a bore, but these guys are NOT Engineers by any stretch of the imagination. Please don;t refer to them as such, we would all be up in arms if anyone who has had a days H&S training was refered to as a H&S consultant. Sorry again but they are window fitters, glaziers, carpenters, joiners, tradesmen, but NOT by any stretch of the imagination engineers. Paul.
Hi Paul, I did a site visit the other day to a glazing contractor and asked each individual what they did and what they called themselves, the answers ranged from glazing, labourer, fixing, Foreman, fixer, and glazier again. Not one of them said they were an engineer.
frankc  
#13 Posted : 24 May 2010 08:54:26(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
frankc

ChrisBurns wrote:
Cuts from gutting ? As far as I am concerned workers wearing comfortable clothing is a bonus and would look at this positively.
I'll tell my mate down at the steelworks to try wearing carpet slippers instead of those big uncomfortable steelies as some would look at that positively. Alternatively, wear what the R/A says you should and just take more breaks out of the sun, take on more fluids, rotate the job if poss. I also will assume these replacement windows, soffits and guttering are not all at ground level and as such some of your workforce are clambering about up ladders, probably whilst carrying something up them, or working from scaffolding. From my experience as a steel erector in a previous life, the risk of cuts or scratches (then infection) is greatly increased by wearing shorts. Good luck in your search for the solution mate and for the pedants, a housewife is now considered a 'domestic engineer'..... Apparently.
frankc  
#14 Posted : 24 May 2010 08:55:47(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
frankc

Message above posted by Frankie, ex steel erector/constructional engineer.
firesafety101  
#15 Posted : 24 May 2010 09:14:47(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
firesafety101

Carpet slippers - steelworks - that's positive - there's always one isn't there :-) On site the other day the scaffold "engineers" were wearing shorts, obviously for comfort during the hot weather. (Looked nice as they were uniform). Not using their slings while working close to the exposed edge I add.
Clairel  
#16 Posted : 24 May 2010 09:21:06(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Clairel

I think it speaks volumes that the biggest debate on this thread is the use of the term 'engineer' not the wearing of shorts. I sort of agree with what pete said. But personally if they are just fitting sealed units then I can't see why they can't wear shorts in principle. If you want to provide cargo shorts then that's a HR (what a nice employer!) decision.
frankc  
#17 Posted : 24 May 2010 09:32:35(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
frankc

clairel wrote:
I sort of agree with what pete said. But personally if they are just fitting sealed units then I can't see why they can't wear shorts in principle.
McGivern17073 posted... In response to the question as to whether they fit glass or glass already mounted within frame - the answer is both. The majority of the time they are replacing a blown sealed unit with a new one. Sometimes they just replace the window furniture (handles, hinges, etc), replace poly carbonate roof sheeting and other similar works such as replacing fascia, soffits and guttering. All windows installed comply with Part L of the building regs.... They are not just fitting sealed units. They are also handling sheets of glass, replacing fascias, gutters etc as well. Time for a R/A review methinks.......
Clairel  
#18 Posted : 24 May 2010 09:46:48(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Clairel

But the majority of the time they are not (I beleive that's what he said). If the cargo pants aren't cut resistance they will provide litle protection from broken glass and sharp edges anyway. So why not provide cut resistant over trousers for the higher hazard work and leave the option to wear shorts when it is very hot. Being hot and uncomfortable does need to be taken into account and so why dress head to toe every day just for the few times that would be required? An ad hoc provision can b considered.
pete48  
#19 Posted : 24 May 2010 10:36:15(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
pete48

Wow, on and on it goes. Practicality and pragmatism are the best allies when thinking about any ppe. Have any of you ever had to wear cut protection clothing? Whether Kevlar or ballistic nylon based, both are uncomfortable to wear at any time. In high ambient temperatures and direct sunlight you would be asking a great deal of your employees to wear it consistently. It is always essential that you properly address the hazards and risks then check out the best way to provide any ppe. It is even more important that whenever the available protection is not easy to wear or work in then you had better be absolutely certain you need to specify it and you have found the best "fit". Frank, your steelworks example has many such situations, I am less convinced that glazing installation has. So, as I said at the beginning of this thread, what actually is the risk and how should we best control it? It is not as easy as saying provide full length leg protection. You might ask yourself the question..how many cuts occur to legs when handling or moving glass, which parts of the leg, what type of cuts, what level of cut and puncture protection would I need to prevent those types of cut. What other snag, puncture and cut hazards are there on the average work site. Do I need to protect from them? Do all other trades have to wear full length trousers and if so why? What is the experience in warmer climes where this work is done? And finally, check with the folks at the GGF or British Glass; what do they say about leg protection for working with glass? p48
frankc  
#20 Posted : 24 May 2010 10:57:03(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
frankc

But it's not just about the glass installation, Pete. As a gambling man, i'd say there was very little chance of the 'engineers' going to get changed from their shorts to 'proper trousers' if their job changes halfway through the day from installing a replacement sealed unit to fixing soffits or guttering. Like i said earlier, time for a R/A review methinks.
grim72  
#21 Posted : 24 May 2010 11:11:56(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
grim72

Don't forget to supply them with sun cream if they are switching to shorts.
pete48  
#22 Posted : 24 May 2010 11:19:32(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
pete48

Frank, I agree fully and wasn't suggesting that they change, more questioning the need for full length or "proper" trousers as ppe within the risk assessment review that the OP is obviously undertaking. Also, evidence that I have seen recently suggests that wearing of shorts is generally accepted on many const sites during hot weather and also these fitters may well be spending most of their time on domestic property where they are the only trade on site. So it needs to be a technically sound reason to specify them if their use is to be accepted and thus successful. Many of these crews work unsupervised and the employer has to rely upon acceptance of the need in order to ensure it's general use. p48
pete48  
#23 Posted : 24 May 2010 11:29:29(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
pete48

Grim, have I missed a change in the general advice to employers about providing sun cream? I thought there was no legal requirement? p48
Kate  
#24 Posted : 24 May 2010 11:34:58(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Kate

You are right, Pete - see the bottom of this page which by coincidence I've just been looking at: http://www.hse.gov.uk/ra.../nonionising/optical.htm
redken  
#25 Posted : 24 May 2010 13:25:46(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
redken

Why do they need permission? Is it specified that they have to wear long trousers?
bleve  
#26 Posted : 24 May 2010 13:33:27(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
bleve

Think I will stick to FRA
Ron Hunter  
#27 Posted : 24 May 2010 16:52:29(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Ron Hunter

Q1. Does the existing Risk Assessment identify that long trousers are required to protect workers from the weather? Q2. Does your company have a Dress Code? If answer to the above questions is "no", then I can wear what I like - I don't have to ask! (p.s. I am also irked by incorrect use of term "Engineer".)
safetyamateur  
#28 Posted : 25 May 2010 11:44:23(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
safetyamateur

Can't see that this has been mentioned thus far, apologies if it has, but... With all this talk of protection afforded by long trousers, does the same apply to long sleeves? There never seems to be a fuss over short sleeves in hot weather.
RayRapp  
#29 Posted : 25 May 2010 18:04:02(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
RayRapp

Resisted this thread so far but, I can't help but wonder what on earth is going on in the world of health and safety. A few years ago I was introduced to a MD of a small contractor whose guys fit out kitchens. He proudly told me that he had banned the wearing of shorts for all his operatives. I said "why?" He was flumoxed and could not give me a reason other than to prevent themselves from getting cuts. Oh, I said, long trousers are going to protect the guys from an electric saw? Now I read it is to protect them from the sun. As the previous poster has asked, what about bare arms? Are we going to ask workers to cover all bare skin in summer. It could be argued that sun cream is PPE and should be provided by the employer - so be it. Let's not nanny people. If operatives want to wear shorts or short sleeved tops then let them be aware of any potential risks and let them get on with it. No one is going to be prosecuted for allowing operatives to wear shorts in summer unless there are some serious risk. Incidentally, in my industry (railway) shorts are banned because of the increased risk of electrocution - bare skin contacting current rails. No problem.
JESU  
#30 Posted : 26 May 2010 14:34:47(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
JESU

The general risk in the hot weather is Heat stress and Heat stroke. To avoid from this, you have to reduce the body part exposed to hot weather, In the UAE, where people working direclty under sunlight, covers all body parts except the eyes, that too with dark safety goggles. If you wear a half trouser the amount of dehydration will be more. One thing which I dont understand, are we talking about sunbath? or a work place safety Cheers JESU
Terry556  
#31 Posted : 26 May 2010 16:11:44(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Terry556

I work for a window manufacturing company and I have banned shorts from the whole factory site as my risk assessment shows. I have not had one injury due to cuts on the legs for over 4 years now and the most important thing is no claims for injuries. No arguments from me shorts or trousers?
frankc  
#32 Posted : 26 May 2010 20:13:05(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
frankc

RayRapp wrote:
He proudly told me that he had banned the wearing of shorts for all his operatives. I said "why?" He was flumoxed and could not give me a reason other than to prevent themselves from getting cuts. Oh, I said, long trousers are going to protect the guys from an electric saw?
So you don't agree with your MD friend that long trousers offer MORE protection against cuts? I do.
Dudz  
#33 Posted : 27 May 2010 09:05:31(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Dudz

It's no wonder that our industry has such a reputation for being anal. With so much discussion about petty semantics - engineer versus fitter. Our prime objective is to ensure an individual can come to work and work safely. Whether they be engineer, brain surgeon, toilet cleaner or window fitter! Pragmatic Risk Assessment, tool box talks with the employees, provision of appropriate PPE and good communication about the risks - that should pretty much cover it!
RayRapp  
#34 Posted : 27 May 2010 11:05:07(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
RayRapp

frankc I never said that long trousers will not offer MORE protection...it is just a matter to what extent you want to protect people. Guys working on the tools are not wall flowers. Personally, I don't like nannying people and I don't like companies using any means to protect their IFRs/AFRs. I went into health and safety to protect people from real risks of serious ill health and injuries - not splinters and sun burn!
frankc  
#35 Posted : 27 May 2010 18:41:50(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
frankc

RayRapp wrote:
frankc I never said that long trousers will not offer MORE protection...it is just a matter to what extent you want to protect people. Guys working on the tools are not wall flowers. Personally, I don't like nannying people and I don't like companies using any means to protect their IFRs/AFRs. I went into health and safety to protect people from real risks of serious ill health and injuries - not splinters and sun burn!
Fair do's mate. I was a steel erector for 26 years in my previous life and regularly wore shorts in the summer (before risk assessments were mandatory) and i remember catching my leg on a sharp piece of steel which required 7 or 8 stitches. One of the other workers said to me as i went to have stitches "I caught my trousers on that yesterday and ripped a big hole in them" Long trousers for me after that........
Users browsing this topic
Guest
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.