Rank: Super forum user
|
Working for a large social landlord and having a number of generic trade based risk assessments that require annual review, I'm wondering what the consensus of opinion is regarding the approach to doing that.
The manager responsible for the trades' areas is keen that his front line managers own the process (which I agree with in principal), and in the past we have tried small workshops with a cross section of those managers and a TU rep and have also tasked individual managers with reviewing a single assessment.
Personally I think the latter works better as it focuses the mind of that person rather than having a forum in which nobody wants to take ownership.
My role is to provide advice and guidance and to moderate the completed assessments in order that the managers responsible for signing them off can be comfortable with them being suitable and sufficient.
I welcome your views or ideas please.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Just a thought or 2?
The staff should be involved as well as the manager in any RA process and specific RA's should be undertaken as needed, as generic RA's are not much use in a court etc situation unless you are absolutely confident
The 'reviewing a single RA at a time' is a good approach noting my comments above
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Max
I agree with Bob. Periodical reviews of RAs should be done in collaboration with others who have a vested interest in them. It is not good practice IMO for one individual to review them. I accept that the iterative process is time consuming and rather tedious if you have a large amount of RAs to review, but there you go.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Principles you describe are sound. Ideal to involve those actually doing the job, but these groups are not always 'comfortable' in this environment. Your TU Reps /ROES should be in a position to inform of first-hand info.
Formal Audit & monitor processes should also inform this review, giving an account of the actual implementation of identified control measures.
From a reactive perspective, the review should take account of relevant incidents and near misses.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
We review bi annually and this is done in the context of training. We take the some managers, employees. trade union or non trade union reps and train in the risk assessment process and then at the end of the session we review the assessments together. It gets everyone involved. We also look at the legal situation regarding corporate manslaughter and thier role.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
It's a good idea to have a spreadsheet/schedule for when each RA is to be reviewed. You don't want everyone to be reviewing every risk assessment every January for example.
Most risk assessments have residual risk and you can decide someway if these risks are 'high', 'medium', 'low', 'negligible' and the review frequency can be high-monthly, medium-sixmonthly' etc.
RAs should also be reviewed if there are significant method changes e.g. new tools, new machines, new staff, new location etc., or if there has been an accident or near-miss.
So eventually you end up with a timetable/schedule that is evenly spread out over the year and the reviews become routine tasks for each reviewer, at least two people should be involved in reviews.
JohnW
|
|
|
|
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.