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
Waz  
#1 Posted : 11 May 2011 10:42:46(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Waz

Here is the issue, we have a variety of long and short shafted mallets at various weights ALL with composite shafts. However, invariably these are either too long, too short etc. and there is a request from the workforce to use 'hickory' shafts once again. Why you may ask, well I suggested that under PUWER Reg. 4, that ergonomic issues can mean that you select the most suitable length, and if hickory, can ADAPT (cut it down) it for the actual work environment and work it is intended to do (hit something).

On the other hand, the HASAW etc. Act states the duties of the employee as "not to interfere with or misuse anything that's been provided for your health, safety or welfare."

Therefore, is the tooling issue for health and safety or welfare reasons?; one could argue not, but what is the consensus, as reducing the shaft length would make the shaft more suitable to the environmetn it is used in, thus is adaptable, still fit for purpose?

Interested for anyone to get back to me on this either through this forum or via warren.fothergill@btinternet.com

Thanks.
TDS1984  
#2 Posted : 11 May 2011 11:02:41(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
TDS1984

My take on the issue would be that genuine adaptation for the task undertaken is not misuse or interference with the article.
Guru  
#3 Posted : 11 May 2011 11:59:52(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Guru

So your saying you cannot purchase suitable length mallets anywhere? I would consult mallet manufacturers before modifying one of their product.

Doing so may affect their reliability?
Pattinson20385  
#4 Posted : 11 May 2011 12:12:36(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
Pattinson20385

I see your predicament but before I would make a judgement I would contact the manufacturer for their thoughts on adjusting the handle/shaft length.

Where there previous safety issues with hickory shafts? If so then without specifically addressing these issues it would be detrimental to re-issue (prevention of re-occurrence). Is it a cost thing? (balance of cost on safety).

Being an ex-tradesman I can sympathise with the need to conduct alterations to tool handles, I made many alterations to tools for specific uses; where appropriate tools could not be purchased.

Hickory will cut safely and can be dressed to prevent impact from sharps and in theory there would be no compromise of the handle integrity when shortened correctly.

What is the maintenance of tools like, are personnel conscientious and look after tools or is this also an issue which may need addressing. Will the change back to hickory provide a pivot to address this if necessary?
Darren Mitchell  
#5 Posted : 11 May 2011 13:05:24(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
Darren Mitchell

Is this an early Friday post!

Are you seriously considering contacting a manufacturer to ask if a hickory shaft can be cut to adapt the equipment? I wonder what the reply would be! What do you do when the shaft needs replaced?

This is hardly a 'significant' risk in your workplace? And to even consider that you are interfering with anything provided in the interest of Health, safety and welfare is strange.
Waz  
#6 Posted : 11 May 2011 21:43:07(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Waz

It seems no-one to date can argue the case. When trying to "flog" relevant point, ergonomics is an issue, therefore even with the scope of weight and lengths of mallets/shafts there is not a one size fits all. When working on flanges or coupling bolts in constrained areas, flogging, if it's the only viable method does become a significant risk, as it's foreseeable that injury can occur due to historical trends noted. However, to make use of hickory shafts, which could be cut to size, without compromising it's integrity, is potentially an option under PUWER, given Reg. 4 and word of "adaptable" within the body of the text.

As Darren states, it is a tool, however it is not provided because of it's ability to reduce the hazards or improve safety and health, it is used because it is a viable tool. With space constraints, reducing shaft size makes it safer. An employee should not interfere, etc. anything provided...... of which I am aware fro the HASAWAct, but question remains, and it is a play on words, is it (the mallet) provided for health, safety and welfare reasons?

Still interested to hear the thoughts.
Guru  
#7 Posted : 12 May 2011 10:54:42(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Guru

I dont think S8 of HSWA would come into play with this one to be honest. This is a work tool, and not something provided in the interest of H&S.
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.