Afternoon All, we've got a small two man machining department (lathes and millers) and they are constantly getting small cuts to their hands - apparently pretty much every day. The cuts come from swarf produced, burrs on the product whilst removing them from the machine and moving stock metal to the machine. They don't wear the cut resistant gloves that our sheet metal workers wear, due to concerns about them getting drawn into the rotating machinery. It came to a bit of a head this morning whilst delivering a bit of a campaign i'm having about increasing the accident reporting rate, one of them said that he would be in my office a couple of times a day. He wasn't complaining about it, and said it 'goes with the job'. I'm at a bit of a loss with what to do, but i'm really uncomfortable with someone getting injuries, however minor, and thinking that's just something they have to accept - sounds like something from a different age! Other than take more care, I can't really think where to go though, am I missing something obvious, or do we sometimes just have to accept some accidents will happen? thoughts and comments appreciated as always. Steve

Hi Melrose, we went through that process with the sheet metal workers recently and got some very good gloves which they guys are really happy with. I've purposefully said that the machinists shouldn't wear gloves though, reasoning that the risk of a cut is much lower than the risk of being drawn in and losing a finger. Can you get gloves which are designed for machinists which would tear if tangled but still provide cut resistance? thanks

With regard to interacting with the machinery, I would go with wturner on this Steve - from the info provided it seems to be more about how swarf etc is removed than providing hand protection. Removal of work from the machine should not preclude the use of suitable gloves if the operatives are genuinely following "best practice" in only interacting with the machines when stopped or the dangerous parts are securely fenced anyway - you don't identify types or models of machinery so it could be anything; sorry. You also mention moving stock metal to the machines, there's no reason why they shouldn't use the gloves for this if it's genuinely not possible to prevent handling; again, assuming that "best practice" is genuinely followed. Frank Hallett

The question of hands being trapped in rotating machinery requires on site study. Under normal conditions on most machine tools hands should be nowhere near the actual rotating parts. Nor should the machinist handle parts whilst the machine is still rotating. So perhaps you need to look at how the work is being carried out and then set up a work protocol that resolves this issue. As already stated, removal of swarf can usually easily be done using an appropriate tool. Assuming a metalworking fluid is being used during the machining operation the flow of this should be stopped or perhaps redirected to the tank using a simple solenoid valve wired in to the electrical circuit for the motor. You will almost certainly then find that something such as thin gloves from Dyneema with a PU coating will provide adequate protection. Of course not having first hand knowledge of your workplace, equipment and operation this is 'theory' but hopefully will help you resolve your issue. Chris

There is absolutely no need to get your hands in a position where they are caught in rotating parts. A half decent machinist can get a finish, with modern tooling, that doesn't need dressing. Using emery and files to dress burrs went out with the ark. I'm with Chris on this in that there are plenty of good cut resistant gloves on the market that will off good protection against mechanical hazards (if you cant eliminate handling material). The only real consideration then is how you control any skin issues relating to contact with cutting fluid. Don't rely on barrier cream, it's next to useless.

Hi Everyone, thanks for all the replies. I think we're all in agreement that their should never be a situation nowadays where someone feels getting injured (however minor) is part of the job. Knowing the culture of my company at the moment though, in certain areas, as it stands they will not put on and take off gloves every time they need to move a component, which either means they have them on when they shouldn't, or don't have them on when they should, both of which aren't great. As for not having to deburr anymore, I'm sure there have been great advance in the last 40 years in machine tools - only trouble is our lathe is about 40 years old. This does raise the next question as to whether its time to invest in some new machine tools of course. Thanks everyone.

Not true. I spent years working as a QC Inspector in a machine shop and later as QHSE manager and even with old manual lathes or state of the art CNC lathes with modern tooling, they can't always effectively remove 100% of burrs or poor finishes. I had the same problem as the OP in that it was an accepted practice that cuts would happen due to the nature of the job. Gloves of any type were forbidden after one of the machinists had his thumb sliced off while using emery and de-burring a threaded connection. Not an easy problem to fix but we went down the education and awareness route and started to see some improvements. We also put some of the guys through risk assessment training and gave them ownership of the process to get them thinking in a different way. This had a significant effect and the foreman really bought into it and the cuts reduced even further. Cuts did still occur but it was at a much more manageable level and no injury greater than an FAC occured.