Spoke with a friend, who asked me if I insist on Risk Assessment / Method Statements (RAMS) for ALL work activities on Site form Contractors. I told him I did. He asked what would be the point on asking for RAMS from someone do a quick fix of a tap or even someone doing few hours cleaning. My understanding, if its a work activity, it needs RAMS...He said im overdoing it...Im I wrong?

Thanks for the link....So in terms of addressing less risk contract work...undertaken a Site Induction should be suffice?

We insist on RAMS for everything. One rule keeps its simple and we are covered, the contractor is covered and it isn't left to anyone to determine what is and isn't minor works.

Most contractors are used to this these days and will have RAMS (be it generic).

It is up to you, if you manage the site and all the contractors, and you feel RAMS are required, then why argue? You have overall control, and if you see fit and you are happy with the paperwork then fine. Thats the measures you have in place. I personally feel that RAMS for all task are appropriate, as if you are the main contractor on site with 20 different subbies, lord knows what they are up to half the time, what plant they use, what chemicals they use, and the workers experience.

My concerns with generic RA's is that they are just that, they haven't been well thought out and may miss something specific...

I have to risk assess the significant risks and record them and what we are, or plan to do about them. I feel that this is a much more simplistic and effective way of dealing with the hazards; I have found people are more likely to respond well to this method .

Thats just my approach, doesn't mean it is right or that it will work for everyone. I have always tried to allow as much common sense to flow through my work and my workplace.

I base my requirement to see risk assessments and method statements on the type of job being done. I don't insist on seeing documents which cover simple issues.

The contractors we use have some experience on the job and they will have risk assessments and methods of working aplenty and my evidence of that is collected during procurement procedures.

However, I will always reject generic risk assessments because they really do need to be site specific and relate directly to the job in hand.

Graham

A risk assessment is not about creating huge amounts of paperwork,
but rather about identifying sensible measures to control the risks in your workplace.

A little one for a job like that takes about 20 minutes at the most and everyone's arse is covered if it's suitable and actullay means something.

H&S gets a bad name because people don't understand why it needs to be done .

Good comments above about it being your site your call . If you think about it do it!

Looking at the sun during an eclipse..... record or not record.....

get what your saying....But, your sarcastic replies to a simple question, its H&S Professionals like you, I find give H&S a bad name....be constructive, not a smart arse

Keep asking your questions and ignore the negative comments. It's your site and you know the full details of what you are doing and why you are doing it; just keep the RAMS proportionate to the hazards/risks. If others wish to adopt a different approach on their sites then that is fair enough, as they are the advisors there. You probably have a fabulous H&S record at your site and if so keep doing what you do.

Regards

I personally ask for RAMS for most activities. The reason for this is that what a contractor may perceive at low risk may not be what I perceive as low risk. On a regular basis I come across the response of ' it's fine Iv'e been doing it for years, Iv'e never injured myself'

This was a discussion for minor building works, cutting slabs, mixing mortar, laying/cutting block paving etc. During our conversation it became apparent he had never heard of silicosis, how you get it and what may cause it.
We have totally different perception of risk. After explaining the condition to him, he was very grateful, and we amended his risk assessment together.
He didn't have these minor activities on his risk assessment as he concentrated on what he believed were the high risk activities such as erecting scaffold etc.

It's also opens up exchange of information and conversation between yourselves and the contractor. You can discuss their documentation with them and find out exactly what they are doing if the MS isn't quite clear. During this process, I have found out on many occasions that while they are on site a Dept Manager has asked them to carry out another task in addition to the ones that we have the documentation for. Sometimes this task may be minor, in other cases a larger job e.g. but he had his ladders with him on the van so he did the task while he was there. This ensures we capture all the work being carried out not just some of it.

These are the reasons why I would ask for docs for most activities.

#17 jon joe

Its not a case of being a smart aR** - its about running an effective safety management system.

To me a BIG safety de-motivator is being treated in a condescending manner by safety people/company safety management systems.

I'm not a child and I don't believe in treating other employees as children either - by trying to give safety advice on non employment / work related matters OR adopting blanket rules that are often stupid and equally drag safety down in terms of reputation e.g. the classic instruction of wearing hi-vis jackets, hard hats etc - when a reasonable risk assessment could well say such PPE is not required.

Following to a logical conclusion - do I need a hard hat for sitting behind my computer? No, of course not. SO why have blanket rules even for the most minor of construction related activities - like fixing taps, simple cleaning etc etc.

I fully except there are exceptions - like when working with children etc, who do need to be told about the the dangers of looking into the sun.

But in a normal industrial setting, I see no reason to tell an adult NOT to look at the sun.