Rank: Super forum user 
|
I have been writing RA’s and SOP’s / SWP’s for many years, but only recently noticed that, when I make note of the current /required controls they are either very sharp and to the point one liners or a far more detailed description. Ie I may have “XYZ training for all operatives” or a series of smaller requirements that in effect make a SWP in themselves (in order to describe, the controls it takes you through the task). In one specific instance I was intending to do a RA and SWP, but decided I didn’t actually need to create a second document.
What are others views, should controls be listed in an overview style to keep them short and to the point (as they are just a management tool) or should they be detailed to demonstrate that everything is covered and with different groups responsible for each part easier to note, also without having to rely on a number of other documents.
Or just different situation may require either approach.
Chris
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Chris
Difficult to give a banket answer partly because the controls should be proportionate to the risks. For example, the ubiquitous slips, trips and falls (same level) will usually be nothing more then providing sturdy rubber soled footwear as a control, but could include using authorised walking routes, head torch, etc. Whereas a hot works RA might include all manner of controls, or alternatively a hot works permit might cover those controls and so not much needs to be articulated in the RA.
So I think it depends on a number of different factors and of course the time at your disposal, given that you only need to record the significant risks arising from your activities. The term 'significant' will partly depend on whether your activities are generally low, medium or high risk.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Well this is the ultimate how long is piece of string question! I read it that what you need to do is match the style RA/SSOW with what you are doing. I think that is the secret to effective Health and Safety –design your approach to the situation at hand. Key things are: - Complexity of the process-no point going overboard for a simple process but for some especially which involve lots of different significant risks then fat is better
- The level of autonomy enjoyed by the people doing the work. If they are closely supervised then a simple SSOW which boils down to do as you are told might suffice on the other hand if the employees work largely independently then they will need more guidance so that they can make the right decisions for themselves.
- Appetite for information-some sorts of people eg scientists and the like, want to have all of the background justification for whatever controls are put into place. Others are just happy with instructions telling them what to do.
- How the overall system works and what culture it reflects. Some places like lots of paper trails and the like and others tend to a lean approach.
Good question but (as you might have guessed) no single good answer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Yes Ray I think you are correct depending on level of risk of the task. In this one instance it was medium to high. Don’t get me wrong I was happy with the assessment and so was our manager and the person external to our company who was affected/ involved by it, so all good.
It just made me think instead of listing out each control in the RA, should I have just said see Safe Working Procedure 47 and I create SWP47 write all the detail in that. I guess the requirement is to record significant findings, not necessarily in the RA!
Again I agree with you A Kurdziel, yes as you say how long is the string, and no single good answer. I also agree about the different end audiences, previously mostly engineering types wanted all the detail they could get, while new company they just want to know “what do I have to do” and don’t want to understand particularly. So horses for courses.
I did expect some to say now keep the assessment as short as possible and put detail elsewhere if you must! And give some reasons for that. I think I just felt guilty somehow that there was so much detail (which I felt necessary, person needs to stand in place x to be safe and see both sides of the blind corner etc). Just felt a little more instruction than control.
I suppose everyone happy is good.
Thanks for the response
Chris
.......................... I really am putting in paragraph spaces, everyone else seems to be able to get them
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
You may find more assurance from HSE. (ah - just beaten to it!).
They are just revising (again) their guide to risk assessment (5 page leaflet indg163). They have added the two paras replicated below in the draft, I have included the preceding original paragraph for context. You can give feedback on the draft at http://www.hse.gov.uk/risk/news.htm (From original): Any paperwork you produce should help you to communicate and manage the risks in your business. For most people this does not need to be a big exercise – you can just note the main points down about the significant risks and what you concluded.
New draft - additional paragraphs:
You may already have documents, such as guidance to employees (including HSE guidance), method statements, data sheets etc that can serve as your record. You do not need to duplicate these.
Insurers and contractors may ask for more detailed paperwork than the law requires. Ask if you are not sure (it might be, for instance, to defend any compensation claims). One way of checking if you are being asked to go beyond what the law requires, is to contact HSE’s Myth Buster Challenge Panel (www.hse.gov.uk/myth).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Just being trivial- why is it when this sort of question is being asked we all revert to clichés, me included: horses for courses, how long is a piece of string etc.”? "both sides of the blind corner” is a new one but it deserves to join the pantheon!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Originally Posted by: A Kurdziel  Just being trivial- why is it when this sort of question is being asked we all revert to clichés, me included: horses for courses, how long is a piece of string etc.”? "both sides of the blind corner” is a new one but it deserves to join the pantheon!
I was actually being literal in this case, one control for the activity was for a person to be positioned so they could see both sides of a corner of the building. It will be a rare task, but needed to be controlled.
Of course the end justifies the means
Chris
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.