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
AshCrane  
#1 Posted : 28 November 2018 16:05:02(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
AshCrane

Hello All,

I'm quite new to the forum and I apologise in advance if this topic has been done to death or answered further down the list (I did check honestly!) 

I have come across an issue within the workplace in that our storemen are issuing equipment and tools out to employees but are not necessarily doing any checks beforehand or when they are handed back into the stores' dept.  

Now I would like to offer a solution but also want to ensure that we are covering all the basics, am I right in thinking that they if they are issuing equipment then they should be fully competent in what they are handling? Equally, should they be checking the equipment for defects/serviceability when it is handed back?

I would appreciate a little guidance on this, though as I am writing this I have opened up the PUWER regsalong with the supply of machinery regs too.

Thank you,

DaveBridle  
#2 Posted : 28 November 2018 16:35:44(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
DaveBridle

Yes PUWER is your guide on this.  All work equipment must be maintained and safe to use.  Therefore it is logical that checks should be made prior to use and then again when the equipment is re-issued for use.  There are many ways to achieve this but in essence the employer must ensure any work equipment supplied for the purposes of work must be free from damage, maintained and fit for its intended purpose.

Employees also have a duty to ensure that the inspect the equipment is fit for purpose prior to use and also to withdraw from service if damaged or defective.

A simple checklist could suffice or a more detailed check prior to issue for your storeman.  He can do a "pre-issue" check and "post-issue" check.  You may want to look at portable appliance testing? (but you dont say what type of equipment you are issuing).

As for training, I would ensure that your storeman is "competent" in the use of all the items he would issue, therefore he can spot defects or issues to prevent defective equipment being used in the first place, again can spot things when they are returned.

Along with PUWER there maybe a requirement for LOLER inspections/Thorough Examinations - depends on what equipment you use.

thanks 1 user thanked DaveBridle for this useful post.
AshCrane on 29/11/2018(UTC)
Roundtuit  
#3 Posted : 29 November 2018 10:26:44(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Why is this an issue? Dependent upon the stores and industry there could be thousands of different items moving every day - the stores operative is there to monitor and control stock making sure reality on the shelf matches "computer says".

I am also struggling with the concept of stores issuing tools given most businesses attempt some form of lean operation so wasting time going to, booking out, returning tools is very wasteful of time unfortunately the post does not indicate why this happens unless these are high value / precision items.

In organisations I have worked in either each individual will have their own issued kit or there will be a common tool/shadow board for a work area - if the tool breaks they are issued with a new replacement which the trained operatives they are expected to check.

We even moved from stores controlling re-usable slings assigning them to shadow boards in the respective work area reducing stores involvement to issuing replacements on a like for like basis and updating the lifting equipment register.

Roundtuit  
#4 Posted : 29 November 2018 10:26:44(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Why is this an issue? Dependent upon the stores and industry there could be thousands of different items moving every day - the stores operative is there to monitor and control stock making sure reality on the shelf matches "computer says".

I am also struggling with the concept of stores issuing tools given most businesses attempt some form of lean operation so wasting time going to, booking out, returning tools is very wasteful of time unfortunately the post does not indicate why this happens unless these are high value / precision items.

In organisations I have worked in either each individual will have their own issued kit or there will be a common tool/shadow board for a work area - if the tool breaks they are issued with a new replacement which the trained operatives they are expected to check.

We even moved from stores controlling re-usable slings assigning them to shadow boards in the respective work area reducing stores involvement to issuing replacements on a like for like basis and updating the lifting equipment register.

Kate  
#5 Posted : 29 November 2018 12:32:03(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Kate

It is the people using the tools that most need to be competent in them - so it would be perfectly viable, and possibly more practical, to have them be the ones that do the checks.  It doesn't have to be the person issuing the tools.

thanks 2 users thanked Kate for this useful post.
aud on 29/11/2018(UTC), AshCrane on 29/11/2018(UTC)
PIKEMAN  
#6 Posted : 29 November 2018 12:38:43(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
PIKEMAN

I would  make it a control measure for "pre use checks by the user". Any competent person, let alone "time served" should do this as a matter of course. You could include it on a work card / point of work  risk assessment and so on if you want a record. Get supervisors to reinforce / check. You can't seriously expect the store person to check equipment unless they have little else to do, and yes, they would need training.

AshCrane  
#7 Posted : 29 November 2018 13:22:22(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
AshCrane

My thanks to all who have replied, the tools being issued are namely stillsaws and grinders. They are maintained and recorded correctly, my main concern was with the recording of who was competent and the training they would require.

Sounds like the end user requires this more than that of the storeman issuing the kit.  

Users browsing this topic
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.