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
Mark_a_Robinson  
#1 Posted : 18 March 2019 12:29:41(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
Mark_a_Robinson

A quick question regarding COSHH and the training/information you should give to employees.

Do you, provide general training on the understanding of COSHH and the need for it, including reviewing a small number of the higher risk items they may be in contact with and then locate the assessment with the product/s,

or;

Do you, have you staff read and sign every individual COSHH assessment that they may use in their day to day work.

My own thoughts are the former. I am relatively good at reading and remembering, but if I were to read more than 5 COSHH assessments in one go I would not be able to unjumble the information when I eventually came to use it. And feel that having training in understanding COSHH and having the assessments at point of use and staff aware of that, would be more effective.

Your collective thoughts would be a great help. Thank you

CptBeaky  
#2 Posted : 18 March 2019 12:44:31(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
CptBeaky

I will be interested to see the approach of others.

As for our place of work (a double glazing fabrication company (we only make the windows, we do not manufacture the raw parts i.e.glass, pvcu, aluminium etc.). When I have a new employee they are given a brief overview of what COSHH is, how it is implimented, and how it relates to the business. They are shown an example and told where to find all the COSHH reports. Then, when they are trained on a process/machine, the safe system of work explains what, if any, chemicals they will be using for the process, any PPE that must be warn and any other safe handling/storage techniques they need to know. I have found it a lot easier for the factory workers to take in the infomation this way, it becomes a part of the actual training as apposed to a separate thing they have to learn. Remember English is not always the first language of our employees.

The maintenance staff and fire wardens have a more indepth knowledge of the fire risks and storage risks etc. To be honest though, we don't have much in the way of hazardous chemicals in large numbers, so I would expect different strokes for different folks.

In saying all this. I have only been in this post for 7 months and have already found many short falls in the system. I would expect there to be a better way.

thanks 1 user thanked CptBeaky for this useful post.
Mark_a_Robinson on 18/03/2019(UTC)
A Kurdziel  
#3 Posted : 18 March 2019 13:16:10(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
A Kurdziel

As you said with COSHH it is easy to get overwhelmed. The employees don’t need to know the ins and outs of COSHH (the regulations) what they need is an awareness of  the hazards associated with the use of  certain substances: what does irritant actually mean,  what’s the difference between something that causes immediate(acute) harm and substances that cause more systematic harm  over time. They also should know how to control the risk posed by these and why for example they should use certain types of PPE and not others. It needs to refer to what they are actually doing in the workplace.  Remember the risk assessment under COSHH refers to a process not a substance, so you only need one for each process not for each substance.

thanks 2 users thanked A Kurdziel for this useful post.
Mark_a_Robinson on 18/03/2019(UTC), CptBeaky on 18/03/2019(UTC)
ttxela  
#4 Posted : 18 March 2019 14:45:08(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
ttxela

One place I worked had bulging files of risk assessments and COSHH assessments however where these made findings (say for instance a certain type of glove was needed) this information didn't make it into the SOP's for manufacture since the Quality dept. and the H&S dept. regarded themselves as entirely seperate.

Guess which document people actually printed out and read when they went into the lab to make something?

The key thing in my view is that the findings of any assessment make their way into the day to day SOP's WI's etc. and not remain in seperate documents that are filed away.

thanks 2 users thanked ttxela for this useful post.
Mark_a_Robinson on 18/03/2019(UTC), A Kurdziel on 18/03/2019(UTC)
Bigmac  
#5 Posted : 18 March 2019 15:19:34(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
ArturK

I am working in coatings and inks manufacturing industry and we use the same approach as mentioned by A Kurdziel

Mark_a_Robinson  
#6 Posted : 18 March 2019 16:20:06(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
Mark_a_Robinson

A little more depth. We also have lots of paperwork and this seems to be relied upon to prove we are doing something(where in reality we are relying on a signature to confirm they have understood). I feel this then falls down in the effective delivery, considering differing learning abilities and styles and the subsequent training. I am trying to push for the employees to be given an understanding of COSHH and the basic principles of risk assesment and then for us to have SOP's based on those which are a step by step guide to the individual tasks, in an easy to read and understand document.

I think I read in Tim Marsh, Behavioural safety(not exact quote):

Imagine your child comes home one day and tells you they are doing Sex Ed at school, you make a little joke about it but feel this is a good thing for them to learn. The next week they come home and say they are moving on from education and are now doing training!!! How would you feel now. 

I feel this is the difference here, education is the passage of knowlege in an acedemic setting whether by written word or word of mouth. The training aspect comes afterward and can only be done by actually doing the task and in the case of COSHH using the chemical and the supervision of this.

Hsquared14  
#7 Posted : 18 March 2019 16:27:41(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Hsquared14

Originally Posted by: A Kurdziel Go to Quoted Post

As you said with COSHH it is easy to get overwhelmed. The employees don’t need to know the ins and outs of COSHH (the regulations) what they need is an awareness of  the hazards associated with the use of  certain substances: what does irritant actually mean,  what’s the difference between something that causes immediate(acute) harm and substances that cause more systematic harm  over time. They also should know how to control the risk posed by these and why for example they should use certain types of PPE and not others. It needs to refer to what they are actually doing in the workplace.  Remember the risk assessment under COSHH refers to a process not a substance, so you only need one for each process not for each substance.

As ever - finger on the pulse here.  Don't get carried away with the fools errand of one assessment per substance. Chemicals are rarely used one at a time and you need to take into account interactions, synergies etc.  Try to limit PPE to as few all purpose or multipurpose items as possible, this may mean specifying a higher level of protection for some things than they really need but trust me if you give people a choice they will always pick the wrong one!!!

thanks 1 user thanked Hsquared14 for this useful post.
Mark_a_Robinson on 18/03/2019(UTC)
A Kurdziel  
#8 Posted : 18 March 2019 16:37:12(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
A Kurdziel

Tim Marsh the man that harnesses smut for the greater good!

What you are describing is competence: the ability to do a job safely which as you have said is more than just having training. Nevertheless a lot of places when the go onto doing COSHH seem to want to put people on a cut down Chemistry degree when all they should be giving their people enough information to do their job safely. Their understanding should be monitored ie ask them why they should be using that particular type of glove not the el cheapo vinyl ones but too much depth can be as bad as not enough.

 

thanks 1 user thanked A Kurdziel for this useful post.
Mark_a_Robinson on 18/03/2019(UTC)
Mark_a_Robinson  
#9 Posted : 18 March 2019 16:41:37(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
Mark_a_Robinson

Originally Posted by: A Kurdziel Go to Quoted Post

Tim Marsh the man that harnesses smut for the greater good!

What you are describing is competence: the ability to do a job safely which as you have said is more than just having training. Nevertheless a lot of places when the go onto doing COSHH seem to want to put people on a cut down Chemistry degree when all they should be giving their people enough information to do their job safely. Their understanding should be monitored ie ask them why they should be using that particular type of glove not the el cheapo vinyl ones but too much depth can be as bad as not enough.

 

Yes exactly, and i dont feel you can prove that competence by having a signature on a peice of paper.

Roundtuit  
#10 Posted : 18 March 2019 20:49:08(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Process - a series of actions taken in order to achieve a particular end.

So my end is to stick A to B and I have a machine that applies glue.

But for the final products I use glue D for one and glue F for another - one is hazardous and necessitates LEV and a lot of controls, the other is benign and does not even requires gloves.

One process two COSHH assessments - one operating instruction which sub-divides based upon the product to be produced (in simple terms LEV on or LEV off).

Operators are trained to produce the products NOT to understand site chemistry on every line we operate.

Roundtuit  
#11 Posted : 18 March 2019 20:49:08(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Process - a series of actions taken in order to achieve a particular end.

So my end is to stick A to B and I have a machine that applies glue.

But for the final products I use glue D for one and glue F for another - one is hazardous and necessitates LEV and a lot of controls, the other is benign and does not even requires gloves.

One process two COSHH assessments - one operating instruction which sub-divides based upon the product to be produced (in simple terms LEV on or LEV off).

Operators are trained to produce the products NOT to understand site chemistry on every line we operate.

chris.packham  
#12 Posted : 18 March 2019 23:05:38(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
chris.packham

Let us not lose sight that COSHH is about 'control'. Risk assessment is merely one step in the process. It is there to inform us whether we need to control the substance and the extent to which the control must go in order to safeguard health and safety of anyone who may be affected by what is happening in the task in question. What is important for the user is not the risk assessment but the controls that are in place and their responsibility to implement and maintain these. Of course it is helpful if they have an understanding of the reasons for the controls, but they do not need to understand all the, often very complex, details of the risk assessment. They also need the training necessary to ensure that they are able to maintain the necessary level of control.

Chris

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.