Tigers, This sounds as though you were routinely having employees sustaining injury and that you have exacerbbated that by the shift change? I'm obviously only responding to what you've posted, but I'd be looking at the whole process and trying to reduce the risk by maybe mechanising or rotating tasks etc. Tackle the cause and the sitaution may change radically.

Hi Tigers, What activities are they undertaking?

I don't know what you're undertaking, but if your staff are sustaining injury (you mentioned WRULDs) then in my humble opinion, your risk assessment needs to address that point. Rest periods are only part of a suggested control and not the whole picture; again suggest you provide more detail if you want advice which is as prescriptive as possible, but the hierachy of control and your risk assessment should be a starting point.

Hi Max, We are in the Refuse and Recycling business but need to collect the same number of bins over a 4 or 5 day period, I am trying to get my head round if all hazards are the same but over a longer period per day, why the change in absence rate?

Probably because fatigue is cumulative - the longer you work the more tired one gets. The more tired you are the less you will concentrate and the more likely you are to sustain injury, and the more serious that injury is likely to be.

In addition the more tired you get the longer it then takes to recover from the fatigue (physically and mentally), therefore as each "cycle" progresses the persons gets more tired, recooperates slightly less during the set rest period, therefore starts the next shift that little bit less recooperated and so on and so on.

Ron, Thank you for the frank comments on the last post. I feel you are making pompous assumptions which at times I feel you are using to chastise. As you rightly pointed out there are pressures in the industry, we have realised this and are trying to ensure we are making the workplace a better place to work and would like to use evidence of related guidance on how to deal with it. Its as simple as that.

Just a thought. How did the workforce take to the changes? Have any complained that they are not happy with the current arrangements? Andy

Thank again you all again for your support and 'comments/opinions'. All the precautions are being reviewed but I need some valid information on rest periods which nobody so far has supplied. So I ask again has anyone seen a report as asked in my original post? I have no ideas of what to put in my report so asked for advice on finding information and not a lecture. I can understand why members are reluctant to post now, super users do not read what is in front of them and tailor answers to what they think the question was.

I guess you have seen this, but in case you have not this HSE web page has some good information and good further information guides at the bottom. http://www.hse.gov.uk/hu...ctors/topics/fatigue.htm They also mention they have a toolkit to help you assess, see the parts around “‘fatigue risk index”. I appreciate the working changes were probably not of your doing, or you were even consulted, but I (at the risk of incurring your wrath) agree with all the comments Ray made. I think you have gathered the evidence you need; the longer shifts seem to have had an adverse effect on lost time / injury. The employees may be making some sort of point or it is a genuine issue. I have watched the men collecting the recyclable black box waste and they really go for it. I can’t imagine trying to do that for 8 hours, never mind 10. Unfortunately the guidance is suggesting that you need to do something even if the men are happier with the longer working time in or to have the extra day off. The above noted guides seem to provide the info you require for your report, good luck.

I love thr freudian slip !!!! Lets see who else notices

There being no posts from a "Ray" on this thread, I'm choosing to assume you support the gist of my thread Chris - thanks for that. Tigers; I feel you are overeacting and taking my comments in an entirely inappropriate context. My only assumptions are that your people are working to systems similar to those I am very familiar with and have experience of - I see no pomposity there. The only people who I would direct criticism at here are the people who made decisions without a full consideration of the human factors and associated risk involved. In other regards, your expectations of this Forum may be unrealistic. This is after all primarily a discussion forum, not a helpline. In fairness you should not gauge contributions on how many posts it takes to get the answer you were looking for. Such attitudes may dissuade contributors from responding to you in the future. I take exception to being referred to as 'pompous' on the basis of such informal discussion.