Rank: Forum user 
|
Hi Guys
I'm trying to revamp the approach to risk assessments at site as the number of assessments are massive and in order to review and management them going forward & i'm trying to stream line the numbers.
We appear to break risk assessments into tasks, e.g. cleaning conveyor, loading product, moving machinery, etc. These quickly adds up and because hundreds of small/medium risk assessments.
I'm thinking of changing the format to select an area, and identify the key processes. Bring the tasks together into a process risk assessment to streamline RAs into 1 assessment.
Has anyone ever completed a similar approach or do most people follow the many small risk assessments.
Thank
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
We've got both types, and I think the combination works OK!
Taking FLTs, we have risk assessments for the general operation within a warehouse, this is not location or task specific, but covers general movement of the machine. This works as it acts as a "pre-requisite" for all to follow. These types of assessment are then supported by task specific assessments where required, using the FLT example again we have a risk assessment for loading bales onto a curtain-sider etc. etc (this would only be applicable to a select number of operatives who conduct the task).
One aspect you could look at is the amount of duplication you have within your risk assessments. Manual Handling may be an obvious one for duplication if you only have it task specific (not sure how specifically you break the tasks down). The fundamental manual handling hazards and controls will be similar for a lot of manual handling tasks, so why not have a general manual handling risk assessment for lifting / lowering / pushing / pulling, then only include any additional task specific risks in your task specific risk assessments.
Considering there are 100s of manual handling tasks that occur in most business, we condensed our manual handling risk assessment documentation by about 500% by employing this method. We still have all tasks assessed, but a lot of them reference the general assessment and add a couple of key points.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Similar to Jake's approach, you could identify all different job titles in your organisation, then identify the various tasks that these people do, some will undoubtedly be the same despite have different roles. Therefore you devise a data base of some description (ie spreadsheet) hyper linking the various RAs with those roles in your data base. Probably best to use a colour coded system to assist with clarity on the tabs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
+1 for the job description approach.
Having a core body of risk assessments which are the foundation of your system is the way to go.
Anything more exotic you can tackle on a case by case basis.
Much easier to manage, particularly if you have a lot of staff.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
an exercise in redefining what falls below the 'significant' threshold may consign many assessments to the recycle bin.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Have to fully agree with all the comments already, process centred approach works best.
As a "hobby" I look after 3 fairly big quarries belonging to the same company, we have 1 risk assessment for each typical process, e.g. Conveyor systems, operation of primary crusher, operating a loading shovel. This works nicely because the management arrangements are the same, taking the loading shovel - the competency requirements are the same, the maintenance the same, the inspection programme the same, etc, etc. So not only do you reduce the number of RA's you streamline the mitigation and control measures and make the monitoring easier too!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.