Rank: Forum user 
|
I have recently started a new role in the food & drink industry and would like to hear others thoughts and advice regarding hair nets overalls being referred to on documents, SOP's RA's and notices as personal protective equipment.
I am aware that the PPE regs do not apply to items provided for hygiene purposes but when I raised this as a concern and recommended these items being called product protective equipment, with our technical dept I was informed that as all of the big supermarkets refer to these items as personal protective equipment then we must to.
This is the least of my concerns regarding issues in my new role but it has now become a bit of an irritant for me and I feel could be very confusing.
I would be very interested to hear if others have come across this and how they have dealt with it in the food & drink industry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
I don't work in the food industry, but for what it is worth I completely agree. The protection offered by the face mask and hair net is surely not only minimal (if you were to argue that it stops hair getting caught in machines maybe???) but surely they are secondary. The primary purpose, as you pointed out, must be to 'protect' the product.
Sometimes I despair about some companies attitudes to H&S...
Maybe you should ask about the CE mark on them and then see what is said!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
Having worked in the food and drink industry for almost 2 decades ,hair nets and face masks are to stop contamination of the product due to skin, hair,breath and anything else from the body falling into the product,overalls do the same for cross contamination from personal clothing.Yes you could argue that hair nets MAY prevent hair entaglement with machinery but in reality these items offer no protection . I would not call these items PPE as they protect the product not the user.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Slippy floors - this exactly what we have both just said I never meant to imply that they would be appropriate PPE at all rather that a person may claim they have a safety benefit...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Gloves protecting the product?
Questionable
I have stood in supermarket stores watching the delicatessen counter. Staff wearing cotton gloves!!! Staff wearing nitrile gloves handling raw food, then cooked food, then raw food, then cheese, all with the one pair of gloves! (a) protecting the product - no, (b) protecting the customer - no, (c) and what about the wearer?
Occlusive gloves can cause what is termed hydration dermatitis. Moisture accumulating within the gloves can cause long term irritant damage to the skin, ultimately resulting in contact dermatitis.
Are gloves the best form of product protection? Absolutely not. There are far better alternatives.
And for those of you who watch Masterchef, or any other cooking programme, count the number of times you see the chefs who are handling the food wearing gloves?
This whole area is full of contradictions and procedures that bear little relationship to the facts.
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.