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
ballyclover  
#1 Posted : 17 February 2015 12:39:44(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
ballyclover

I have asked over and over that our employees wear safety eye protection when working in areas signed.

Would i be correct in thinking that employees who do not use the PPE provided in a clearly stated area would be breaking the law?

Where would i stand if there was an accident and the correct PPE had not be used, even though the training had been giving, items signed for and areas clearly marked and defind

Thank you
jodieclark1510  
#2 Posted : 17 February 2015 13:05:09(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
jodieclark1510

staff have a duty to look after themselves but employers have a duty to make sure they are looking after staff. there may be a hint of contributory negligence in there depending on the situation.

What is the work being done?
Artist1  
#3 Posted : 17 February 2015 14:03:03(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Artist1

Safety Glasses::::

Firstly They would NOT be breaking the Law, as this law would have been 'installed' by your company site specific rules.
The Risk Assessment, would (In this case) have highlighted the need to protect the employees eyes as a control measure because it was found that there may be a hazard that could damage them.

As the previous reply suggests; everyone, including employees have a duty to protect themselves and anyone who may be affected by their actions or omitions.

Have you any disiplinary systems in place? if not why? this employee is clearly flouting your rules and should be repremanded. You are, or should be, carrying out your 'Duty of Care in protecting your employees.

achrn  
#4 Posted : 17 February 2015 14:15:08(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
achrn

Artist1 wrote:
Safety Glasses::::

Firstly They would NOT be breaking the Law, as this law would have been 'installed' by your company site specific rules.


What about "It shall be the duty of every employee while at work as regards any duty or requirement imposed on his employer or any other person by or under any of the relevant statutory provisions, to co-operate with him so far as is necessary to enable that duty or requirement to be performed or complied with."

The employer has a duty imposed on him to provide PPE and ensure it is used correctly. An employee not wearing it is not co-operating as necessary to enable that duty to be complied with, surely?
Flashman  
#5 Posted : 17 February 2015 14:19:45(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Flashman

I'm with achrn on this. Site specific rules are (as far as I can recall) made after a suitable and sufficient risk assessment? p
jodieclark1510  
#6 Posted : 17 February 2015 14:26:32(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
jodieclark1510

Agreed. Just for clarification, my post is egarding if a claim is made against the company this might be something that comes up with regard to ppe. I'm of the view that if you put in place the need for safety glasses, if someone will not wear them- remove them until you find out what's going on
David Bannister  
#7 Posted : 17 February 2015 15:56:48(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
David Bannister

Failure of supervision and management?

If the need for PPE as a risk control is as a result of an adequate risk assessment, is provided and made available, exposed persons are informed and instructed on why, how, where etc but the company is tacitly accepting the lack of use, the chance of a civil claim succeeding after an eye injury is great.

As to where "you" stand jodieclark1510, I suggest the best place is well to one side, if the brown stuff starts flying, unless of course, you have a managerial or supervisory role here!
LATCHY  
#8 Posted : 17 February 2015 16:20:39(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
LATCHY

We have a claim at the moment where the employee said he was wearing the PPE and it was the fault of the safety glass not being wrap around that a piece of metal went into his eye, signed in the accident book.

Then the person puts a claim in stating to the insurance that no safety glasses were actually available.

He has actually been caught on camera grinding without the designated PPE being worn and all the safety glasses were at his disposal has he was the manager, with proof of the glasses being bought receipts etc.
RayRapp  
#9 Posted : 17 February 2015 16:22:16(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
RayRapp

David Bannister wrote:
Failure of supervision and management?

If the need for PPE as a risk control is as a result of an adequate risk assessment, is provided and made available, exposed persons are informed and instructed on why, how, where etc but the company is tacitly accepting the lack of use, the chance of a civil claim succeeding after an eye injury is great.

As to where "you" stand jodieclark1510, I suggest the best place is well to one side, if the brown stuff starts flying, unless of course, you have a managerial or supervisory role here!


David, that's am interesting conundrum...PPE identified as a risk control as a result of an adequate risk assessment. Not necessarily in this case, but all too often PPE is mandated as a blanket control and without a risk assessment as per MHSW Reg 3. Is this a breach of the law, specifically PPE Regs 6(1) I wonder?
chris.packham  
#10 Posted : 17 February 2015 16:45:11(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
chris.packham

"So far as is reasonably practicable, the prevention or adequate control of exposure of employees to a substance hazardous to health, except to a carcinogen or a biological agent, shall be secured by measures other than the provision of personal protective equipment."
COSHH Regulation 7(2)
also
"There is in effect a hierarchy of control measures, and PPE should always be regarded as the ‘last resort’ to protect against risks to safety and health; engineering controls and safe systems of work should always be considered first."
PPE ACoP, para. 20
How does one confirm to these with a 'blanket' PPE policy?
Chris
David Bannister  
#11 Posted : 17 February 2015 17:22:45(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
David Bannister

RayRapp wrote:

David, that's am interesting conundrum...PPE identified as a risk control as a result of an adequate risk assessment. Not necessarily in this case, but all too often PPE is mandated as a blanket control and without a risk assessment as per MHSW Reg 3. Is this a breach of the law, specifically PPE Regs 6(1) I wonder?


That is a great question RayRapp. I have not heard of any prosecutions under this Reg but has anybody else?

On the face of it, imposition of a site-wide blanket rule for, say, eye protection without a valid R/A to support the decision appears to contravene this Reg.
peter gotch  
#12 Posted : 17 February 2015 17:36:57(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
peter gotch

Ray

Nothing on the HSE prosecutions database for breach of PPE Regs, Reg 6 in last 5 years.
RayRapp  
#13 Posted : 17 February 2015 19:02:13(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
RayRapp

Thanks for your comments guys. I do apologise to the originator of this thread for hi-jacking it.

It was a tongue firmly in cheek posting. I would be very surprised indeed if there has EVER been a prosecution pursuant to Reg 6. Yet, it is always presumed that prior to the introduction of PPE a RA has been conducted - which clearly is not always the case. Proving it might be a bit tricky.

So, when I read something to the effect 'can an employee be prosecuted...'
jodieclark1510  
#14 Posted : 18 February 2015 08:48:51(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
jodieclark1510

David Bannister wrote:
Failure of supervision and management?

If the need for PPE as a risk control is as a result of an adequate risk assessment, is provided and made available, exposed persons are informed and instructed on why, how, where etc but the company is tacitly accepting the lack of use, the chance of a civil claim succeeding after an eye injury is great.

As to where "you" stand jodieclark1510, I suggest the best place is well to one side, if the brown stuff starts flying, unless of course, you have a managerial or supervisory role here!



Completely agree. No personally not in that kind of role yet, little bit more experience in the big health and safety worlsd required, I mean more in a general sense the people with the power to stop work should do just that. It only takes that one time to ruin alot of people's lives potentially, not a risk worth taking in my book.
stevedm  
#15 Posted : 18 February 2015 13:58:56(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
stevedm

The rule and being able to defend it are 2 different things...you have to show that your disciplinary system is being used to enforce the PPE message..therefore David comments are spot on this is a supervision/management failure. You need to show that you have followed the process...it is quite easy to get it to final written when it comes down to it. Although the severity of the impact will need to be taken into consideration....
Users browsing this topic
Guest
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.