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
hsherwoo  
#1 Posted : 13 December 2018 17:31:22(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
hsherwoo

Has anyone got any real life examples of practical steps that employers have taken to enforce a clean-shaven policy for employees who need to wear RPE?  I am not talking about employee awareness sessions about the risks of silica dust etc to try to convince them to shave, I am talking about those employees who are just refusing whatever to be clean shaven at work. 

The usual spiel is that employees will say that they have never been required to be clean shaven before and that it is not in their employment contract.  Does anyone have real-life examples where companies have:

a) taken disciplinary measures under breach of company H&S rules

b) made variations to existing employment contracts to specifically include the requirement to be clean shaven if RPE is required in thier job role

c) made provision for air fed masks with a financial contribution to such by the employee?

Roundtuit  
#2 Posted : 13 December 2018 17:42:07(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Make the situation not require RPE OR get RPE that fits the individual. Please feel free to use the search function at the top of the page "facial hair" should pull up several of the previous posts on this topic
Roundtuit  
#3 Posted : 13 December 2018 17:42:07(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Make the situation not require RPE OR get RPE that fits the individual. Please feel free to use the search function at the top of the page "facial hair" should pull up several of the previous posts on this topic
hsherwoo  
#4 Posted : 13 December 2018 18:04:35(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
hsherwoo

Originally Posted by: Roundtuit Go to Quoted Post
Make the situation not require RPE OR get RPE that fits the individual. Please feel free to use the search function at the top of the page "facial hair" should pull up several of the previous posts on this topic
I am talking about situations where a face mask has to be worn to deal with residual risks
Roundtuit  
#5 Posted : 13 December 2018 20:32:22(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Well if you have residual risk that you are unwilling (probably for cost purposes) to control, and employees who have never been tasked with wearing RPE appropriately before then be prepared for the flood of negligence, employment discrimination and constructed dismissal claims.

In some of the previous posts you would see there are comments that even someone arriving at the start of a shift "clean shaven" could have significant stubble growth within a few hours negating the protection issued.

And as to your last statement - we are not talking about upgrading DSE or safety specs from standard to designer frames where a contribution would be acceptable - we are talking the health of the individual which should be at NO CHARGE to the employee.

thanks 8 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
chris42 on 14/12/2018(UTC), A Kurdziel on 14/12/2018(UTC), kmason83 on 10/01/2019(UTC), Dave5705 on 23/01/2019(UTC), chris42 on 14/12/2018(UTC), A Kurdziel on 14/12/2018(UTC), kmason83 on 10/01/2019(UTC), Dave5705 on 23/01/2019(UTC)
Roundtuit  
#6 Posted : 13 December 2018 20:32:22(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Well if you have residual risk that you are unwilling (probably for cost purposes) to control, and employees who have never been tasked with wearing RPE appropriately before then be prepared for the flood of negligence, employment discrimination and constructed dismissal claims.

In some of the previous posts you would see there are comments that even someone arriving at the start of a shift "clean shaven" could have significant stubble growth within a few hours negating the protection issued.

And as to your last statement - we are not talking about upgrading DSE or safety specs from standard to designer frames where a contribution would be acceptable - we are talking the health of the individual which should be at NO CHARGE to the employee.

thanks 8 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
chris42 on 14/12/2018(UTC), A Kurdziel on 14/12/2018(UTC), kmason83 on 10/01/2019(UTC), Dave5705 on 23/01/2019(UTC), chris42 on 14/12/2018(UTC), A Kurdziel on 14/12/2018(UTC), kmason83 on 10/01/2019(UTC), Dave5705 on 23/01/2019(UTC)
Oxford  
#7 Posted : 17 December 2018 09:21:52(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Oxford

We have a similar situation with guys working in confined spaces, so we have just supplied a forced air face mask that covers the entire face - because the air is force fed into the mask, it creates overpressure so no fumes etc can get into the mask.

The air pack/pump is battery powered and has a life of around 8 hours - it is worn on a belt around the waist

johnmurray  
#8 Posted : 17 December 2018 14:23:15(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
johnmurray

Originally Posted by: Oxford Go to Quoted Post

We have a similar situation with guys working in confined spaces, so we have just supplied a forced air face mask that covers the entire face - because the air is force fed into the mask, it creates overpressure so no fumes etc can get into the mask.

The air pack/pump is battery powered and has a life of around 8 hours - it is worn on a belt around the waist

So the mask is supplied with air from the confined space....which doubtless contains contaminants (gases) that the filters will not remove?

And from experience with such units, the filters need changing fairly regularly...and they are not cheap...

MJT110474  
#9 Posted : 18 December 2018 12:38:45(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
MJT110474

PPE is the LAST resort, this is quoted everywhere.

If a contract doesn't state (usually upon employment) that clean shaven is required, you may be able to change it, but it will likely take months to implement these changes.

You could, as suggested use airfed helmets, or if it's in a confined space and you are concerned about recycled air issues, invest in airfed units that draw air in from outside of the confined space.

Whichever method you decide to use, reasonably practicable would crush any argument when working in confined spaces, especially if it is for repeated jobs.

Sgallacher27  
#10 Posted : 19 December 2018 22:41:27(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Sgallacher27

I have been involved in this previously, where a company I worked for had around 40 field based employees who periodically had to cut concrete with a cut off saw (silica dust). Wet cutting was used, however the hazard still remained.

Due to this cutting only being required a few times per week, and the cost of 40 x air fed hooded respirators being very expensive, we decided on issuing each employee with a half face respirator and aranged fit testing for all employees. This obviously threw up the clean shaven issue, and to be honest we had a bit of a nightmare sorting this out!

Eventually, all new employees were made aware of the clean shaven requirement at interview stage, and reminded of it at induction stage. Existing employees had their contracts altered (with two months' notice if I remember correctly) and they were required to sign a copy of the company clean shaven policy. If an employee simply refused to be clean shaven, they signed a refusal form and were excluded from the work tasks which required respirators. They were also reminded of their duties under section 7 of HASAWA.

Where an employee had a beard for reasons such as religion, confidence, to hide scars etc. we provided an air fed respirator. We actually found that employees were finding the hoods uncomfortable, especially when working on a hot summer day - although this was rare!

It isn't an easy thing to impliment, however in our scenario it did work in the end following an initial period of resistance.

Hope this helps.

Oxford  
#11 Posted : 04 January 2019 15:32:43(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Oxford

Originally Posted by: johnmurray Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: Oxford Go to Quoted Post

We have a similar situation with guys working in confined spaces, so we have just supplied a forced air face mask that covers the entire face - because the air is force fed into the mask, it creates overpressure so no fumes etc can get into the mask.

The air pack/pump is battery powered and has a life of around 8 hours - it is worn on a belt around the waist

The air supply is provided from a belt worn supply pack - it does not simply take the local atmosphere and feed it through the mask (which would negtae the use of the mask, obviously)

So the mask is supplied with air from the confined space....which doubtless contains contaminants (gases) that the filters will not remove?

And from experience with such units, the filters need changing fairly regularly...and they are not cheap...

Kate  
#12 Posted : 05 January 2019 07:45:31(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Kate

There seem to be some crossed wires here.

There are four ways of supplying air through respirators.

1.  The surrounding air can be drawn through a filter by the process of breathing.

2. The surrounding air can be pulled through a filter by a powered pump (positive pressure).

3.  The respirator can be attached to a hose which supplies air from an external source (air-fed).

4.  The respirator can be attached to an air cylinder which is worn on the user's back (breathing apparatus).

It sounds like we are talking about a positive pressure respirator here..  In that case the contaminated air is indeed being used; it is being filtered to (hopefully)  remove the contaminants. The air isn't provided from elsewhere and isn't clean to start with.   In the alternatives of air-fed repirators and breathing apparatus the contaminated air isn't used at all.  That is necessary in some cases such as when the contamination is very high or unknown, or when oxygen is depleted. 

So there is some merit in johnmurray's points.

johnmurray  
#13 Posted : 05 January 2019 17:54:47(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
johnmurray

"We have a similar situation with guys working in confined spaces, so we have just supplied a forced air face mask that covers the entire face - because the air is force fed into the mask, it creates overpressure so no fumes etc can get into the mask.

The air pack/pump is battery powered and has a life of around 8 hours - it is worn on a belt around the waist"

I'm well aware of them....I have worn them for years....allow me to put a few points across. They take their air from the space around the worker. I assume you have tailored the filters to the contaminants present, which means you have had the air sampled, or have other information about the contaminants and the level of same. If you have no idea what the air contains, then you have no idea which filters to purchase. the battery life is largely irrelevant, what is more interesting is the airflow through the filter, which decreases as the filter captures the dust/fume etc. Usually, the units are supplied with a basic flow-meter so that the airflow can be seen to be sufficient. The battery outlasts the filter in heavily contaminated air. If that happens, then the air is too contaminated for that system to be used and air should be supplied from  another source, or the job should be reconsidered. I'll repeat, *I have used these systems extensively*.

I'll say something else about them too....use one for a shift and then examine the INSIDE of the facemask, in practically all cases you will find a deposit of extremely fine dust.

Ackashaun  
#14 Posted : 08 January 2019 13:06:23(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Ackashaun

We switched from full and half face masks for that very reason. People have to be cleanly shaven all the time and we found it was hard to police. Not only that you could end up discriminating on religious grounds regarding shaving, take in the fact people lose weight, gain weight and can sweat when working, it is difficult to get a proper seal on a full face mask.

We found the belt fed hoods with filters a much better solution, they are comfortable to wear and we use a wide range of filters from dust to vapour depending on the task. As stated they take the air from around you and feed it through the filters, similar to what a full face mask does. We have had no issues reported with contamination on the inside of the hood, the masks use have a neoprene seal around them to fit snuggly on the skin and dust should not pass the filters.

johnmurray  
#15 Posted : 09 January 2019 10:28:39(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
johnmurray

That depends upon the filters....and the size of the particulates present....and also note that their use in an enclosed environment is not a good idea....or one where oxygen depletion may occur...

chris.packham  
#16 Posted : 09 January 2019 12:12:19(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
chris.packham

Another benefit of the full hood type inhalation protection is that this also covers the sensitive skin on the head. I have seen situations where half- or full-face masks have been worn where the airborn contamination included chemicals that could be absorbed into, and through, the skin with harmful effects. In many cases the hazard due to skin exposure had been recognised as chemical protective gloves were being worn. It was just that the airborn exposure had not been recognised. It is also worth noting that at least one study has shown that with some chemicals airborn exposure of the facial skin at well below the WEL has been capable of causing health effects.

And please do not rely on the sk notation in EH40. There are many chemicals that will not be included in EH40 that can penetrate the skin, particularly when in combination with other chemicals or where the skin is already damaged, even though this damage may still be sub-clinical.

Chris

Ackashaun  
#17 Posted : 09 January 2019 13:20:24(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Ackashaun

Originally Posted by: johnmurray Go to Quoted Post

That depends upon the filters....and the size of the particulates present....and also note that their use in an enclosed environment is not a good idea....or one where oxygen depletion may occur...

The filters should be suitable for the task though? if they are letting in particles then the wrong filters are being used or they have not been fitted correctly. If small particles are noticeable on the inside of the hood, then these particles will penetrate the lungs too. I agree with the confined space though, they should not be used in confined space, especially where oxygen is likely to be depleted. We hire equipment in for that task, a personal Oxygen bottle carried on the back and attached to a hood, these give several hours of oxygen to the user. Though I must state we swap our workers every 30 minutes to give them a break when working in confined spaces, all have their own personal hood and tank hired in for this task and always have a standby man and Derek if required.

johnmurray  
#18 Posted : 09 January 2019 14:20:12(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
johnmurray

Hopefully compressed-air and not oxygen!

I noted that filters are rated by how much of various sizes of particle they filter out...if 95%, then that leaves 5% getting through....

Fortunately for employers, by the time the employee is seriously affected he/she has usually moved-on...bearing in mind that 15%-30% of COPD cases are caused by workplace air pollution...

Ackashaun  
#19 Posted : 09 January 2019 14:30:29(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Ackashaun

Yes, you are right, compressed air when Oxygen is deficient or dangerous to life is what I should have said.

Edited by user 09 January 2019 14:32:39(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Oxford  
#20 Posted : 23 January 2019 15:17:38(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Oxford

Originally Posted by: johnmurray Go to Quoted Post

"We have a similar situation with guys working in confined spaces, so we have just supplied a forced air face mask that covers the entire face - because the air is force fed into the mask, it creates overpressure so no fumes etc can get into the mask.

The air pack/pump is battery powered and has a life of around 8 hours - it is worn on a belt around the waist"

I'm well aware of them....I have worn them for years....allow me to put a few points across. They take their air from the space around the worker. I assume you have tailored the filters to the contaminants present, which means you have had the air sampled, or have other information about the contaminants and the level of same. If you have no idea what the air contains, then you have no idea which filters to purchase. the battery life is largely irrelevant, what is more interesting is the airflow through the filter, which decreases as the filter captures the dust/fume etc. Usually, the units are supplied with a basic flow-meter so that the airflow can be seen to be sufficient. The battery outlasts the filter in heavily contaminated air. If that happens, then the air is too contaminated for that system to be used and air should be supplied from  another source, or the job should be reconsidered. I'll repeat, *I have used these systems extensively*.

I'll say something else about them too....use one for a shift and then examine the INSIDE of the facemask, in practically all cases you will find a deposit of extremely fine dust.

The masks are used as part of a CS entry process and the atmosphere is sampled and checked for a certain amount of time, and where necessary forced ventilation is introduced, before users would enter the space - and the gas monitors are left in place during the entry as well
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.