Rank: Forum user 
|
Hi all
I have just started work in a large food manufacturing premises with a host of activities stemming from engineering workplace transport production transport and the vehicles maintenance unit
On looking at the sites risk assessments and risk profile I’m rather bamboozled ed on as to where to start
The departments each have nearly a hundred plus individual task based risk assessments with individual ratings for risk under each sections. This means that each risk assessment can comprise of another twenty plus scores based on risk
To add to this there is no index showing the score for each one !
In any case there would be 1000s per departments !!!!
There is a risk profile however this is very generic and given we have recently had two specific noise related hearing complaints this should be on there and it isn’t !
Has anyone been in a similar situation
These are only task specific there are also Additional COSHH . Point of work and Mac assessments to add to all of these as well
As an example of what I mean for hygiene the cleaning of a mixer will entail hazards of working at height l, use of chemicals, slips trips falls , machinery hazards in event of start up and so may have 20 ratings
Each and every activity is rated and for every task
Same for other departments !
Any input much appreciated as it seriously needs condensing for the sake of effective management -
I was going to look at specific risks for each department and relate to activity so for example Llosa all risks working at height in hygiene and so forth ?
If anyone can give me some well founded non critical advice it would be much appreciated.
Thankyou
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
You get to see this thing quite often and IMO (some others may differ) the way forward is to collate the RA to the activity or machine. So use of XYZ machine will incorporate W@H, MH, mechanical hazards, noise etc. Haveing several RA for 1 activity is not doing any favours to the poor workers who have to read them - and they wont - eyes will glaze over and minds will wander. KISS is the key
To revamp these will take a lot of your time, is this what they company wants to do and can you explain the value to them? regards
Linda
|
 1 user thanked linda xc for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Thankyou for your reply
I agree re the time and think the issue is managing the sheer volume when it comes to reviewing each one and the issue like you say of various assessments being in different places such as puwer assessment
I could
Look at the puwer assessments as starting point as we have one for each machine and then assess what is needed
From this hygiene specific assessments could be an overview with key areas such as working at height and various forms of access used given more priority
Does any one have a Index if assessments from a similar environment I could perhaps compare to?
On a positive we have lots rather than areas missed however I believe the management of it all needs definite improvement
Ahhh !!!! The trials of new beginnings to a new role ://///
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Hi, Think of the poor guy who wrote them all! I had/still have a similar problem, still many historic RA's which duplicate every risk on every RA. Pages and pages of slips, trips and falls hazards on every one, for example. It makes reviewing a nightmare too. I looked at it from the perspective of 'what are these for?' If you remember that the RA is to identify the hazards, and suggest controls, (like training on working at height, or training on identifying trip hazards) then the task becomes less onerous. The RA is not supposed to be a training manual. One general WAH RA, (or perhaps one specific to each dept.) one covering slips trips and falls, and out of them should come training materials and safe working procedures. Then your specific RAs (like cleaning a machine) can say 'persons must be trained and competent at working at heights' and reference your WAH RA and training needs/matrix. Look on the bright side, you got the job! Good luck. Dave
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
This reminds me of the story of the scientist I worked with at government research lab. He told that he personally had over 80 risk assessments to cover all of his work. He insisted that they were all relevant. Then one day the server on which they were all stored went down. I told him to group all of his processes together and create risk assessments around those. He was able to cover it all with 6 documents.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
#1 Please write is paragraphs, it makes reading and understanding your posts so much easier. Sound like you need to a filtering and consolidation exercise of the documents that you have.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
To be honest I would archive them and start again. Break things down into core tasks and special tasks, you will find that core tasks are common to each department / area of the operation and then you will maybe have a couple of specialist tasks per area too. It will make it a lot more manageable.
|
3 users thanked Hsquared14 for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
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.