Rank: Forum user 
|
Afternoon All I'm a H&S apprentice currently dealing with a situation whereby a hole has appeared in a roof covering a work area and requires emergency repair. A roofing contractor has conducted various roof work at our site in the last 6-weeks and as such, I thought it was prudent to call this contractor to see if they can effect a temp repair. Asbestos fibres are contained in the roof area in question, but the contractor is qualified to handle this. My questions are: 1. If the contractor displays a licence/evidence of competency to use a MEWP to access the area, can I permit them to use ours? 2. Is a PTW required for emergency make-safe works to the roof? The previous works this contractor has done have involved comprehensive PTW and RAMS documentation but related to an ongoing project rather than a one-off emergency repair. Any advice would be greatly appreciated as I currently have no other H&S contact to reach out to.
Many thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Hi Hendlem Essentially the idea of a PTW is an invention which has no legal basis. It is just a variant on what the law does require. So different organisations have their own criteria for when a PTW is required and many of them insist on so many that they become counterproductive as just a tick box exercise making it less likely that they will get an appropriate level of scrutiny when it is actually sensible to go down the Permit route. I would be looking for risk assessment documentation from this subcontractor so that you can assess whether the proposed method of working makes sense and doesn't conflict with what is happening underneath.
|
 1 user thanked peter gotch for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Thank you, Peter. That is a particularly helpful response.
Originally Posted by: peter gotch 
Hi Hendlem Essentially the idea of a PTW is an invention which has no legal basis. It is just a variant on what the law does require. So different organisations have their own criteria for when a PTW is required and many of them insist on so many that they become counterproductive as just a tick box exercise making it less likely that they will get an appropriate level of scrutiny when it is actually sensible to go down the Permit route. I would be looking for risk assessment documentation from this subcontractor so that you can assess whether the proposed method of working makes sense and doesn't conflict with what is happening underneath.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Hi Hendlem A PS Even if you decide to go down the road of a PTW, you should think about who should be owner of the PTW and the ultimate signatory. You are not an expert on roofing and hence all the intricacies of health and safety in roofwork - that's why you subcontract to a specialist who should know the topic better than you. Hence, if YOU own the permit there is a danger that you insist on precautions that might be either excessive or insufficient. Decades ago when I worked for HSE, a scaffolder fell through a fragile rooflight on a flat roof where the Client had issued a Permit for the work to be done - essentially rendering a wall between the flat roof and the one above and the erection of the scaffolding to enable this activity. Something similar had happened at the Client's site before and they had bought 10 guard-rail frames to protect against exactly this type of incident and specified their use as part of the conditions of Permit. However, what they had thought about was: (a) that there weren't nearly enough frames to protect up to 36 rooflights that the various workers were liable to pass by (b) falls from the open edges on three sides of the roof - obviously not relevant to the specific incident, but arguably a greater risk. So not only did the Main Contractor and scaffolding subbie end up in Court but so did the Client and part of the evidence was the Permit which was written proof that the Client accepted that they had a degree of control over the working area. A better strategy for the Client would have been to put the onus on the speciaists they had brought in to devise a suitable safe system of work and not impose their own solution on the Contractors - the people who should have the expertise.
Edited by user 19 December 2024 16:37:54(UTC)
| Reason: less ambiguity
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Hendlem You mention PTW and RAMS in the same breath implying that both are issued at the same time by the same person. Typically the RAMS is created by the person doing the work and it explains to anybody who needs to know what the author will be doing to ensure everybody’s safety. THE PTW is issued by the person running the site. As Peter says, it authorises somebody to do a non-routine task on someone’s site. It is aimed at making sure that this non routine activity will be conducted in a safe manner and not only includes the precautions that will be applied but also notes at what times the work can carried out and what services etc will be disabled to enable this to be carried out. An emergency roof repair might qualify especially if it involves modifying or even suspending other work activities on the site. otherwise it is down to the contractors RAMS.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.