Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Alan Breen
does anyone know if there is a limit to how much weight a person would be allowed to carry depending of course on the persons weight/height and fitness etc:?
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
Alan
How long is a piece of string? The HSE guidance for heavy building blocks puts a figure of 20kg for an individual to place on a wall, above this 2 operatives are required. I remember also the push to 25kg cement and plaster bags. Some of the early HSE guidance to the Manual Handling regs in 1993 suggested 25kg at waist height and close to the body. This reduced when stooping or reaching up was required, also with distance from the body. It is a useful start point in my mind.
Bob
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Nick Higginson
Alan,
There is no weight limit for anyone. The Manual Handling Operations Regs 1992 require employers to:
1. Avoid Manual Handling wherever possible
2. Carry out a risk assessment on any manual handling hazards that remain
3. Reduce risks to lowest levels reasonably practicable
There are some weight limits quoted in an appendix at the back, but these are based on operations of 30 times an hour, and are not maximum weight limits, as many people seem to believe.
Drop me an e-mail if you would like some more help. I do have a couple of sample electronic MH RA forms I could send if you want.
Regards,
Nick
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Alan Breen
Thanks a lot Bob,I know it was a slightly obscure question,but a friend of mine is an insurance assessor and she asked if I could try and find some info on this subject.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Neil Budworth
Just for info the HSE have published a leaflet called handling the news, which is suggesting a limit of 18kg moving to 17kg for newspaper bundles.
Regards
Neil
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Jack
Re Nicks posting, the figures in the Appendix of the HSE Guidance (L23) are NOT weight limits they are basic guideline figures for identifying when manual lifting and lowering operations may not need a detailed assessment (it says here). And they are for relatively infrequent operations - UP TO 30 operations per hour.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Nick Higginson
Isn't that what I said?
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
Nick
You missed the UP TO
Bob
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Nick Higginson
Bob,
Many thanks, how could I have been so shortsighted? Fear not, I will grab the copy of the regs and quote chapter and verse from now on. At least I can be safe in the knowledge that Jack is there to point out the error of my ways.
Nick
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Nick Higginson
RE Jack's first statement:
Could I just point out the inaccuracies here as Jack has mentioned a Manual "lifting or lowering" operation.
The precise definition of Manual Handling is "Any transporting or supporting of a load (including the lifting, putting down, pushing, pulling, carrying or moving thereof) by hand or by bodily force". (Regulation 2(1) on page 6 of the Manual Handling Operations Regulations 1992 (L23) ISBN No. 0-7176-2415-3.
Therefore Jack's definition was not all encompassing.
Nick
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Jack
Fortunately Nick, Jack is still here to point out the error of your ways. If you re-read his earlier posting you will see he was specifically talking about THE FIGURES IN THE APPENDIX of the HSE GUIDANCE (L23) and when he said: they are basic guideline figures for identifying when manual lifting and lowering operations may not need a detailed assessment, he was quoting DIRECTLY from L23 page 43 Para 7!! Further on in the guidance you can find information about other manual handling guidance eg carrying, pushing, pulling and even handling while seated.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Keith Archer.
Alan,
As other respondents have pointed out there is plenty of information about on Manual Handling but the golden rule on lifting is always lift within your own capacity.
Hope this helps,
Keith
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Brian Dawson
I've been watching this thread develop with some amusement. Nick you seem to have taken exception to being "corrected" by Jack. That to me is one of the strengths of this forum. I know it can be irritating - and why doesn't he give his full name? - but it can also be valuable, especially if you are working towards qualifications.
In fact, I think Jack was making a valid point. In your initial response your first two paragraphs made the point that there are no weight limits. Then you said the appendix quoted some weight limits. Jack was saying they are not weight limits they are guidelines to determine whether a detailed assessment is necessary. You also confused the issue by referring to these weight limits only applying for 30 operations per hour. You therefore seemed to be implying that there were weight limits but they only applied when you were repeating the operation 30 times an hour. I know you didn't mean that but I also think it was reasonable for Jack to clarify the point. I do not think he was any more pedantic than quite a number of responses to this forum including some of your own (indeed wasn't there one today where you even apologised for pedantry and managed to critise Jacks into the bargain? He must have really got to you!)
All the best
Brian
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By STEVE
Jack
Your the man!
I have noticed over a period of time how Nick feels he has to correct peoples mistakes or errors to which there is nothing wrong with that,but what he also feels he needs to do is belittle them aswell.
Not very good for a Safety Person
To gain respect you have to give a little,there is nothing wrong in trying to impress if thats what you feel you have to do but not on other persons errors.
Maybe this is not taught in the Nebosh paper format welcome to the real world
Steve
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Lee Bennett
Dear All,
Over the last few days I have been reading the postings on these forums.
Most of the questions were quite legitimate and some responses were sarcastic, pedantic, nit picking, and at times puerile.
Even I recieved an email saying I should watch my tone from a user of this forum.
Is there something in the water ? Is it because we have lost the Ashes ? Or is it just the lack of sun ?
Once upon a time these forums were informative and sometimes humourous what went wrong ? No wonder regular contributors are leaving in droves.
So come on people if it is reasonably practicable, lets get on with the main objective to make our workplaces safe and healthy, even safety people need to laugh now and again.
"I have opinions of my own - strong opinions - but I don't always agree with them."
President George Bush
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Nick Higginson
Gents,
I tjought me and Jack were just having a bit of fun - apologies if anyone has taken it in a way other than it was meant. Brian you are exactly right in that by the thread developing, we have arrived at the correct advice. I sometimes type to quickly without thinking of the wordage I am using, and although I knew exactly what I meant with regards to the guidelines in the appendix, it didn't come out as I meant it!
As for warning e-mails, I'm not sure what that's all about. The only really disappointing comments are Steve's derogatory remarks, which I don't intend to get involved in.
Once again, apologies if I was misunderstood.
Nick
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Jack
Yes, things seem to have got a bit serious overnight; is that when the grown ups log on?
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Alan Breen
Hi everybody,it`s Alan here again...first of all thanks to you all for such a great laugh on my very first question on a forum.........secondly,thanks to Nick for the e-mail,and thirdly .Lee,we may have lost the ashes,but what a great victory at Headingly.......
many thanks to you ALL
Alan
22/08/2001
|
|
|
|
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.