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
Admin  
#1 Posted : 14 January 2005 09:44:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Kenny McGillivray a large part of the work I do involves vetting workplaces prior to placing trainees on work experience and have visited some 750 placements over the last 10 years or so The other day I visited a hairdresser who employs 6 people. This employer had been visited in Dec 04 by an Environmental Health officer on an inspection headed the Health & Safety at Work act 1974. I was shown the report because I asked about COSHH and the Employer had nothing in place whatsoever. The report asked this employer to put up a law poster and develop some staff training. What the hell is going on?? I have seen young 19 year old hairdressers with dermatitis so bad that they are in agony every working day!! I have tried over the years to spread the message of taking care of employees and all the stuff we rattle on about in journals and conferences. It is a poor show that the enforcing authority thinks a poster to be more important than the basics of controlling serious occupational health problems. Thanks for letting me get rid of the steam!! Kenny
Admin  
#2 Posted : 14 January 2005 10:13:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Tom Clark I have had some experience of EHO's and HSE 'inspecting' premises and only making comments like you have - about the The H&S Law Poster. If they don't see any other problems or even look for them then they don't comment. These are very busy people and never enough to go round carrying out full inspections. They can also be very helpful in giving advice and assistance - it's not always notices. Maybe you could get hold of some leaflets on the matter and pass on the information to employees. A good place to start and you can download - is the HSE site. www.hse.gov.uk Regards Tom
Admin  
#3 Posted : 14 January 2005 10:53:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Robert I would also consider that the "chemicals" used in hairdressing salons are accompanied by better, easy to read, manufacturers MSDS type of information. Having seen the latest scenario on the tele, it appears that the manufacturers' get out clause is "read the label". Posters and COSHH info splattered round a salon would be a real winner with the customers, wouldn't it? Can you imagine "Before and After" photos!! This may be of little consequence, but I have actually seen a CD radio in a salon, which after a period of time showed signs of the controls "melted" and the CD player unworkable because of the chemical atmoshere. The owner unwittingly admitted that he went through two of these annually. So what are the staff and customers' repiratory system like? I think it's about time the manufacturers and salon owners provided "real" information to their workers so then at least an EHO or other would be able to make a more subjective analysis of each situation.
Admin  
#4 Posted : 14 January 2005 12:22:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By steven bentham I am not the worlds best supporter of EHO's! However the HSE's enforcement policy statement does talk about proportionality, openess, targetting and consistancy. If everytime that EHO or an inspector came across a workplace without a COSHH assessment they prosecuted them out of business then they would be not following their own enforcement guidelines. If the shop is requested to put up a poster and provide information/training then it is a first step to what is a relatively low risk work environment. Also the EHO is trying to encourage ownership in a framework of legislation that is supposed to have an element of self regulation. If you feel that it is that dangerous I presume you have not allowed the placement to go ahead! (I am not at all running down the ill-health effects of any occupational group, I think this is a vastly under estimated problem) We have all seen bad accidents etc, but regardless of your views enforcement is and should (in my view) targetted at hish risk areas, unless you want to pay for a lot more inspectors out of your taxes and rates.
Admin  
#5 Posted : 14 January 2005 12:58:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Dave Wilson As an ex LA EHO I, to a vertain extent agree with your sentiments of how EHP's inspect premises under enforcing authority regulations. Historically EHP's get the low risk level premises and it is not really a high priority on their list. H&S is usually in with Food, Pest control nuisance etc and that is mainly what they target. When I did my EHO training it was mainly directed at the law side and the enforcement of and had very little content on the actual safety technology or safety science side and as such new how to prosecute and under which statute but not the 'how to pu right' which inessence is not their job. As long as the employer complies with statute then what else can they do. The main driver for me was that when I qualified as and EHO I went and did a NEBOSH Dip immediately after as the vast majority of my work at the time was in Heavy industry in Dockyards at my knowledge of safety management and technical experience was severley lacking. the audit commission have also recognised this as well.
Admin  
#6 Posted : 14 January 2005 16:43:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Mark Jacobs As an EHO and member of IOSH working in the private sector I can understand your frustration. I worked for a company with sites across the UK and there were significant variances in the standard of inspection for food hygiene and health and safety from total apathy to ridiculous detail. I spent a lot of my time explaining what the legal requirements were to the EHOs. I find through personal experience that only those enlightened enough to take a further safety qualification have any grasp of the concept of risk assessment. As they have limited knowledege they do not ask appropriate questions and fall back on physical shortcomings. The level of prosecutions in the retail sector is so low as LA legal departments will often only take a case where a favourable result is assured or the business has hacked off a local councillor. Look on the bright side. If health and safety in hairdressing salons fell under the remit of the HSE it would never have been inspected. At least now they have complied with one set of regulations. I do feel better for that!
Admin  
#7 Posted : 14 January 2005 17:40:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Simon Ayee With the advent of Topic Inspections (slips & trips, work at height, MSDs, workplace transport, stress etc)you might find that COSHH does not get asked about at future visits even by Inspector's who might wish to.
Admin  
#8 Posted : 14 January 2005 20:53:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Stuart Nagle Could it be a case of Environmental Health Officers being good at what they are particularly trained for - Environmental Health Work; e.g. food hygiene inspections, dealing with infestations? etc etc... But, perhaps are not quite so good at dealing with health and safety issues, that from my knowledge they are not specifically trained to deal with? Was the EHO involvement as LA level (people who routinely visit premises in their LA area anyway) a simple 'shortcut' of trying to provide the H&S inspection system on the cheap that should be in force by professional H&S persons!!! However, before we berate the poor EHO, a great many of which are very well qualified, like many in the H&S Sector, and I am sure work very hard, should we not be asking questions about the veracity of Local Authority H&S Inspection work. I know this subject has reared its head recently, when HSE took LA's to task over the quality/quantity of their H&S work, however, what measures have been taken to make things better and how has this improved the situation, if at all? I don;t recall anything being the recent - and now defunct HSC proposals for LA H&S work!! It would appear to me that in the most part, the only specific H&S advisors working for LA's are in the most part their own H&S advisors, employed by the LA to provide H&S advice specifically to the LA in respect of their own working environment/premises - not anyones else's. I fully appreciate, having worked in Local Government, the stresses and strains on the service, but if the service is going to be provided, should it not be provided effectively? I sympathise with Kenny in his views., a HSE H&S Poster is not preventing the sores and rashes associated with dematitis and advise/action should have been given/taken, but at least the staff now know who to complain to so perhaps they too can jump on the claims bandwaggon!! Whilst this kind of thing persists, things are not going to improve in respect of SME's and commercial premises. We often hear on this site about claims, but inaction and non-professional H&S advice in dealing correctly with issues is not going to help reduce the issues at source by removing/reducing the problems. Yes, we can whack-em with notices, sue em in the courts, visit and inspect every month to 'follow up (oh yes the poster is up... very good...well done), but unless we get them on board... we will never get them to comply/improve with what is best for them and their employees...and ultimately evryone else... How should this area be tackled/improved??? There, that should elicit some shots across the bow!! Stuart
Admin  
#9 Posted : 18 January 2005 10:24:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Melanie Torrance I can understand your frustrations. I am an Authorised Officer for a local authority. In our Environmental Health department we employ a mix of EHOs and AOs (who are either on the Food Safety or H&S side). Generally the EHOs deal with environmental issues, noise nuisances etc, whilst we AOs carry out the majority of routine food and H&S inspections. This allows us to be specialists in a single area, unlike EHOs. Some see this as a better way of doing things, some don't. I also agree that the new topic based inspections can make it appear that issues such as COSHH will be ignored in future inspections, but certainly not by me! Whilst I have incorporated the topics into my inspections, they are certainly not the only areas I look at.
Admin  
#10 Posted : 18 January 2005 12:18:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Dave Wilson Stuart agree with most of your sentiments here, however what hasn't been said is that EHP's are 'enforcers' and not really advisors or H&S consultants. They only do this in what is called low risk environments etc. The HSE are specialits in 'safety' but would you expect them to give you advice on Nuisance or Part A processes or contaminated land, pest control, urban renewal, landfill, waste management, food hygiene, fitness for occupation, housing grants, HMO's pest contol, etc the list goes on. The main workload of an EH dept is to ensure public health and H&S is only a very small bit of their toolbox and it is really only EHO's who have gone into the private sector who would advance their H&S knowledge, to that end to try and do something the CIEH have an HSE person seconded to them to try and raise this profile. Know it doesnt help the 'salon' etc but in the overall scheme of things it is very low risk.
Admin  
#11 Posted : 18 January 2005 12:58:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By DougieGeorge Kenny, I have a foot in both camps on this one. I was an LA EHO for 5 years and in recent years, an EH Advisor, specializing in HS & EP – a member of both professional bodies. Have experienced good & bad in LA enforcement. As mentioned earlier, standards vary across the UK. My views on LA EHPs (EHPs is the ‘buzz’ word as now ‘Practitioners’ encompass the Officers, Techs & other EH staff): The level of EHO degree training in HS is about the same as food safety, housing, etc. Some EHPs have very good experience/additional qualifications and are very competent – but many do not. Same goes for IOSH members. There are ever increasing pressures on EHPs with often thousands of premises to visit in each LA. Sadly, lower risk premises such as barbers often become a means to boost the target for inspections. Many low risk premises are now put out to contract. Competency of contractors can vary considerably and often in their interests to whip round several businesses quickly. EHPs’ lives likely to get busier. e.g. chasing people to give them litter penalty notices, dealing with ASBOs and Scots EHPs will soon have the added pleasure of enforcing new smoking laws. Put all this together with a limited no. of staff (combined with a national shortage of EHOs being recruited) and you can see the stresses. However, should not be an excuse for shoddy enforcement. Bottom line is that you doing your visits has highlighted some uncontrolled hazards – so a place to avoid. Wonder how many other students out there are actually still placed in hazardous environments because others aren’t as thorough as you? My daughter is due to do a 2 week placement later this year (which seems an excessive waste of school time!) Wonder if an assessment has been done on her placement workplace – with a vet. Having experienced myself vets in action during the Foot & Mouth fiasco – I’m beginning to worry! Fancy nipping into Lancashire for a visit?
Admin  
#12 Posted : 19 January 2005 22:05:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Kenny McGillivray Thanks to you all for your comments, I can sympathise with EHO's and the huge work load. I will keep banging on at the businesses I deal with and hopefully make the experience a wee bit safer for the young people we place. Thanks again and I'm glad I found the IOSH forum it keeps me from despairing. Kenny
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.