Posted By Owen Needles
Has anyone got suggestions for improving the amount of people who read risk assessments. Ours are freely available in folders near by but people don't appear to be reading them. Is it worth 'making' people read them and getting the to sign to say they have read and understood them. I think this method is a little heavy handed but i'm running out of ideas.
Thanks in advance

Owen

Posted By steven bentham
Owen

An idea I have seen work well with some construction firms;

Pick out the key aspects of the results of the 'risks and controls' and put them into a tool box type talk - to be delivered by front line supervisors (weekly). Another is to discuss key points of accidents (they can be from another company or hse prosecution as long as it fits your own work)

Topic has to relate to the work in hand, and ideally done casually i.e. over a mug of tea.

Reading pages of risk assessments is boring, but the significant results can be transcribed and used differently. You have to build ownership and be open of whats required. An inspector does not really wish to read all your risk assessments but wants to know how you are managing and implementing the controls.

Posted By Adrian Watson
People don't need to read the risk assessments; they need to know what to do! Don't give people the risk assessments give them appropriate information, instruction and training.

Regards Adrian watson

Posted By John Murgatroyd
Just leave them where they are.
So, nobody reads them.
What's new then ?
My company has risk assessments covering everything from working at height, to being clobbered by a falling toilet-roll.
Nobody has ever read any of them. They go along with those other A4 leaflets, method statements.
Everybody should have them, but nobody bothers with them.

Posted By John Murgatroyd
Because at the end of the day Frank, the job has to be done.
Doing it safely would be nice, but loads of people just want to do it the way they have always done it, the quick and easy way. Method statements are one of lifes classics. You can't start a job until you have one, but you can rarely do the job by following one.
Risk assessments are another. They are doubtless very useful, but look about any building site and you can spot dozens of cases where they have obviously not been read....if written !
Both are a convenient conspiracy between worker and manager...

Posted By Jonathan Sandler CMIOSH
I have read all comments on this subject and ask this, how do you communicate health and safety?
Door stops are a good thing to have but not when they are keeping a fire door wedged open. The best thing for that is the fire extingusher, fight the fire while having you back to the door.
As they say' the road to heaven is paved with good intentions.' Lets not loose sight of what the question is please.
There is no harm in reading the risk assessments to the employees, this is done on large construction sites as part of the site induction.
It just shows cooperation and communication, how else can we demonstrate our professional side?
Regards

Posted By AlB
I used to believe that Risk Assessments should be communicated to everyone and therefore we produced reams of risk assesments and made literally hunderds of copies and gave them to each employee to sign. Obviously they did sign them, but I can guarantee that the vast majority did not read them.

In the last couple of years my opinions have changed. I think that RA are a hindarance and are not a necessity to the workforce. They should be used as a way of assessing risks - by the management and the safety professionals. THEY then work to overcome the risks by the best possible means. Any risks remaining should be conveyed to the workforce through training and work procedures - ones that WORK.

That's the challenge facing the safety professional today - to help the management to get the job done without compromising the company through personnel loss of time through injury or illness or from a hefty prosecution following a serious incident.

I DO NOT believe that safety is by the book - it needs to be WORKABLE. How many of us have prepared RA and Method Statements only to find that what's written is not practicable??? I know I have. But my apporach is now very different. I work to keep people and the environment safe, to protect the company from loss of personnel, finance and reputation, whilst working to maintain and even promote efficient working and cost effectiveness. There is a way of working safe and woriking efficently. That does not mean a55 covering by writing and getting people to sign Risk Assessments - as I said, Risk Assessments should be used as a means of finding out what needs to be done to ensure the safety of personnel, and what insructions anbd training is required for the personnel.

Posted By Mark Talbot
Yes, I agree with AlB and Frank. As I read down the responses, I was getting a bit worried - but then the light came on.

When you review a risk assessment the 'action required' part is often worded towards what the individual with the tool in their hand should do. I much prefer the approach that gives the actions to the manager/supervisor (e.g. ensure worker understands that work is undertaken with fencing in place).

In the vast majority of cases managers dictate the real-world working conditions / safe systems through the provision of equipment, training and resources. How is a worker supposed to "ensure ladder is footed" if the job has been given to just one person?

Everyone must have access to them, but I think the target audience must be the people who influence ... managers.

Posted By Wayne Voller
I have to agree with Steve and Adrian. Risk assessments are more a tool for managers and safety professionals to see where they should direct and concentrate their efforts to reduce risk. It is then up to these ones to find the best way to communicate those efforts to staff, whether it be by training, supervision, instruction, tool bx talks so that employees can ACT on this information.

Wayne