Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By Richie Higgins
I have just attended a training course related to OHSAS 18001 (Auditing) and was for the first time in my relatively short career made aware of Process Risk Management.... Although not convinced that doing one risk assessment for all will or can work but also trying to be open minded thought i would approach the forum for some thoughts if you wouldnt mind.
The basic approach is to go through the whole process, be it a factory, office, workplace etc and carryout one risk assessment, then deal only with the significant risks.... Not sold on this myself as i said and the process seems to be very business orientated not overly considering Legislation etc.. what about specific fire assessments, task based assessments, manual handling, cossh etc or do we assess too much.... your thoughts please...
Richie
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Charley Farley-Trelawney
Hate the principal myself, I don't like generics at the best of times.
I suppose everything has it's place though, I am certain someone will disagree with me.
CFT
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By James White
Just to add my two cents worth. What I have typically done has been to create a risk registry identifying all the work tasks and associated hazards and controls that are in-place. Then I would define what risks in the registry pose a higher or immediate hazard over others and then I would generate specific safe work plans/procedures for each risk/hazard.
Some view this as a tiresome task but from mitigating risk exposures it becomes a great tool to identifying or exposing equipment, operational, workflow and personnel shortfalls.
Done right it is an excellent tool. Anyway thats my two cents worth.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Adrian Watson
Dear All,
Isn't this what we are supposed to be doing? The management of health and safety at work regulations require you to deal with significant risks; not all risks, but significant risks!
I have been doing process based risk assessments throughout my career. I get into a workplace, follow the process flows from start to finish and then go around the admin, and maintenance areas. In each place I evaluate the tasks, individuals, management and environment to identify the key business and health, safety and environmental risks that need to be dealt.
Once the risks are identified the management and I identify the ideal controls and the controls that are in place. We then develop a plan how we are going to control these risks. We then put the controls in place and ensure that they are effective. Once we feel that these risks are adequately controlled we repeat the process and deal with the new set of significant risks.
Regards Adrian Watson
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Richie H
Adrian,
Please excuse my ignorance, but do you include in your process risk assessment fire, cossh, asbestos etc? I think this is an ideal approach and have being reading up in BS8800 etc and it is becoming clearer and i am on the brink of being sold... reading as i type....
As it clearly states in the standard; "it is usually better to integrate assessments for all hazards, and not carry out separate assessments for health hazards, manual handling, machinery hazards and so on. If assessments are carried out separately, ranking riks control priorities is more difficult".
Now it all makes sense, and does state more detailed assessments may be required for particular hazards. The jigsaw has almost fallen into place.
The only problem now is it looks like i am going to have to re-produce our Risk Assessment Process & Template.... Adrian, would love to see a working copy if at all possible?
Richie
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By AlB
Richie,
I have found that it pretty much depends on the situation. Small, low risk environments can easily be assessed by identifying all the risks and working to reduce all of those risks. LArger workplaces with more complex risks can be attacked by a Process Risk Assessment, which, as mentioned previously, is a live process aimed at attacking the significant risks in a systematic way.
I use both approaches, depending on the environment and needs of the workplace.
As was rightly pointed out, concentrate on the significant risks, and avoid getting bogged down in the minor risks such as papercuts until there is nothing more pressing left. Which I can't see happening!
Good luck.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Richie H
Thank you all for your comments, they have all been very useful. I now realise there is a time and a place for various forms of risk assessment, (risk dependant) etc ... at least i am off the train of thought that everything must be risk assessed regardless... significant only ...
Cheers all,
Richie
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By AlB
Richie,
Just a last note for you - don't take the approach of ignoring the minor risks, as these can often be escalated in certain situations. Initially tackle the more significant risks and work your way down. Your time and effort should be on the higher risks (which does not necessarily mean the most dangerous piece of equipment on site - it means the more likely area to cause harm).
Apologies if I'm teaching granny to suck eggs here!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.