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 : 21 March 2007 12:23:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By John
A contractor has been asked by an end user site to fit an emergecny stop unit to every third operator station on production line rather than at every station. The reason given is that the client does not want operators to press e-stops as a control stop. Clearly instruction and training etc will play a major role here but the client also wants to keep costs down i.e. save money by implementing e-stops at every third station. By pressing an e-stop this will stop whole production line.

Problem is that in between stations there is a risk as operator cannot get to e-stop in time if need be!

Contractor wants the job but knows client is wrong. Contracotr is thinking of doing risk assesment at present to submit to end client but knows this will not make a difference. End client is clearly liable under statutory law but where does this leave the contractor if he carries out the project?

Thanks in advance.
Admin  
#2 Posted : 21 March 2007 13:28:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Ian Waldram
If contractor risk assessment shows a clear need for additional stops, they should strongly recommend this to the client, with supporting evidence (a written design standard, or widespread sector good practice would help!). If the risk is less clear cut, the recommendation can be less emphatic, perhaps pointing out that it will be cheaper to do it now than as an in-service upgrade.

It's hard to do a complete risk assessment without operational people contributing, so maybe involvement of someone representing those who will operate the line will clarify whether there is a significant risk or not. If the client controls such participation, then the cover letter could again emphasise the need to involve operations people in a risk assessment in due course.

Provided all this is documented and given to someone in the client organisation who is accountable for project safety, the contractor should have no residual liability.
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.