Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By Paul Purvis
The questions are:
1. if I with 5 years experience of writing method statements and risk assessments for a specialised type of site working environment that we carryout work on, author an assessment, which is found after an event not to be accurate, can I be prosocuted/sued?
2. if I am giving assistance to a colleque who has 2 months (chucked in at the deep end)doing basic assessments, am I again going to be held responsible?
3. method statements are being ammended after my signature has been applied, do I convert everying into pdfs?
4. I am continually being told that its not like that in the real world onsite, and I am 100% sure that the m/s etc are not even being read.
I could go on, but I think the above gives a clue where about up the creek I am.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By TonyB
Hi Paul,
I will offer my opinion on this.
Point 1.
There is a difference between risk assessments (RA) and method statements (MS). RA are required by law and MS are not.
With regards to RA - the ultimate legal duty rest with the employer for the quality of the assessment (Reg 3, MHSWR - every employer should ensure 'suitable and sufficient' RA are undertaken for all work activities). Therefore, if the RA are not 'suitable and sufficient' then its the employers fault - provided you tried your best and applied suitable standards and followed ACoPs etc.
MS - this is slightly different. I assume the MS is provided to the client/principle contractor. If they ask for these then they have a duty to assess the MS and agree to the way of working. They therefore would be partly held responsible if the proposed method was grossly defiecent.
Can you be sue - no. Your employers would be sued using vicious liability.
Point 2 - same as point 1.
Point 3.
If you suspect they are being amended then protect them. Either pdf, or password word docs to allow read only access. However, the client/PC should ensure that the contractors are working to the original MS so if its being amend during the work the client/PC may pick this up.
Point 4.
Its the job/workers Supervisors who are directly responsible for ensure the MS are followed. The client/PC also have a legal duty to check. I would formally report your concerns and let management deal with it! However, if you ever see it happening, challenge it.
Hope it helps.
(However, with this being the IOSH forum I would wait for a few more replies as I'm sure somebody will disagree!! I prepare for the onslaught!)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ron Hunter
It could be reasonably construed that the Method Statement was the written statement of the employer's safe system of work, and the legal construct can therefore be equally applied.
Could you be held liable Paul? That potential scenario could not be entirely ruled out.
It is relatively simple to apply Password Protection to MS Word Documents. This gives a lot more flexibility, allowing some areas of a document to remain "open", whilst other parts are locked to all but the author.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ron Hunter
Just noticed - "vicious liability" above. A new concept - I like it!
'The biter bit' presumably. An ideal strategy in these litigious times!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.