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
RayRapp  
#1 Posted : 04 February 2010 20:11:13(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
RayRapp

Currently reviewing a H&S Construction plan against the company PMP requirements. I have always written h&s plans as an isolated document and not within an integrated PMP. I am not even sure the PMP H&S section conforms to the CDM ACoP list in Appendix 3. Hope this all makes sense?

Has anyone faced a similar conundrum, or has an opinion either way? All comments will be warmly appreciated, thanks.

Ray
Ron Hunter  
#2 Posted : 09 February 2010 16:51:04(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Ron Hunter

Project Management Plan presumably. I'd caution against integrating the CPP or PCI within this. The CPP in particular is intended to be specific to the Site and the people that work there, updated with reports, etc.
It would (IMHO) be in danger of becoming buried within a PMP?
RayRapp  
#3 Posted : 09 February 2010 16:59:21(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
RayRapp

Ron, thanks for comments. I agree, the PMP is likely to be ignored and a CPP is a legal requirement unlike much that is contained in the PMP. However, we have a PMP in place, for better or worse, so I have decided to write a stand alone CPP and integrate it into the PMP afterwards, where no doubt it will be ignored, forgotten etc.

Cheers.
ptaylor14  
#4 Posted : 10 February 2010 09:04:03(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
ptaylor14

ron hunter wrote:
Project Management Plan presumably. I'd caution against integrating the CPP or PCI within this. The CPP in particular is intended to be specific to the Site and the people that work there, updated with reports, etc.
It would (IMHO) be in danger of becoming buried within a PMP?


NACWYTA, OK IMHO LOL
Ron Hunter  
#5 Posted : 10 February 2010 16:43:31(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Ron Hunter

Well said! It's all gone a bit TLA there!
Safety Smurf  
#6 Posted : 10 February 2010 16:55:24(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Safety Smurf

It could get worse!

C U L8R
KieranD  
#7 Posted : 11 February 2010 09:05:53(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Guest

Ray

Since you explicitly indicate that you welcome all comments, may I respectfully observe that your statement 'I have decided to write a stand alone CPP and integrate it into the PMP afterwards, where no doubt it will be ignored, forgotten etc.' suggests that, as a competent safety practitioner, you are choosing to avoid the hallmark of profesionalism namely using knowledge in a manner that enhances the client's effectiveness.

Even if addressing social relationships at work is not specified within the protocols you refer to, the field of your actual choices as a safety professional de facto includes them. Arguably it is up to you personally to spend your time on matters you believe 'will be ignored, forgotten, etc.' and not to take initiatives to promote a culture dedicated to enabling all involved to learn to act as intelligent adults.

As long as competent safety (and other) professionals choose to promote protocols they believe 'will be ignored, forgotten, etc.', they are effectively promoting the eclipse of what they profess.
boblewis  
#8 Posted : 11 February 2010 12:00:25(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
boblewis

If we are totally honest most PMPs are better managed and reviewed than the CPP. It is often that CDMCs do not understand them or blindly insist on the letter of the law and so must see a document titled CPP. I often used to change th title for their, and the old PS, copy. It was changed back for use on site.

A good PMP is also a good CPP - the problems only really start if you try to separate out the contents to align wt the acop offered headings. You need to think strategically. Look at terms like:

Leadeship

Training Behaviours and Competency

Control of Contractors

Management of Site Facilities

Co-ordination and Co-operation

Emergency Arrangments


etc etc

You will quickly find that you can combine Q,S and E under all such headings

Bob
RayRapp  
#9 Posted : 11 February 2010 12:30:46(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
RayRapp

Kieran

You are correct in remarking that I did invite all comments. However, it was not meant as an opportunity to have a dig at my professionalism. In my experience there are too many prescripitive measures in project management. Hence many get overlooked, forgotten or are subject to good old apathy. That's just the way it is...I'm not trying to change the world, just being honest.

Bob

There are also issues with trying to populate a construction PMP to a rail contract, but never mind, I have decided upon my route of action. thanks for you comments.
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.