Posted By Bill Bircham I would suggest that you have a look at our 'core' legislation, the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations, which require all plant, machinery and work equipment to be maintained. It seems from your posting that the 'what' is not in question, just the 'who'. Put simply, it must be done, the management have to decide who does it. It would make sense to have the Maintenance Dept do so simply beacuse they are likely to have the required skills and competenices to do so

Posted By Rob McCarthy I concur with Bill, after all you are only advising the management, it would be the managements choice as to what maintenance proceedure it impliments, providing that it fall within the manufacturers guidlines. The question also arises as to who is compitent to carryout such tasks within the organisation or alternatively to source others who are compitent.

Posted By Raj Dear Colleagues, The point is not who does the maintenance, but whether the "monthly inspection" for preventive maintenence of these equipments should be carried out by the maintenance dept. or done by the Safety Officer. My contention is that the maintenance dept. conducts the monthly inspection as a routine, while the Safety officer does random inspections of these safety equipments also. The forms for the monthly routine inspection should be filled and maintained as a procedural matter by the maintenance dept. This is where the problem lies. The question is whether it is the maintenance personnel who should do the periodic inspections training can be done on this by the SO)and the Safety Officer randon inspections to support the preventive maintenence programme or is the Safety Officer solely responsible for the inspections, with the maintenance dept only doing maintenence when asked to do so. Kindly advise. Warm regards Raj

Posted By Stuart Nagle Raj. As the other responders have indicated, the key word here really is 'responsibility'. It seems fairly obvious that there is a requirement to have, maintain and inspect the equipment. Responsibility for who does what, i.e maintains the equipment and inspect the equipment is suttle. On sites that I operate the procedure is as follows. 1) Equipment is recorded in a register 2) There are responsible persons who's task it is to check the equipment is working safely, on a monthly basis, whether or not the equiment is used, and record the results of their tests/checks. They are trained and competent to perform this function, and of course, you must ensure this is the case. 3) The system is audited at regular intervals every 6 months, and this involves an H&S role in checking that the equipment is in order, tested/calibrated as required, and serviced in accordance with manufactures instructions. This will also involve inspection of the routine monthly tests and checks carried out. The system relies on several factors; a) there is defined responsibility for whom is responsible for doing what. b) Persons involved are trained and competent to perform the function where they have responsibility c) Audit is critical to ensure legal and client requirements are met, and Clients are provided with copies of the audit reports. Your involvment should be identifying the problem(s) that exist in demarcations of responsibility, and making recommemdations to resolve the matter by the apportioning of responsibility to best H&S and commercial practice. Obviously, then it is up to the management to look at your report and make the necessary changes, implement any training requirements you have identified as a result of your recommendations, and inform you of the outcome. This will then require follow-up action to ensure the system is operating as specified, i.e. further auditing. Hope this helps. Stuart Nagle