Rank: New forum user 
|
Good Evening, A company (mainly fencing/landscaaping) has issues with Vibration at Work, namely 2 recent cases of HAVs and a case of HAVs with CTS in both hands. There's at present limited control measures if any (anti-vi gloves stil used as a contol measure), no mention of EAV/ELV or Health Survelliance etc. Operatives are using tools for upto 3-6 hours a day frequently.
An issue has occured where a rotorvator which has a magnitude of 2.9 m/s2, was re-tested in normal conditions which came out at 9.6 (testing was done with a Calibrated VB Pulsar instrument) The company is only willing to use the declared manufactures data on their risk assessments and unwilling to use the new data.
The CEO, has a alarming influnce over the 4 managers, who unfortunately will go through the motions to keep things simple.
My question would be; - Would you class this new risk assessment as suitable and sufficiant by not acting on this new information, equipment is between 2-5 years old, and not maintained as per manufactures recommendations all the time?
I'd be intrested in other peoples views on this Andy
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Of course not! But what is the conflict of interest?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
The conflict of interest is between the new measurements provided by the consultant, and the reluctance of the company to heed that advice given, and implementing new control measures.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Slightly odd question as I’m sure you know the answer to this already as I remember a post from you saying you have done the NCRQ diploma and vibration is bread and butter H&S. ( your log in name was memorable as I first thought there were too many A’s in the middle, then the penny dropped) However, we all sometimes need confirmation and I agree it is not acceptable. Why bring in a consultant if they are going to ignore them? As you know HAVS is RIDDOR reportable so the HSE will (should) have something to say. Chris
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
that isn't conflict of interest that is belligerence...(if I could spell it)…the manufacturers data is based on factory conditions and brand new product…unless the tool is brand new and I mean straight out of the box, it could be argued that their data is ok, but if not then….he has two choices wait for the EL claim and argue the toss in court or buy brand new equipment…the latter is probably cheaper but it won’t last for long…and besides it still looks like they guys using the existing equipment would potentially still have a claim…ask him to take advice of a lawyer…maybe then
|
 1 user thanked stevedm for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
What you have described is a disagreement between two parties rather than a conflict of interest.
There could be a conflict of interest involved but it's not clear what that is in this case.
|
2 users thanked Kate for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Paraandy No conflict of interest. Consultant has been brought in has done measurements, advised their client and the client chooses to ignore that advice. This is far from uncommon, but a very risky strategy to adopt. The client may try to hide the advice they have been given, but the truth is likely to get out. ....and no Court is going to believe that vibrating power tools still give off as little vibration X years after they have been unboxed. When it comes to a claim, the onus will fall on the employer to show that they have done all that is reasonably practicable. Pretending they have not had a specialist assessment done is not going to cut it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.