Rank: Forum user 
|
Hi All, I understand the need to formally appoint responsible persons for Legionella and an Electrical duty holder where it is relevant for a business, but I am being asked to consider appointing responsible persons for other pieces of legislation, many of which do not specifically request this in the regulations. I'd be interested to hear if anyone else appoints various people as responsbile perons for various disciplines or areas of safety and if so, which ones? Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I suppose we do, although they are mostly "me". In our Health and Safety Policy we specifiy whose is responsible for what, which I would suppose covers this. Sometimes it will be the Lead engineer, a supervisor or the factory Manager, but since we are a small business it is mostly just "Person Responsible - Health and Safety Manager" With a list of which person matches which job title at the front, so as to make it easier to change should there be a change in personnel
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
I put in the legal register not just what the legislation says but how the organisation complies with it and who has the overall responsibility (accountability) for this compliance. In most cases I like to say that this is the head of the relevant department.
It is then up to them who they delegate the actual tasks to. No one expects the head of facilities to be the person running the taps to flush out the legionella.
The purpose of documenting responsibility in this way is to concentrate the minds of management on the idea that they do actually have some responsibility and it is not all up to the poor old H&S person.
|
 1 user thanked Kate for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I have just been asked to include this after a risk/insurance audit and my response is no. The head of dept or manager is responsible for risk assessments for their area and this is detailed in my organisation and arrangements document. I cannot name every one of these people or roles and with the way things change in a larger organisation I would need to be continually updating the document.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
HI hopeful - nothing wrong with assigning responsibility to postholder rather than a named human person. As you indicate it means not having to change everything when staff move on. P
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I wouldn't name individuals either. I do think it is useful to define what role is responsible for what and to update this in the event of a reorganisation, so that the new postholder can see what their responsibilities are and responsibilities don't slip through the gaps when there is organisational change.
|
3 users thanked Kate for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
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.