Hello all,

Can you tell me if you need training in Abrasive wheels to use a grinder?  As the Maintenance Manger states it is only for changing wheels, please help

The question is how does the employer prove they have discharged their duties under PUWER?

There were the original abrasive wheels regulations with some quite onerous training but since then a more suitable 1/2 day course is available through the usual providers.

By example & no affiliation: https://www.citb.co.uk/national-construction-college/health-safety-and-sustainability-courses/abrasive-wheels-disc-mounting/

How do you believe you can be an operator without proper training in the equipments use?

That particular link from the CITB is for construction workers who are "just operators".

It was not about the level of course your engineering manager was thinking about which involves dressing and balancing.

As per the previous replies, it's about being able to prove competence and that means you need to know the people and their experience before you decide on training levels. The move from Abrasive Wheels Regs to PUWER means that the requirement for training is less prescriptive (in my opinion).

As an abrasive wheels instructor I still go through a full training session for young people i.e apprentices, but for experienced guy's that I know, I use a shorter refresher style session that covers the hazards of using an angle or pedestal grinder, the precautions and a practical observation element.

Only our most experienced guy's are trained and authorised to dress, true or change wheels on the pedestal grinders and these are kept to a minimum.. 

Originally Posted by: Woolhouse-Smith29124

Thank  you for the information but the qustion still stands do users need training in the use of grinders?

Then the stock answer is "what have you identified in your RA"? I would advise that instead of looking for legislation to tell you if your operators require abrasive wheels training, making the decision yourself based on the findings of your assessment. 

The simple answer is that for dressing, truing or changing the wheels on a pedestal or bench grinder there needs to be a higher level of training than just a half day general awareness course. A poorly maintained or fitted wheel can cause significant damage to the user if it bursts.

Thank you Mike350, that is exactly my thoughts that the Maintenance operator needs the half day awareness training.  But the Maintenance Manager has said I need to re-read the law and they do not need training only for changing, dressing the wheels etc which is not what the Maintenance operator is doing.   He does not understand this.

PUWER stipulates that all operators must have undertaken sufficient training in the use of abrasive wheels and be supplied with adequate protective clothing. The workplace must have adequate health and safety measures, including guarding, emergency stop mechanisms, warning devices, visible markings and means of isolation from energy sources.

Specifically Under Employers Duties it says that : "Any employees using abrasive wheels must be provided with sufficient training to help ensure they are competent to do their jobs safely". 

Source - humanfocus.co.uk/blog/abrasive-wheels-regulations-everything-you-need-to-know/

Originally Posted by: mike350

PUWER stipulates that all operators must have undertaken sufficient training in the use of abrasive wheels and be supplied with adequate protective clothing. The workplace must have adequate health and safety measures, including guarding, emergency stop mechanisms, warning devices, visible markings and means of isolation from energy sources.

Specifically Under Employers Duties it says that : "Any employees using abrasive wheels must be provided with sufficient training to help ensure they are competent to do their jobs safely". 

Source - humanfocus.co.uk/blog/abrasive-wheels-regulations-everything-you-need-to-know/

Does PUWER state the above, or an interpretation by Human Focus - primarily a training provider?

Following on Evans' question, the Approved Code of Practice and Guidance on PUWER, L122 mentions training in relation to abrasive wheels but only in the guidance:

111 The person whose normal work includes the use of a piece of work equipment will have been given ‘the task of using it’ and the instruction and training provided should be appropriate to that work. For example:

(a) training of someone to use a grinding machine should cover the proper methods of dressing the abrasive wheels, see Safety in the use of abrasive wheels; 

(b) in the case of someone carrying out a turning operation on a lathe, the training should cover the devices which should be used if working with emery cloth to obtain the required finish on a workpiece. The application of emery cloth, held directly by hand, should always be avoided. Further information on this topic can be found at hse.gov.uk/engineering

So sub paragraph (a) is easily capable of being interpreted so as to indicate that someone just using a grinder would have to be trained in how to dress a wheel.

But that needs to be read in the context of the words that precede it......"appropriate to that work".

We don't train an HGV driver in how to work in a pit to do maintenance under the HGV (UNLESS they are going to multitask!) so why does someone intermittenly using a grinder need to be trained in how to change a wheel. What they need to be instructed in is to leave this to someone who HAS had the training.

When I occasionally used a grinder on castings decades ago, nobody taught me how to change the wheel. They taught me about adjusting the guard, making sure that the eye shield was in place and to use goggles. In those days, training in e.g. the noise and HAVS risks would probably have been rather limited.

Not wishing to highjack this thread, but again under PUWER hwo do ensure that your pallet truck operators are properly trained?

Are there any external courses? or is basic guidance from a experienced / competent supervior + sigend off document deemed sufficient?

Hi Chris, the question that Evans posed can not be answered with a simple Yes or No.

He asked "how?".

So, in effect a variant on the original question about abrasive wheels.

Is there some course that would be deemed "suitable" and tick the boxes that the regulator or someone else might like to tick?

Or could one devise something bespoke to the equipment being used and what it is used for?

As with so many other questions that deal with duties that are qualified by the words "reasonably practicable", there are numerous options that might or might not be sufficient.

For powered trucks we utilised the skills of our FLT trainer as they are basically an electric fork lift the operator does not ride.

The ankle catchers are covered in Manual Handling training (Aids).

Apologies - I should have stated the pallet trucks are manually operated, not the powered ones & they are the ankle crushers. 

I consider that in-house training will suffice, but the query I get is who is competent to provide this training? how would they prove this competency in court / to the insurer? do we need to formally record the trainin? or is this simply providing instructions?

Originally Posted by: Evans38004

do we need to formally record the trainin?

For our site we sign employees off against the Manual Handling RA & SOP (a pictorial step by step "how to")

We then had a major debate when we renewed the fleet which changed the colour from yellow to orange if we should update the SOP to reflect the "current" fleet image - common sense prevailed as the mechanism was identical but we do explain to new starters the old fleet colour was yellow.

This thread has spread into the old debate about what to say when the accident happens and the regulator or insurer starts looking for a bit of paper saying "This person has been trained"!

But, if we continually managed health and safety by checking that we had an answer to such interrogation, we would do very little other than send people on expensive training courses which they probably don't benefit from.

So, it is up to each organisation to make up its mind as to what training is needed, how to deliver that and how to enable a record that this has happened. In some cases that could be simply having a record of who attended what face to face or online offering on such and such a day and some detail of what was covered.

In other cases, you might want some test to show that the training has been taken on board by those there.

In other cases, you might want each person to get some physical evidence of attendance, which might come in the form of a pretty certificate of the type that some like to have framed and display on the wall.

Of course where the records (OR copies of the records) are more likely to be actually needed is in the Corporate centre (e.g. HR or training department) as that is where the focus is likely to be quite soon into any investigation.

Some 20 years ago we had an embarrassing blunder! As a quid pro quo we had agreed with our Client that we would put 20 people through IRCA accredited OHSAS 18001 lead auditor training and so we did. 

Auditee (our Client) turned auditor and asked to see evidence! Our HR team was responsible for keeping each employee's training records with each person being instructed to copy anything to HR for retention. But HR only had 10 records of the training as the attendance certificates for one of two courses had not been copied to them!

Edited by user 03 August 2023 14:22:03(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Just my 2p here....

If you are going to design your own inhouse training I would create it as a PowerPoint (with videos embedded) and devise your questions from it.

That way if anything happened and you need to evidence your training you have exactly what was trained and the questionnaire to go with.

I would also record you observation training until you "sign them off" as competent so you have the 2 elements with is the theory and the practical which to be fair an abrasive wheel course may not have....at least the one I did had no practical. We just watched a bunch of videos answered a few questions (as a group) and hey presto we were trained and that was an external course provider.