Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By Katie Murray
How do you overcome senior management sensitivities regarding the content of hygiene monitoring reports without compromising professionalism. For example,describing shortfalls in control measures even though the exposure levels are below the OELs for that substance and then making recommendations. After all, a monitoring survey can only reflect the exposure experienced on the day of that survey and unless continous monitorng is in place can not be assumed to be indicative of exposure all the time. Any advice, please
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Stuart Nagle
Katie.
How about rewording the report to exemplify the company's strive towards continuous improvement and how these areas will contribute toward success and improvements in staff and management satisfaction... meeting and exceeding targets and showing customers how the company is making huge efforts to offer better standards and become a maket leader in the provision of health and safety !!
I find that the 'mindset' of management can be changed by using the right approach and wording in reports. It is not so much what needs to be done as showing (proving in some cases) that achievement fits with the business plan(s) and the companies desire or aspirations to be the best.
Often consideration of the staff and their conditions, and producing evidence in management-speak is all that is required to coerse and achive the target.
Use a little phsycology here to plan out what you want to achieve and look at what the company's desires are, how can you get the two to diverge and show that really both are one and compliment each other
hope this helps...
Stuart
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Adrian Watson
Dear Katie,
In my experience, the best way to deal with this is by following the golden rules of report writing.
Be;
1. Accurate;
2. Brief;
3. Clear, correct; and
4. Direct the reader to a solution.
If you do these the reader may not like the message, but the messenger wont get shot!
In circumstances that you describe I would specifically state that; X measurements were taken and the results were Y. The standard is Z and the results were:-
1. Below the standard and indicate that exposures were under control;
2. Below the standard, but observations indicate that exposures were not under control;
3. Above the standard and that exposures were not under control.
Because of these conditions I recommend a, b & c.
EG.
The exposures to xylene of 5 Persons working in the hand finishing section was measured using the procedure described in MDHS 70, see appendix a for complete details. Their results, see appendix 2 for complete details, ranged from 10 ppm to 90 ppm, (8 hour time weighted averages). Whilst these results are below the occupational exposure standard of 100 ppm (8 hour time weighted average) they do not show that exposures are being properly controlled. I believe this, because several work practices were seen, such as large pieces being left to dry in the open, xylene being decanted into buckets, amongst other examples of work practices, which could easily lead to the occupational exposure limit being exceeded. In this case I suggest that we carry out some on the floor training of both the supervisor and operatives and then repeat the exposure measurements.
I hope this helps.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.