Extensive risk assesment

[Safety Steve]

..... nope, checked it again and still sounds like 'I know what my client needs' not 'I know; my client wants....'

 

I am just a client advisor listening here - which bit did I get wrong?

[detritus21]

If you don't understand the processes or risk assessment may be you should ask and discuss what is acceptable and then come to a compromise over what you and the contractor think is acceptable rather than not understanding whilst thinking you know everything. Put simply If you don't know the roles or processes further dialogue with those who do would be best rather than being a know all. This applies to both parties.

[Safety Steve]

Lets remind ourselves of the OP....

 

I'm having problems getting on to a site. They say my risk assesmnet and method statement is light on content and isn't robust enough and should have more content.

I use the Arb association ones and have had them accepted everywhere else.

1-Does anyone have a seriously thorough RAMS I can copy?

2- Can anyone recommend a health and safety advisor that's is an arb specialist I can use?

 

Thanks

 

The way I see it, it might pay dividends to do what the client wants in this instance.... Of course you can stand your ground and sling some mud around at the same time. Tell you what, stamp yer foot as well - probably make you feel better. But until you come up with the goods .... well you know..... clients eh! Who needs them.

[detritus21]

Ah but have they said what they are really after. Also the aa stuff is used as a basis for chas registration. If it I good enough for chas should it not be good enough for the hs on site.

[detritus21]

Also I wasn't saying about standing your ground if it was aimed at me. I was saying discussions should occur and compromises should be possible I there is a lack of understanding from the main contractor.

[Safety Steve]

Ah but have they said what they are really after. Also the aa stuff is used as a basis for chas registration. If it I good enough for chas should it not be good enough for the hs on site.

 

in a word - no.

 

Chas is a pre contract process designed to make my life easier. It was established by local authorities to reduce the burden of duplicate document checking by the public sector, thus wasting taxpayer £'s.

 

It does not replace the need to check specific work safety arrangements and or dynamic assessments for a particular job. It is not a 'one stop shop', it is not a 'safe to work' license, it is not an assurance of safety performance...... I could go on, but you get my drift?

 

Chas also, (note the word also) can help contractors get their house in order regarding health and safety - but don't for one moment think it is all you have to do.

[Safety Steve]

Also I wasn't saying about standing your ground if it was aimed at me. I was saying discussions should occur and compromises should be possible I there is a lack of understanding from the main contractor.

 

Then the main contractor better learn my language because I am not about to learn theirs..... (ps please give us some credit for our ability to speak and our ability to listen and understand)

[Gray git]

Am I am laughing at another stereotype here?? This belongs on Only Fools and Horses....

There are several reasons for bringing documents with you and having them available to be read onsite prior to and during the work. You were in the wrong not to bring them. If 'he' (the obvious 'fool' who didn't understand you) had called for my input I would have called your bluff regarding stand down - I suggest others do not follow your lead on this unless you have established a cordon or 'temporary factory' that is under your full access control and demarcation and that this is contractually bound.

 

'They don't understand us......' and 'it does not fit the (clients) required format' Erm.... try thinking who is the lead responsibility on this work environment (whether it is a forest, wood, park, street, garden or wherever)- I'll give you a clue, it isn't likely to be you.

 

If I don't understand your processes or paperwork, or if I don't think it is good enough (that's right - you heard me) then you had better change it - or you are stopped at the gate and turned away - your loss, unless you have inconvenienced me then I'll chase your tail a bit.

 

What you misunderstood is that the disc contained all the staff certs, 5staff x about 20 each, cosh assessment prob 20pages, generic risk assessment 30+ pages maintenance records 30+ pages so over 200pages to be printed off for them to not look at. Offered to provide these pre start but no informed them I'd be abiding by there own policy of not printing documents but providing stuff electronically, but he forgot his laptop......

What is important to have available in paper format and we have is ssra and Ss method statement which forms part of the pre start briefing.

It's no bluff about charging for being stood down with no notice and I have done it and got payed.

I prefer to work in sink with clients but when a little Hitler out to make his mark with the first contractors on site saying we must fit guards to the exposed cutting blade's on chainsaw and can't use chippers because it throws debris with out dust suppression obviously doesn't understand what he's talking about.

We frequently specify that our working area is under our control and out of bounds to anyone ells on site which actually go's down well with most sites we work on.

[detritus21]

I am giving credit but there are many who won't listen or ask if there is a problem. You misinterpreted my comment about Chas that the AA risk assessment is acceptable within the Chas scheme. If it is acceptable within the process why can it not be acceptable to the contractor. Provided the risk assessment has the appropriate info in it and has not been used as a tick box, which it can be, then it should be acceptable as a format.

 

I am not saying it is the only way to do it as mine are different as I found it too easy to use the aa ones in a tick box way. I have a fairly robust approach to hs for risk and method statements and would happily discuss any problems with the sites hs officer and amend if justified.

 

I am just being devils advocate to highlight a need for dialogue of an appropriate form to reach the required outcome.

[Gray git]

Dialogue between client and contractors is the way forward and compromise and amendments are the result but when you ask why they require a certain amendment which wouldn't actually change the outcome and the reason is simply 'because I think so' with no back up sometimes you have to stand your ground but in a positive calm way, no shouting stamping feet or toys out the pram but providing evidence to support your assessment.

 

To the op ask the client what further information they require and if it's a reasonable request fine.