Extensive risk assesment

[gensetsteve]

H&s has done more to hold up the job than scargil and the unions ever did. It's unusualto see paper pushers going out of business. It's normally working companies not getting paid by the big boys. There seems to be a return to the culture of not paying small businesses in the hope they go bust. I was not a Blair fan but he did seem to get on top of this problem for a couple of years.

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

Occasionally the AA system is challenged by H&S 'bods' as it doesn't include the standard 'risk evaluation' process, i.e. how hazardous is the activity prior to controls 'HIGH' and then afterwards 'MODERATE/LOW' (residual risk). This is largely academic as all the stuff on there has potential to do you harm and the controls are 'as much as you can reasonably' do anyway.

 

Make sure the site specific risk assessment is presented with a copy of the generic risk assessments and perhaps supply copies of relevant AFAG / FISA leaflets as appendices, and maybe even copies of the relevant NPTC assessment schedules, and hopefully that will be enough paperwork to satisfy their needs

 

After having said that, IF it is a particularly tricky or unusual job, you might want to consider engaging a suitably qualified AND (industry) experience H&S advisor to assist.

 

Good luck..

Paul

[Andymacp]

Thanks for the replies, very useful.

The job isn't tricky at all really standard stuff.

I think cause it's a flagship project there keen to have everything spot on.

I think the problem is there not taking the generic into consideration and just looking at the site specific!

I'll send the Afag and the schedules.

They keep asking if I have a health and safety advisor so might be paying for one and just add it to the bill.

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

They keep asking if I have a health and safety advisor so might be paying for one and just add it to the bill.

 

Increasingly standard protocol for civil engineering / construction works as the Management (of H&S) Regs dictate it...or at least that's a simple interpretation of such.

 

Ideally ensure they are registered here The Occupational Safety and Health Consultants Register (OSHCR)

 

Cheers, n good luck..

Paul

[brisbane trees]

extra content I needed they said a bit more colour and some check boxes.

 

Yes, colour is very important. All risk assessments should contain red, green and a bit of blue.

 

The red indicates the danger you want to avoid, green shows you are a tree expert and blue, well, blue just goes really nice against the black ink.

 

Checkboxes are also known to be vital to risk assessment because they provide such nice alternatives to just reading all those hard paragraphs with big tree words.

 

It also helps to draw a sun in the left hand top corner of every page, and don't forget to draw a smiley face on it.

[Adrian cook]

You could just contact Paul (AATeccie) if you don't know, that's Mr Elcoat himself. Not sure if he wants me to put his contact details in here as he hasn't offered them up. But you won't get a better person on board. Just google Elcoat Ltd and your prayers will be answered.

[john k]

Yes, colour is very important. All risk assessments should contain red, green and a bit of blue.

Amber. Don't forget amber. Without amber it's not a proper "traffic light" system. In my experience these people absolutely love traffic lights because they can understand them without reading anything at all.

 

Uncontrolled risks are always red or amber, then they magically change to green when you apply control measures. A column of green on the right hand side of the page and all your worries are gone.

 

Some of them like numbers too, because putting a numerical value on something makes it feel reassuringly precise. Uncontrolled risks always have scary big numbers, but these become friendly little numbers after you apply control measures.

 

If you include traffic lights and numbers you can't possibly go wrong.

Edited May 2, 2015 by john k

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

No good for this task since a paying job depends upon it, but at some point I'd like to write a complete load of old tosh (supported by traffic light colours, tables, charts, numerical values etc) and a serious piece of written work and see which one passes muster!

[Paul Melarange]

You could just contact Paul (AATeccie) if you don't know, that's Mr Elcoat himself. Not sure if he wants me to put his contact details in here as he hasn't offered them up. But you won't get a better person on board. Just google Elcoat Ltd and your prayers will be answered.

 

I'm not sure if I miss read this post but, just to avoid confusion, Paul AATeccie) is Paul Smith (Technical officer for the Arb Association).

 

Paul Elcoat is someone entirely different. He is a business consultant that is employed by the association to conduct some of the approved contractor assessments.

 

Both Pauls are very good at what they do and top blokes 👍

[Lee Winger]

Yes, colour is very important. All risk assessments should contain red, green and a bit of blue.

 

The red indicates the danger you want to avoid, green shows you are a tree expert and blue, well, blue just goes really nice against the black ink.

 

Checkboxes are also known to be vital to risk assessment because they provide such nice alternatives to just reading all those hard paragraphs with big tree words.

 

It also helps to draw a sun in the left hand top corner of every page, and don't forget to draw a smiley face on it.

 

 

Up here on the Fraser Coast we say sod risk assessments