Candidates Observation Sheet GP

Introduction including overview of area inspected and activities taking place :

On the above date at the stated location a health and safety inspection was carried out by the named person. The area in question is a designated recycling centre which also houses an integral hazardous waste materials store which houses wastes including batteries, solvents, acids and aerosols from site processes and an office. The centre operates on a 24/7 three shift basis, employing 7 operatives and 1 manager. The centre processes approximately 4500 thousand tons of waste on an annual basis and activities include baling and compacting waste streams which is carried out by 2 static bin lift compactors, 1 horizontal baler and 1 vertical baler. There is a high volume of FLT and HGV traffic involved in processing and transporting the waste. The site has a zero to landfill accreditation and strictly follows their duty of care implementing the waste hierarchy control measures.

Whilst many good practices were found to be in place there were also numerous minor issues that whilst independently do not constitute major concerns, collectively if not addressed could constitute the beginning of significant failures to the sites Health and Safety Policy.

Executive Summary :

During the above mentioned Health and Safety inspection whilst many good practices were observed numerous Health and Safety issues were found that require immediate actions. These actions are a legal requirement under the employers duties as stated in The Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, section 2(3).

It is strongly advised that recommendations listed receive swift actions as a failure to do so may result in civil or criminal prosecution. Potential consequences include, moral (accident rates / industrial disease and ill health), legal (prosecutions / civil actions – compensation claims) and financial (direct and indirect ) implications with some possible scenarios being called to magistrates court which carries a £20,000 6 months imprisonment penalty or possibly crown court where this increases up to 2 years imprisonment and unlimited fines.

Many of the issues uncovered were as a result of site policies and procedures not being effectively communicated, a key recommendation is to review communication methods and training policies in order to correct the issues found during this inspection.

Main findings of the inspection :

Physical Hazards:

A number of physical hazards were found including slippery floors, trailing cables, unsafe furniture, faulty IT and missing safety signage. Some of these are easy fixes such as refresher training and tool box talks but others will require time and investment such as extra drainage.

In contravention to legislation :

HASWA 1974 : (2)Without prejudice to the generality of an employer’s duty under the preceding subsection, the matters to which that duty extends include in particular— (a)the provision and maintenance of plant and systems of work that are, so far as is reasonably practicable, safe and without risks to health;

Transport Hazards:

Good findings were that all FLT drivers had received above and beyond minimum training requirements, however due to the volume of traffic and pedestrians a transport risk assessment and segregation plan is urgently required.

Machinery Hazards:

Lock off procedure was not being followed, retraining, possible disciplinary advised. Machines had pure assessments in place but issues were still found.

In contravention to legislation :
HASAW 1974 : 2 2 Without prejudice to the generality of an employer’s duty under the preceding subsection, the matters to which that duty extends include in particular— (c)the provision of such information, instruction, training and supervision as is necessary to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health and safety at work of his employees;

HASWA 1974 : 7
(a) to take reasonable care for the health and safety of himself and of other persons who may be affected by his acts or omissions at work; and

Electrical Hazards:

In contravention to legislation :
Electricity at work regs

Kettle n the office had no PAT and was removed during inspection. Damage socket on FLT charger was also locked off during inspection. Location of electrical panels next to high volume of traffic is not ideal.

Biological Hazards/COSHH:

Drainage from the centre was found to be inadequate and in a poor state of hygiene. COSHH cupboard found unlocked. MSDS sheets missing and personnel not adequately vaccinated.

In contravention to legislation :

HASAWA 1974
(2)Without prejudice to the generality of an employer’s duty under the preceding subsection, the matters to which that duty extends include in particular— (b)arrangements for ensuring, so far as is reasonably practicable, safety and absence of risks to health in connection with the use, handling, storage and transport of articles and substances; COSHH Regs 2002 (Storage of dangerous chemicals)

Conclusions :

On the whole the area had many good Health and Safety practices, however there were areas that were either missing appropriate policies or procedures or policies and procedures were in place but not being followed. The companies Health and Safety Policy is in place to both meet the requirements of the employers Health and Safety 1974 at Work act sections 2 and 3 responsibilities as well as :

Moral reasons :

Accident rates / industrial disease / ill health
All of the above are key drivers in promoting a positive health & safety culture across site.

Legal reasons :

Prosecutions / civil actions / claims
Should an employee have an accident due to defective equipment the company could ne in breach of their duty of care if found that a duty of care was owed, this duty was breached and that it resulted in injury or loss.

Financial reasons :

Direct and indirect cost (sick pay / temp labour / time)
If an employee was injured replacement labour would have to be financed, if machinery was damaged this coul also result in significant down time and heavily damage the business financially.

A suggestion is made to review the whole Health and Safety Management system using a plan do check act approach incorporating looking at the Health and Safety policies and procedures, targets and objectives, roles and responsibilities, implementation and operation, checking, auditing and reviewing.

Recommendations – include as a table in the following format:

Priority definitions :

1 = High 2 = Medium 3 = Low

Recommendation
Likely resource implications
Priority
Target date
Review Health and Safety policies and procedures
Time and effort

1 month from report
Transport risk assessment to be carried out and actions implemented

Time and effort from in house personnel to carry this out.
Civils cost to be confirmed for barrier system. (Approx £2K for segregation barriers) 1
1 month from
the report
Implement weekly inspections/audits for all machinery.
In house, minimal resource.(Time)

1 month from
the report
PAT register to be created

In house, minimal resource.(Time)

1 month from
the report
Add battery chargers and leads to FLT daily check sheet

In house, minimal resource. (Time)

1 month from
the report
Increase drainage in recycling centre and implement cleaning schedule

External contract for civils, price to be confirmed. (Approx £4K for additional drainage). 2
2 month from
the report
COSHH audits to be set up and carried out
In house, minimal cost. (Time)

3 month from
the report
DSE assessment to be carried out in office
In house, minimal cost. (Time)

3 month from
the report
Adopt medical screening programme and also look at vaccination requirements possibilities In house, minimal cost, occupational Health. (Time)

3 month from
the report

APPENDIX 6
GC3 Marking Matrix

For each element, 0 marks should be awarded if that aspect of the report fails to meet the criteria for 1 mark.