Tag: OHS

Safety Glasses

Franklin Grima2 Comments

“In-Nuccalijiet”

The human eye is one of the most vulnerable and exposed organs in our body. Most of the other organs are protected behind the human skeleton, however, the eye only has the eyelids and the eyelashes as natural protection. In conjunction with our natural reflex to blink our eyelids protect our eyes from dust, wind, intense light and small flying objects such as insects.

However, this protection is natural and only protects against natural sources of harm. At the workplace, we have several industrial processes which bypass such natural protection due to their excessive speed, forces, radiation and/or light. It is often observed that grinding, rock breaking, metal work, polishing, lathework and other work processes which may create flying particles or intensive radiation/light (such as welding) are carried out without the required collective protection.

Usually, the first thing that comes to mind as protection for the eyes is safety glasses. However, as per the hierarchy of controls in health and safety, these are the last item to consider when implementing control measures. Safety glasses offer only individual protection and should they fail, they do not fail to safety, meaning the individual will be harmed. Other collective protective measures should be considered prior to the provision of safety glasses.

We’ll be using a pipe-cutting machine as an example to outline what some of these measures are.

  • Elimination: Is it possible to remove the process of using the pipe-cutting machine? For example by purchasing pipes of the correct length?
  • Substitution: Is it possible to change your equipment or process to use lesser hazardous equipment? Will a hand operated pipe cutter do the required work?
  • Engineering Control: Does the machine has the required guards to make sure that in case of failure the hazard does not reach the user? Can the machine be completely isolated from the worker by enclosing it?
  • Administration controls: Is the pipe cutting machine subject to a periodic maintenance regime? Have the personnel been trained on the use of this equipment? Are safety signs posted and rules implemented?

After considering the above, PPE is to always be implemented when using industrial high-risk equipment. All the above-mentioned measures reduce the risk significantly, but some residual risk will always remain as we can never be completely safe and this is mitigated by PPE, more specifically safety glasses in this case.

Different types of eye protection are available depending on the hazard one needs to protect against. Amongst others, these include safety glasses, safety goggles, hood and face shields.

The type of eye protection made available to the employees should be based on a risk assessment, based on manufacturer guidelines and certification.

The main types of certification for safety glasses are EN166 (European standard) and ANSI Z87.1 (American standard). Such certification would be outlined on the safety glasses frame and also on the lenses.

Quality & certification | Bollé Safety (bolle-safety.com)

For employees who wear prescriptive glasses, there are two options, either safety over-glasses or prescriptive safety glasses. Over glasses, as the name implies, are safety glasses which are designed to be worn over normal prescriptive glasses. Prescriptive safety glasses are specifically designed safety glasses which have integrated certified prescriptive lenses.

Regardless of the type of safety glasses chosen, it should always be ensured that these are manufactured to the previously mentioned standards. I have come across situations where suppliers provide frames which are certified but fitted with normal non-certified prescriptive lenses. Personally, I do not accept or recommend these types of glasses within my workplace and practice the rule “no certification means not allowed”.

For any equipment to be certified, this has to be manufactured according to a standard, as such the only local shops which provided these prescriptive safety glasses are PPE importers who order the glasses directly from the PPE manufacturer.

When a grinder wheel is spinning up to 2000 RPM, all safety features fail and it detaches, you want to be sure that the personal protective equipment provided to the employees is certified as safety equipment. PPE is always the last line of defence.

(Picture by Gillian S: Safety Glasses Save Lives (bulksafety.com))

Have a look at the safety glasses used by yourself or at the workplace, are these adequate and certified? Are the employees who use prescriptive glasses offered the same level of protection as all other employees? Are you making use of safety glasses to reduce the level of residual risk?

Management of Change

Franklin GrimaLeave a comment

“L-Immaniġjar tal-Bidla”

Articles, blogs, entrepreneurs and business leaders all state that change is required for a company to grow and maintain a competitive edge against its competitors. Changes may occur in the product being provided, the company’s branding, management of people and technological changes. Such changes can promote the company’s profits, increase employee engagement and growth, and lead to a safer workplace. However, they can also lead to uncertainty, additional financial costs, reduced performance and the introduction of new hazards and risks.

The effectiveness of a change depends entirely on the management of the said change.

Management of change is a process by which the changes are systematically analysed to identify inherent environmental, health, safety and business risks which may be introduced in the process of implementation. It is so important in health and safety that it is an identified clause required to be implemented for ISO45001 Occupational Health and Safety Management Systems certification. Furthermore, although not mentioned directly in legislation, the General Provisions for Health and Safety (S.L. 424.18), places an obligation on the employer to evaluate the risks arising from equipment, chemicals, work processes and the workplace. As such, it can also be said that a procedure for the management of change helps the employers stay compliant.

Management of the change process would usually involve the following steps:

  • A request for a change
  • An evaluation of risks and hazards related to the change
  • An evaluation of compatibility with current work equipment, infrastructure, chemicals and work processes.
  • Identification of any changes required
  • Training on the change and
  • Implementation

A concept which goes hand in hand with “Management of Change” is “Safety by Design”. Which, as defined by Worksafe is “the process of managing health and safety risks throughout the lifecycle of structures, plant, substance or other products”, perfectly illustrated in the picture below.

(WorkSafe New Zealand, 2018)

Should a change not be managed correctly, and safety not be given importance at the designed stage, the costs to remedy the risks introduced and the possibility of harm increase significantly.

When considering environmental, health and safety, quality and business requirements, change is not a matter of procuring and implementing equipment. It requires time, careful planning and proper evaluation. The personnel leading the change must make sure that the following pitfalls are avoided:

  • Lack of communication and consultation with the stakeholders who may be affected by the change
  • Tackling a big or several small changes all at once without the adequate resources
  • Think that the change will affect only its immediate surroundings, without giving due consideration to secondary equipment, processes, legislative and standard requirements.
  • Beliving that the change has been fully implemented, without proper long-term monitoring of its effectiveness.

In today’s fast-paced industry, change is no longer optional to stay ahead within your sector but is most often imposed by legislative changes, technology advancements and stakeholder requirements. As such, having a robust system to manage such changes is as important as any other day-to-day procedure required to keep the company afloat.

Out of sight, out of mind (heart)

Franklin GrimaLeave a comment

 Out of sight, out of mind“Il-bogħod mill-għajn, il-bogħod mil-qalb”

When I was young we used to play a game called “dahar ma’ dahar” (back to back) at school. We used to sit 5 kids in a row with papers attached to our back. The first kid would draw something on the back of the kid in front of him. The kid in front would in turn draw the same thing on the kid in front until all the kids draw the image.

The image always changed from one kid to the next. The purpose of this game was to teach us the importance of clear and correct communication and to always question where the information is coming from.

This is exactly what happens when a health and safety practitioner engaged in a company does not have a direct line of communication with senior management, the people who have the ultimate responsibility of health and safety and the ones who have the authority and power to implement change within a company.

The same would apply if the health and safety practitioner does not have a direct line of communication with the workforce. They would not be hearing the problems, concerns and good practices from the horse’s mouth but these would be passing through several lines of communication prior to being received by the health and safety practitioner, as such the practitioner may not be working with the correct information.

This may result in a situation where the correct and current information is out of sight from the employer, as such no action is taken on persisting health and safety issues.

The General Provision for Health and Safety at Work Places states that the employer must designate competent people to assist them in the undertaking of their health and safety duties. Although there is no mention of who this person is to report to, if this person is an employee ranking low on the company’s organisational chart when their message is passing through the different employees to arrive at its final destination to the managing director or CEO, their message will be tarnished with every other person’s opinion and personal/professional agenda along the way.

ISO45001, a health and safety management standard, requires organisations to hold management reviews so as to review the company’s health and safety management system. Several items are to be reviewed during this review, which include, opportunities, risks, legal compliance, trends in incidents, reports and communication from the workforce and continual improvement.

Such reviews ensure that management is never too distant from the reality of the health and safety culture within the company.

Appointing a competent person to assist you in fulfilling health and safety law requirements is a legal requirement. Most of the time, the responsibility of the same legislation lies with the employer.

Should employers feel comfortable that their competent person fulfilling the legal duties pertaining to their position as the employer, is answering to another or several other managers before they are aware of any item identified by the competent person? Should they consider holding monthly management reviews so as to ensure that they are always aware of the current situation of health and safety within their company? Wouldn’t this ensure that health and safety are given the attention required and that the current level of health and safety within the organisation is improved?