Categories
Uncategorized

Norse takes over Rochford waste and recycling contract

MRW Norse takes over Rochford waste and recycling contract Council forms joint venture to provide household waste, recycling collection and street cleansing services after 14 years with Suez Norse takes over Rochford waste and recycling contract Mark Smulian Read More

Categories
Uncategorized

WRAP’s circular economy competition awards grants in different regions of the world

WRAP’s first International Grants competition, The International Circular Plastics Flagship Competition – developed and delivered in partnership with UKRI – has awarded funding of £1.2 million to six UK based innovators to work with international partners to tackle plastic related issues in India, Chile, South Africa and Kenya. With Earth Overshoot Day highlighting the state […]

Categories
Uncategorized

Suez hails reuse business in sustainability report

MRW Suez hails reuse business in sustainability report Report shows increased reuse and donations as company awaits outcome of Competition & Markets Authority investigation Suez hails reuse business in sustainability report Mark Smulian Read More

Categories
Uncategorized

Biffa extends takeover deadline amid tax row

MRW Biffa extends takeover deadline amid tax row Annual results show record profit, says chief executive Michael Topham, as bid from Energy Capital Partners still on the table Biffa extends takeover deadline amid tax row Mark Smulian Read More

Categories
Uncategorized

Getting the most out of occupational hygiene surveys

A good occupational hygiene survey should assist you in providing an accurate assessment of exposure to health hazards in your workplace. In order to achieve this, you will also need to make sure that the consultant has all the relevant information they will need to recognise, evaluate and control the risks to health in your workplace. This short guide has been designed by SOCOTEC to help you plan and design a valuable survey in partnership with a qualified occupational hygienist. It also provides some guidance on the next steps you should consider following the survey.

Step 1 – Identify the Hazard(s)

Document the hazard, who has raised it and discuss with workforce, supervisors, site EHS, any other stakeholders (e.g. subcontractors, shared site tenants etc.). Include details of perceived exposures and concerns, known/suspected sources, peak exposure times and events, which shifts affected (including start and finish times), job roles affected, current controls in place including any procedures, training.

At this stage, the stakeholder may have useful suggestions for improved controls.

Where possible, review any relevant material safety data sheets (MSDS) and/or any previous surveys associated with this hazard for pertinent information
Document/record details of initial discussion and information gathering.

Step 2 – Plan and Design in Co-operation with Occupational Hygienist

Where further investigation is deemed necessary, a suitable site representative should share documents with an occupational hygienist who can assist in survey design and scope and propose an exposure monitoring regime deemed to be a good representation(s) of the activity/hazard of concern. This may also involve pre-site meeting or calls
Consult the relevant stakeholders again regarding the proposed exposure monitoring survey and adjust the scope if required after discussions
Agree date(s) and times for exposure monitoring visits to be carried out. When all in agreement that hazards can be effectively assessed, schedule an appropriate site representative to be present during the occupational hygienist’s visits (someone who has been involved in the initial planning phases and is invested in the quality of the assessments)
Individuals to be monitored can also be specified and informed at this stage
One or two days prior to agreed visit date(s), the occupational hygienist (OH) will confirm with the site contact that all measures are in place to facilitate the survey as per scoping phase. OH will provide RAMS for visit.

Step 3 – Survey Day – On Site

On arrival at site, the occupational hygienist will complete relevant inductions, permit to work (PTW) and liaise with site representatives, relevant stakeholders and any individuals to be monitored
During monitoring, OH should be provided access to suitably observe work processes/practices and current control effectiveness. They should be allowed to record details of any discussions with operatives which may be included in report
Exclusions/deviations from planned scope will be recorded
Prior to leaving site, OH will provide summary of any immediate risks, initial findings and proposed controls. Any exclusions from monitoring scope will also be communicated.

Step 4 – Review the Report

Approx. 20 working days (this will vary per report), OH will prepare and submit report of monitoring survey to requested recipients. This will include observations of activities, comments from site operatives, results and assessment of exposure/controls. The report will also outline recommendations for further controls.
Recipient should review report and respond to OH if any amendments are required.

Step 5 – Discuss, Identify and Implement ACTIONS

The report recipient should discuss, propose and agree actions with all stakeholders at the site based on report findings, recommendations and feedback
Implement your agreed actions designed to PREVENT or CONTROL exposures.

Step 6 – EVALUATE – Was this successful?

At this stage, a lot of time, effort and potentially money has been invested into this process, but how can we demonstrate a positive outcome?

EFFECTIVENESS REVIEWS – Discuss and Record:

Has the risk been reduced to a residual level?
Can we quantify a significant reduction in exposure and is further monitoring/sampling required to demonstrate this?
Do all involved parties feel risk has been sufficiently reduced and the actions/controls deemed suitable?
Can exposure be reduced further still and is further action required?
For a given hazard, unless it has been removed completely, it is likely that exposure to this hazard can be further reduced. The outcome of this process should directly inform the next stage.

Step 7 – Continual Improvement

Continual improvement should be your aim: regularly review/audit your actions and controls and audit the stakeholder’s adoption of agreed actions or controls.

Questions for your reviews:

Is there adequate enforcement of implemented actions?
Is the maintenance of controls adequate and recorded?
Have there been any changes to process/work practices, additional activities?
Are new staff aware/trained at induction stage?
Is staff refresher training/required?

Keep detailed records regarding this process (steps 1-7) and use this to inform and plan any further monitoring, evaluation of controls and continual improvement of exposure to health hazards in your workplace.

What makes us susceptible to burnout?

In this episode  of the Safety & Health Podcast, ‘Burnout, stress and being human’, Heather Beach is joined by Stacy Thomson to discuss burnout, perfectionism and how to deal with burnout as an individual, as management and as an organisation.

We provide an insight on how to tackle burnout and why mental health is such a taboo subject, particularly in the workplace.

The post Getting the most out of occupational hygiene surveys appeared first on SHP – Health and Safety News, Legislation, PPE, CPD and Resources.

Read More

Categories
Uncategorized

B&M fined £1m after electrician sustains serious burns in warehouse explosion

A retail company and an electrical contracting company have been fined after an electrician suffered serious burns to 15 per cent of his body when he was caught in an explosion at a warehouse in Liverpool.

The electrician was using a metal spanner to repair an electrical fault at B&M Retail Ltd warehouse, in Speke on 22 September 2018. The spanner he was using came into contact with a live busbar (metallic strip) linked to the power distribution causing an electrical explosion.

The 35-year-old man sustained serious injuries which included burns to his arms, hands, thighs, legs, and face. He was placed in an induced coma for two weeks and had to undergo several skin grafts. As a result of the incident the electrician was unable to work for five months.

The victim said: “I am very conscious of the scars and always think people are staring at me or talking about me behind my back.

“To me, my arms look like Freddy Kruger’s from Nightmare on Elm Street.

“I now can’t play with my little boys as much as I used to and I’m worried about hurting myself, and they are worried about hurting me. I have paranoia of being touched.

“I do worry about the future as I know the pain will never go away and might get worse, leaving me unable to work and support my family.”

A HSE investigation found that the victim, who was employed by Daker Ltd, had been attempting to connect a generator to B&M’s Low Voltage supply in order to allow B&M to operate some of its core site functions whilst high voltage maintenance was being undertaken. This work was complex involving several contractors and required co-ordination of different working parties with specific time limited requirements. There was insufficient planning between parties beforehand including who was in charge of each site, coordination of work and exchange of relevant documentation.

B&M failed to appoint a suitably competent person to plan and carry out the work to connect temporary generators to their distribution board at the premises.

According to HSE, Electrical contractors Daker Ltd.’s work methods fell well below the required standards. Electrical work commenced without proper planning and the power supply to the circuit was not stopped prior to the incident and live working was allowed to take place, this meant that the power supply could be switched on or off at any point, putting workers at risk of electric shock.

B&M Retail Ltd of The Vault, Dakota Drive, Estuary Commerce Park, Speke, Liverpool pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2 (1) and Section 3 (1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. At Liverpool Crown Court, the company was fined £1,000,000 and ordered to pay costs of £4,978.

Daker Ltd of Stewart House of Tonge Moor Road, Bolton pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2 (1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. The company was fined £100.

Speaking after the hearing, HSE Inspector Roger Clarke said: “This incident has had life-changing consequences on the victim and his family.

“It could have been avoided if the companies involved had taken the time to appropriately plan and coordinate tasks to ensure the circuit was dead, eliminating the risk of electrocution to workers.

“Working with electricity is a high-risk activity and safety must be a priority.”

Why should you subscribe to the SHP newsletter?

Do you want the very latest health and safety news, product launches, job listings and expert opinions sent straight to your inbox daily?

The SHP newsletter is essential reading – sign up today to get your hands on all this!

The post B&M fined £1m after electrician sustains serious burns in warehouse explosion appeared first on SHP – Health and Safety News, Legislation, PPE, CPD and Resources.

Read More

Categories
Uncategorized

Fashion sector faces probe over recycling claims

MRW Fashion sector faces probe over recycling claims Competition and Markets Authority to examine Asos, Boohoo and Asda Fashion sector faces probe over recycling claims Mark Smulian Read More

Categories
Uncategorized

Director trio sued over £320m waste project losses

MRW Director trio sued over £320m waste project losses M+W sues over losses on food and municipal waste and gasification plants Director trio sued over £320m waste project losses Mark Smulian Read More

Categories
Uncategorized

Valpak predicts plastics packaging recycling record

MRW Valpak predicts plastics packaging recycling record Second-quarter figure sets record according to compliance scheme Valpak predicts plastics packaging recycling record Mark Smulian Read More

Categories
Uncategorized

Council to collect food waste by bike

MRW Council to collect food waste by bike Herefordshire seeks provider for venture as cabinet member expects ‘ours to be the very first council in the country’ Council to collect food waste by bike Mark Smulian Read More

Generated by Feedzy