:p
But seriously, I'm looking into this sort of thing for our little group
(unfortunately we have to had over risk assessments to the powers that be,
or otherwise no dice).
> :p
> But seriously, I'm looking into this sort of thing for our little group (unfortunately we have to had over risk assessments to the powers that be, or otherwise no dice).
The Loughborough uni group. No, we haven't done anything except a standard
fire thing. All that meant was we got some fire extinguishers!
On Aug 30, 2012 10:46 PM, "Dominic Morrow" <nottingh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 30 Aug 2012, at 22:45, Greg Milway <g.milway...@student.lboro.ac.uk>
> wrote:
> > :p
> > But seriously, I'm looking into this sort of thing for our little group
> (unfortunately we have to had over risk assessments to the powers that be,
> or otherwise no dice).
> :p
> But seriously, I'm looking into this sort of thing for our little group
> (unfortunately we have to had over risk assessments to the powers that be,
> or otherwise no dice).
> We employ common sense and expect others to do the same.
> On Aug 30, 2012 10:45 PM, "Greg Milway" <g.milway...@student.lboro.ac.uk>
> wrote:
>> :p
>> But seriously, I'm looking into this sort of thing for our little group
>> (unfortunately we have to had over risk assessments to the powers that be,
>> or otherwise no dice).
I used to work in a factory and had the pleasure of doing some of the auditing... basically if you are part of the uni, they should be able to tell you what you need to do and have a manual with the basics some where within it... but most of it will however, be common sense, they could make you write something up, i.e keeping walk ways clear of cables, safety goggles to be worn when using equipment and signs stating this near machinery etc
> I used to work in a factory and had the pleasure of doing some of the
> auditing... basically if you are part of the uni, they should be able to
> tell you what you need to do and have a manual with the basics some where
> within it... but most of it will however, be common sense, they could make
> you write something up, i.e keeping walk ways clear of cables, safety
> goggles to be worn when using equipment and signs stating this near
> machinery etc
Well, start with the Hackspace Manual and go from there. Does the Uni
require a risk assessment before allowing students to leave the building,
cross the road and catch a bus? What level of insanity are we looking at
here?
On Aug 30, 2012 10:58 PM, "Wendy" <missgent1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I used to work in a factory and had the pleasure of doing some of the
> auditing... basically if you are part of the uni, they should be able to
> tell you what you need to do and have a manual with the basics some where
> within it... but most of it will however, be common sense, they could make
> you write something up, i.e keeping walk ways clear of cables, safety
> goggles to be worn when using equipment and signs stating this near
> machinery etc
when these people get picky they really do, the way we have all seen things change is comical to say the least... and you definitely can't cross roads ;)
We're fine for "general" use of the lab that we've been promised, but we'll
need our own risk assessments for soldering, power tools, etc, so we can
papercraft to our hearts content, but the moment we want to make some
pretty LED stuff, gotta have the paperwork :/
On 30 August 2012 23:26, Dominic Morrow <nottingh...@gmail.com> wrote:
Ok, so you need to do risk assessments for soldering. Doesn't sound too
difficult. First google hit gives you exactly what you need. Who'd, have
thought it? :-)
On Aug 31, 2012 2:13 PM, "Greg Milway" <g.milway...@student.lboro.ac.uk>
wrote:
> We're fine for "general" use of the lab that we've been promised, but
> we'll need our own risk assessments for soldering, power tools, etc, so we
> can papercraft to our hearts content, but the moment we want to make some
> pretty LED stuff, gotta have the paperwork :/
> On 30 August 2012 23:26, Dominic Morrow <nottingh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I've done a number of RAs for events. I've also done a butt tonne for
>> work
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> On 30 Aug 2012, at 23:23, Martin Raynsford <msraynsf...@googlemail.com>
>> wrote:
>> I did a laser risk assessment for DMMF its a good place to start for that
>> On 30 August 2012 23:15, Michael Erskine <mse...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>> Well, we're not an employer so that won't apply.
I'd already found that. I was just hoping that you guys would be able to
provide examples geared more towards a less formal situation that you might
find in a hackspace.
On 31 August 2012 20:34, Michael Erskine <mse...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Ok, so you need to do risk assessments for soldering. Doesn't sound too
> difficult. First google hit gives you exactly what you need. Who'd, have
> thought it? :-)
> On Aug 31, 2012 2:13 PM, "Greg Milway" <g.milway...@student.lboro.ac.uk>
> wrote:
>> We're fine for "general" use of the lab that we've been promised, but
>> we'll need our own risk assessments for soldering, power tools, etc, so we
>> can papercraft to our hearts content, but the moment we want to make some
>> pretty LED stuff, gotta have the paperwork :/
>> On 30 August 2012 23:26, Dominic Morrow <nottingh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I've done a number of RAs for events. I've also done a butt tonne for
>>> work
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> On 30 Aug 2012, at 23:23, Martin Raynsford <msraynsf...@googlemail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> I did a laser risk assessment for DMMF its a good place to start for that
>>> On 30 August 2012 23:15, Michael Erskine <mse...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>> Well, we're not an employer so that won't apply.
Risk Assessment can be quite straighforward and doesn't necessarily need heaps of documentation. The main thing is to document it so that you can prove you acted reasonably (should an accident occur!). There's no law that lays down the method so here is one way to skin this particular cat:
Make a list of the hazards. Could include fire, explosion, burns, entrapment of body parts, crushing, etc.
For each hazard: - Decide the potential harm on some scale. Typically you could use abstract values of intensity (low/medium/high) or numeric scale (say 1 to 5). - Decide the possibility (chance) of it occurring. Again, can be low/medium/high or a numeric scale. Now multiply the numbers or use a matrix for the abstract values to reach an overall risk level. If you are working in numbers the result might be in the range 1 to 25. In abstracts it could be insignificant/very low/low/medium/high/very high, etc.
Now decide what (if anything) you need to do. This stage is called 'control measures'. If the result was insignificant or a low number, you might say 'no further action'. If it is medium level you probably need to do something. If it is high/very high, you'll definiely need to do something.
If you need to take action, you select one or more control measures from a hierarchical list. The acronym ERICPD is commonly used. Start at the top and work down until you reach a practicable solution. Here's some idea how this works, using 'road traffic accident' as the hazard.
E = Eliminate - turn the road into a pedestrianised area. R = Reduce - Introduce a speed limit. Might still be a collision but death is less likely. I = Isolate - Use barriers, subways, pedestrian bridges, etc. to ensure separation/isolation. C = Control - Traffic lights. P = Personal Protective Equipment - Pedestrians wear something light/bright, motorists wear seatbelts, cyclists wear helmets. D = Discipline - Education, training (driver training, cycling proficiency) and we all learned to look both ways before crossing didn't we?
I spend a lot of time telling people not to go straight for PPE or discipline - start at the top. Remember it's a hierarchy.
Last step: Re-run the assessment of overall risk to check that your control measures have (or will) indeed reduced the risk. Make sure all this is documented. Job done (though you should also review periodically)
There is more information on the websites of HSE, IOSH and NEBOSH.
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 6:41 PM, Nev <nevdav...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Risk Assessment can be quite straighforward and doesn't necessarily need
> heaps of documentation. The main thing is to document it so that you can
> prove you acted reasonably (should an accident occur!). There's no law that
> lays down the method so here is one way to skin this particular cat:
> Make a list of the hazards. Could include fire, explosion, burns,
> entrapment of body parts, crushing, etc.
> For each hazard:
> - Decide the potential harm on some scale. Typically you could use abstract
> values of intensity (low/medium/high) or numeric scale (say 1 to 5).
> - Decide the possibility (chance) of it occurring. Again, can be
> low/medium/high or a numeric scale.
> Now multiply the numbers or use a matrix for the abstract values to reach an
> overall risk level. If you are working in numbers the result might be in
> the range 1 to 25. In abstracts it could be insignificant/very
> low/low/medium/high/very high, etc.
> Now decide what (if anything) you need to do. This stage is called 'control
> measures'. If the result was insignificant or a low number, you might say
> 'no further action'. If it is medium level you probably need to do
> something. If it is high/very high, you'll definiely need to do something.
> If you need to take action, you select one or more control measures from a
> hierarchical list. The acronym ERICPD is commonly used. Start at the top
> and work down until you reach a practicable solution. Here's some idea how
> this works, using 'road traffic accident' as the hazard.
> E = Eliminate - turn the road into a pedestrianised area.
> R = Reduce - Introduce a speed limit. Might still be a collision but death
> is less likely.
> I = Isolate - Use barriers, subways, pedestrian bridges, etc. to ensure
> separation/isolation.
> C = Control - Traffic lights.
> P = Personal Protective Equipment - Pedestrians wear something light/bright,
> motorists wear seatbelts, cyclists wear helmets.
> D = Discipline - Education, training (driver training, cycling proficiency)
> and we all learned to look both ways before crossing didn't we?
> I spend a lot of time telling people not to go straight for PPE or
> discipline - start at the top. Remember it's a hierarchy.
> Last step: Re-run the assessment of overall risk to check that your control
> measures have (or will) indeed reduced the risk.
> Make sure all this is documented.
> Job done (though you should also review periodically)
> There is more information on the websites of HSE, IOSH and NEBOSH.
> The thing that always puzzles me about risk assessments is : what
> happens if you don't identify a risk ? Are you liable for for lack of
> knowledge ?
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 6:41 PM, Nev <nevdav...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Risk Assessment can be quite straighforward and doesn't necessarily need
> > heaps of documentation. The main thing is to document it so that you can
> > prove you acted reasonably (should an accident occur!). There's no law
> that
> > lays down the method so here is one way to skin this particular cat:
> > Make a list of the hazards. Could include fire, explosion, burns,
> > entrapment of body parts, crushing, etc.
> > For each hazard:
> > - Decide the potential harm on some scale. Typically you could use
> abstract
> > values of intensity (low/medium/high) or numeric scale (say 1 to 5).
> > - Decide the possibility (chance) of it occurring. Again, can be
> > low/medium/high or a numeric scale.
> > Now multiply the numbers or use a matrix for the abstract values to
> reach an
> > overall risk level. If you are working in numbers the result might be in
> > the range 1 to 25. In abstracts it could be insignificant/very
> > low/low/medium/high/very high, etc.
> > Now decide what (if anything) you need to do. This stage is called
> 'control
> > measures'. If the result was insignificant or a low number, you might
> say
> > 'no further action'. If it is medium level you probably need to do
> > something. If it is high/very high, you'll definiely need to do
> something.
> > If you need to take action, you select one or more control measures from
> a
> > hierarchical list. The acronym ERICPD is commonly used. Start at the
> top
> > and work down until you reach a practicable solution. Here's some idea
> how
> > this works, using 'road traffic accident' as the hazard.
> > E = Eliminate - turn the road into a pedestrianised area.
> > R = Reduce - Introduce a speed limit. Might still be a collision but
> death
> > is less likely.
> > I = Isolate - Use barriers, subways, pedestrian bridges, etc. to ensure
> > separation/isolation.
> > C = Control - Traffic lights.
> > P = Personal Protective Equipment - Pedestrians wear something
> light/bright,
> > motorists wear seatbelts, cyclists wear helmets.
> > D = Discipline - Education, training (driver training, cycling
> proficiency)
> > and we all learned to look both ways before crossing didn't we?
> > I spend a lot of time telling people not to go straight for PPE or
> > discipline - start at the top. Remember it's a hierarchy.
> > Last step: Re-run the assessment of overall risk to check that your
> control
> > measures have (or will) indeed reduced the risk.
> > Make sure all this is documented.
> > Job done (though you should also review periodically)
> > There is more information on the websites of HSE, IOSH and NEBOSH.
I once went to a prestigious barbeque, part of the events at a Henley
boating rally.
There was a risk assessment sellotaped to the marquee wall - most
comprehensive, went into all the common risks and some of the less likely
ones.
However it didn't foresee the half-wit who was running the barbeque, who
collected up all the styrofoam food containers and plastic drinks glasses
in a black bin liner at the end of the evening, then proceeded to burn them
on the barbeque.
The black acrid smoke was unbearable and we had to evacuate the area.
Never saw that one coming. Never able to predict human stupidity.
So - I am now somewhat cynical about risk assessments. ;-)
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 8:24 PM, Mat Burnham <matburn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Assess the risk that you'll miss a risk, and if it's low enough you're okay.
>> The thing that always puzzles me about risk assessments is : what
>> happens if you don't identify a risk ? Are you liable for for lack of
>> knowledge ?
>> On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 6:41 PM, Nev <nevdav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Risk Assessment can be quite straighforward and doesn't necessarily need
>> > heaps of documentation. The main thing is to document it so that you
>> > can
>> > prove you acted reasonably (should an accident occur!). There's no law
>> > that
>> > lays down the method so here is one way to skin this particular cat:
>> > Make a list of the hazards. Could include fire, explosion, burns,
>> > entrapment of body parts, crushing, etc.
>> > For each hazard:
>> > - Decide the potential harm on some scale. Typically you could use
>> > abstract
>> > values of intensity (low/medium/high) or numeric scale (say 1 to 5).
>> > - Decide the possibility (chance) of it occurring. Again, can be
>> > low/medium/high or a numeric scale.
>> > Now multiply the numbers or use a matrix for the abstract values to
>> > reach an
>> > overall risk level. If you are working in numbers the result might be
>> > in
>> > the range 1 to 25. In abstracts it could be insignificant/very
>> > low/low/medium/high/very high, etc.
>> > Now decide what (if anything) you need to do. This stage is called
>> > 'control
>> > measures'. If the result was insignificant or a low number, you might
>> > say
>> > 'no further action'. If it is medium level you probably need to do
>> > something. If it is high/very high, you'll definiely need to do
>> > something.
>> > If you need to take action, you select one or more control measures from
>> > a
>> > hierarchical list. The acronym ERICPD is commonly used. Start at the
>> > top
>> > and work down until you reach a practicable solution. Here's some idea
>> > how
>> > this works, using 'road traffic accident' as the hazard.
>> > E = Eliminate - turn the road into a pedestrianised area.
>> > R = Reduce - Introduce a speed limit. Might still be a collision but
>> > death
>> > is less likely.
>> > I = Isolate - Use barriers, subways, pedestrian bridges, etc. to ensure
>> > separation/isolation.
>> > C = Control - Traffic lights.
>> > P = Personal Protective Equipment - Pedestrians wear something
>> > light/bright,
>> > motorists wear seatbelts, cyclists wear helmets.
>> > D = Discipline - Education, training (driver training, cycling
>> > proficiency)
>> > and we all learned to look both ways before crossing didn't we?
>> > I spend a lot of time telling people not to go straight for PPE or
>> > discipline - start at the top. Remember it's a hierarchy.
>> > Last step: Re-run the assessment of overall risk to check that your
>> > control
>> > measures have (or will) indeed reduced the risk.
>> > Make sure all this is documented.
>> > Job done (though you should also review periodically)
>> > There is more information on the websites of HSE, IOSH and NEBOSH.
