Huge fine for borough council ?? (Read on if you want to know how you can avoid a similar penalty)

The #hse levied a huge fine on a metropolitan borough in December for failing to manage Hand Arm Vibration risk (#havs #hav)

?

I’ll put the link to the HSE website in the comments, but if you’ve only got a couple of minutes to spare, I’ll summarise what they had to say below and importantly tell you how they could have avoided the financial, physical and reputational damage caused.

?

?? “The employee had been subject to regular health surveillance whilst employed by the Council, which had included recommendations on limiting exposure. However despite the report of April 2019, little action was taken to address the issues identified”

?SOLUTION: Once you have an employee with a diagnosis of Hand Arm Vibration, it is critical that action is taken to reduce/limit that individual’s exposure to prevent them from further harm. Typically, this would involve the implementation of a control measures, such as job rotation with colleagues and/or the selection of tools with a lower vibration magnitudes. Your data should be used as the basis for these control measures.

?

?? “While a system of Occupational Health surveillance was in place, it was inadequate as there was either no implementation, or inconsistent implementation, of the recommendations and actions to be taken”

?SOLUTION: Your HAV Management system should ‘flag up’ any actions that were NOT taken to reduce exposures in line with OCC Health guidance. At the same time your system should report to you any reductions in tool operator exposure by the actions implemented. Operator engagement with HAV Risk is key, a clear consistent message that informs them of the potential permanent disability is important.

?

?? “the data used to calculate the vibration exposure grossly underestimated the vibration magnitude of the tools in use, and also relied upon accurate times being entered by staff”

?SOLUTION: In use tool accredited vibration magnitudes are available from online data bases. Alternatively, tools can be measured on site by a competent person using equipment that has manufactured in accordance with BS EN ISO 8041 and used in compliance with BS EN ISO 5349. Often, Manufacturers declared vibration magnitudes do not reflect the ‘in use’ vibration magnitudes and as such fail to reach the levels of accuracy demanded by the HSE. Accurate Trigger time data capture can be difficult to achieve due to intermittent tool usage. Asking th employee to estimate their usage will never give you an accuracy! A time/motion study with a stop watch is an alternative, but this will prove to be inefficient and time consuming. Utilisation of a trigger time recording system is a prudent, low cost investment to gather this data accurately.

?

?? “Workers were incentivised to continue using vibrating tools through a bonus scheme and overtime work which inevitably led to high levels of exposure. Workers were allowed to work up to the recommended Exposure Limit value (ELV)

?SOLUTION: Whilst the HSE guidelines declare an Exposure Limit Value (ELV) of 400pts and an Exposure Action Value (EAV) of 100pts, these are not targets!! It is your duty to reduce risk to as low as reasonably practicable. Your Suitable & Sufficient Risk Assessment will identify the high risk tasks, tools or individuals. Use the data collected to take appropriate corrective actions. Training your workers and supervisors on why the management of HAV is important, highlighting the life altering health risks that HAVS causes.

?

Give us a call if you need any more straight talking advice on managing HAV Risk. We are the only provider capable of offering the full suite of compliance solutions that would have prevented this council from the cost and embarrassment of their penalty. #NotJustProducts.

www.thehavi.com

[email protected]

01159327002