Anyone on here in the H and S game ? I asked a company I was visiting recently,why I had to wear gloves to use the keyboard on a computer in a laboratory. I was just told that it was the laboratory rules. No one explained what was on the keyboard, if anything. I have been accused of ' reluctance to wear PPE ' even though after a short discussion, I wore them. As far as I know, as an employee, I have the right by law to question Health and Safety at work, wherever I am working Anyone know otherwise ?
I am surprised you weren't frog marched off the premises. Unfortunately H&S has become just another way of one group of people establishing dominance over another and to question it is seen as "bad attitude". Where I used to work there were regular meetings to come up with "new" HS&E initiatives, each one more hare brained than the last. Fact of modern life unfortunately. Regarding the computer keyboard. You didn't say what kind of laboratory it was but keyboards are generally pretty unclean devices covered in bacteria and worse, particularly those used by many people.
Yes you have the right to question the health and safety policy of your company. That doesn't mean that they will be obliged to change the policy because you don't agree with it.
Our company has started a scheme where the workforce 'has' to raise 65 H&S safety tickets per month (so many per department) of potential areas of incident or improvement. i.e. it is a mandatory requirement to raise them, full stop, if the exist or not - including the offices. The first and only one I raised was a colleague of very small stature had eaten 3 bananas in one day. For a normal sized adult it is said to be dangerous to eat too many bananas in one day, so Rob, being little, could have been endangering himself. My submission was frowned upon. I haven't and won't be submitting anymore. In the mean time a basic old rule to ensure a safe working practice: chain weights for lifting, was not adhered to and a 20 tonne tool fell 5ft from a crane when the chains broke. A guy had been underneath removing something 60 seconds previous to the chain breaking - very lucky. He did have his High Vis and Steel Toecaps on, perhaps it was this that saved him :Finger:
In the hierarchy of risk assessing a process, the use of Personal Protective Equipment should only be a last resort as you should replace or substitute the perceived hazardous material. The acronym is ERICPD. Where PPE is mandatory the hazard should have been fully defined in a written document where the material safety data sheet should be referenced, the minimum exposure time limit defined and have evidence that the PPE is fit for purpose. You have a right in law to see this "safe system of work" especially as you are supposed to understand it to be involved in the process. As has been said earlier, companies are free to define what they consider appropriate so long as it does not conflict with or reduce the effectiveness of the PPE. It should not have been an inconvenience to tell you. Andy
What type of lab was it? Chemisrty? QC? Pathology? Wearing of gloves is part of GLP (Good Laboratory Practice) dependant upon the methods used and nature of the work. Stop being a miserable git and do as you are told.:tearsofjoy:
I work in an environment where we have to wear copious amounts of PPE. Not because all of our functions have been risk assessed and deemed to require said PPE, but because somebody, somewhere had a particular accident and a blanket rule was brought in. My particular area have to wear head protection because there were 5 head injuries across the site last year. It's almost going to be an impossibility to have a head related accident in my environment, but I'm not allowed to risk assess it out, all it's done is p**s staff off. I am required to do safety checks each day, a safety audit weekly, a number of risk assessments monthly, plus 6 monthly reviews of current risk assessments. I also attend safety meeting and have to present initiatives on safety to higher management. If you ever question it, you tend to get shot down. The upshot is that a lot of people in the same position as myself just use it as a tick box exercise to get through the storm. It's become too big of an animal and deviated away from the intent in my opinion.
Pharmaceutical laboratory. The fact that I was using my laptop also alongside didn't occur to the idiots. So I suppose that's contaminated now. I have a written warning to defend.
Ah, that serious - punch the fuckers :Rage::Rage::Rage::Rage::Rage: but follow this procedure: (when no one is looking :Finger
well the use of gloves will have been assessed as part of the method validation and GLP within the lab to prevent carry over, false negatives and a whole host off other quality critical attributes. It's highly likely that will have caused a non-conformance report to be raised by your actions of disregarding policy. The reason for the gloves could be (it is in labs I use and audit for glp and method validation) to prevent contamination of the the process. Pharma products are there to treat illness, not exacerbate them by introducing unknowns to the patient. And with a name like yours who knows what you could introduce into the system . Lesson learnt, do as the lab owner wishes, there is a reason for it.
Do not defend it. Say there was a misunderstanding, you were only wanting to understand the reasoning for the rule, make an apology like you mean it, learn from the experience and move on. Don't get into an argument you will inevitably lose.
Under employment law, using HMG guidance, you cannot receive a final written warnng unless you have committed gross misconduct. All lesser transgressions require a sequence of verbal and written warnings with time berween each to give you the opportunity to improve. If you were not employed at the company you were visiting, they are obliged to explain the rules and regulations to you before you enter the work area. If this was not done, they have been negligent and have probably not followed their own written prcedures for allowing visitors into the work place. Without prejudice, I'd be having an informal conversation with the local HSE representative for advce on where you stand. Andy
As you where a visitor, why would you question wearing ppe unless you thought it was not adequate enough??????????
If you were a visitor and not actually employed by the company, I can understand why they want you wear protective clothing, but I doubt they have the authority to give a written warning to a visitor. They can escort you from the premises and instruct you not to return, though.
When H M The Queen is visiting a facility which requires hard hats (usually to open it formally) and she is handed a hard hat, she always accepts it without question and carries it in her hand. But she doesn't put it on her head - and who is going to tell her she has to?
