e.g. from a confined space, employers will need to consider
what additional provision may be required.
In any event the arrangements for calling the
emergency services should be well known by all particular
appointed persons.
Any information relating to the emergency procedures
must be made available to any accident and emergency
services to ensure that they can prepare their own
response plans.
The employer is responsible for putting together an
emergency response plan to include such issues as:
➤ Safety equipment and PPE
➤ First aid facilities
➤ Emergency procedures for employees
➤ Procedures for clearing up and safe disposal
➤ Regular safety drills
➤ Any needs of disabled persons.
6.7 6.7.Case study
On many occasions supervision is a safety critical element
contained in a safe system of work (SSOW). When it
fails it may result in dire consequences such as personal
and financial losses.
On Friday, 6 February 2004 the HSE issued the
following press release:
A construction company was fined a total of
ฃ40 000 and ordered to pay ฃ12 983 costs
at the Old Bailey after pleading guilty to
a breach of health and safety legislation.
The case, brought by the Health and Safety
Executive (HSE) against Eugene Ltd, arose
following a fatal accident during construction
work at St Thomas’ Hospital, Lambert Palace
Road, London SE1.
Construction worker Ian Mallon was laying
block work at a height of about 2.5 meters
when he fell from the unguarded edge of a
scaffold work platform on 17 June 2001. As
a result of the fall Mr. Mallon suffered severe
head injuries from which he died in hospital
several days later. The incomplete scaffold
platform used by Mr. Mallon and his workmates
had not been inspected by a competent
person after its alteration.
Eugene Ltd pleaded guilty to a breach of
duties under section 3(1) of the Health and
Safety at Work Act etc. 1974, in that they
failed, so far as was reasonably practicable,
to ensure the health and safety of persons
not in their employment.
Sentencing the company, the Judge said:
‘Sadly it is all too often the case [that] when not
adequately supervised corners are cut, a principal
contractor must be alive to such risks.’
HSE Principal Inspector, Neil Stephens,
said after the case:
‘This case has demonstrated that principal
contractors simply cannot assume that
sub-contractors, if left unsupervised, will act
safely. Principal contractors must ensure that
they have adequate arrangements in place to
supervise the work of their sub-contractors’.
e.g. from a confined space, employers will need to consider
what additional provision may be required.
In any event the arrangements for calling the
emergency services should be well known by all particular
appointed persons.
Any information relating to the emergency procedures
must be made available to any accident and emergency
services to ensure that they can prepare their own
response plans.
The employer is responsible for putting together an
emergency response plan to include such issues as:
➤ Safety equipment and PPE
➤ First aid facilities
➤ Emergency procedures for employees
➤ Procedures for clearing up and safe disposal
➤ Regular safety drills
➤ Any needs of disabled persons.
6.7 6.7.Case study
On many occasions supervision is a safety critical element
contained in a safe system of work (SSOW). When it
fails it may result in dire consequences such as personal
and financial losses.
On Friday, 6 February 2004 the HSE issued the
following press release:
A construction company was fined a total of
ฃ40 000 and ordered to pay ฃ12 983 costs
at the Old Bailey after pleading guilty to
a breach of health and safety legislation.
The case, brought by the Health and Safety
Executive (HSE) against Eugene Ltd, arose
following a fatal accident during construction
work at St Thomas’ Hospital, Lambert Palace
Road, London SE1.
Construction worker Ian Mallon was laying
block work at a height of about 2.5 meters
when he fell from the unguarded edge of a
scaffold work platform on 17 June 2001. As
a result of the fall Mr. Mallon suffered severe
head injuries from which he died in hospital
several days later. The incomplete scaffold
platform used by Mr. Mallon and his workmates
had not been inspected by a competent
person after its alteration.
Eugene Ltd pleaded guilty to a breach of
duties under section 3(1) of the Health and
Safety at Work Act etc. 1974, in that they
failed, so far as was reasonably practicable,
to ensure the health and safety of persons
not in their employment.
Sentencing the company, the Judge said:
‘Sadly it is all too often the case [that] when not
adequately supervised corners are cut, a principal
contractor must be alive to such risks.’
HSE Principal Inspector, Neil Stephens,
said after the case:
‘This case has demonstrated that principal
contractors simply cannot assume that
sub-contractors, if left unsupervised, will act
safely. Principal contractors must ensure that
they have adequate arrangements in place to
supervise the work of their sub-contractors’.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..