Human shield

Employee safety remains of paramount importance across all sectors, and the legislation and guidance around personal protective equipment (PPE) reflects that. According to guidance from the Health and Safety Executive, 'personal protective equipment' is defined as all equipment (including clothing that gives protection against the weather) that is intended to be worn or held by a person at work and that protects against one or more risks to health or safety, and any addition or accessory designed to meet that objective. In simple terms, therefore, PPE is a barrier between the wearer and a hazard. But it is intended to be the last resort. That is, employers should have taken steps to identify and minimise (if not eliminate) risks in the working environment, before choosing the appropriate PPE as the last line of defence. It's not reasonable – nor is it expected – that every risk should be eliminated. For example, in theory any person in any workplace could drop something on his or her foot. But protective footwear doesn't have to be worn by everyone, only by those for whom manual handling of heavy objects, or work around them, is part of their job. In straitened times, it's possible that some employers may decide to trim the PPE bill by moving to alternative brands and/or suppliers. But, given that comfort is such a crucial factor in the likelihood of PPE being worn correctly, it could prove a false economy if employees aren't involved in the decision to move to new kit. A cheaper, ill-fitting face mask, for example, will probably be adjusted by the wearer – with the result that it is no longer fit (if you'll excuse the pun) for purpose. The obligation to provide and wear the kit itself is shared, in legal terms, between the employer and employee – or, indeed, the agency worker (more on which later). The employer, having carried out appropriate risk assessments, has to provide the necessary PPE and the training on its correct use, and this is widely known and understood. But, equally, there is also a legal duty on the employee to wear it. Section 7 of the Health and Safety at Work Act places a duty on employees to ensure their own health and safety while at work, so failure to wear PPE is a breach of this duty. Picking up this point, Charlotte Hagestadt, principal legal adviser at manufacturers' organisation EEF, says: "It is sensible to include a statement in the company handbook or in individual contracts that employees are required to wear and use personal protective equipment whenever asked to, either by signs or where instructed as part of the job. They should also report any difficulty in doing so, or problems with the equipment, to their supervisor immediately. "Employees need to be made aware that any failure to wear or use any personal protective clothing or equipment will be treated as a disciplinary matter and, in serious cases, could be regarded as gross misconduct." The position is less clear cut for agency workers. While the agency is the employer, in terms of legal obligations, and therefore assumes the responsibility of PPE provision, etc, in fact it's often the case that parties collaborate and the site owner will issue safety kit to everyone, as it's more practical. PPE is hugely diverse, ranging from eyewear and ear defenders to safety boots – and everything between. Linde Material Handling is using Specsavers' voucher system for the eyecare needs of its employees – in its offices and in the Merthyr Tydfil plant where it makes heavy-duty forklift trucks from 10-tonne capacity upwards, along with container handling equipment. Linde's factory workers use the safety eyewear vouchers for eye examinations and to ensure glasses meet their own needs, in terms of frame type, prescription lens specification, etc. Linde's Leighton Dean says the voucher system makes administration simple for the employer, as well as for the individuals: "With more than one site in the UK, the number of Specsavers stores gives our employees easy access to eyecare." Specsavers has also launched a range of varifocal safety eyewear. The reason, says the company, is that users should be able to expect the same standards from safety eyewear as they do from everyday glasses. Jim Lythgow, director of strategic alliances at Specsavers Corporate Eyecare, explains: "Considering the significance of safety eyewear and the tasks people may be executing while wearing them, it's crucial that they are provided with eyewear that is well fitted, comfortable to wear and provides the best possible vision." That said, some forms of PPE, such as lone worker tracking systems, can be tricky to specify. As Chris Potts of ANT Telecom says: "Even the tracking systems vary, with some more appropriate in outdoor situations." Potts suggests companies consider a number of questions. First, how can an engineer react if there is a problem or accident on site? What happens if, for example, a security guard is hit on the head and cannot call for help? And what happens after the alarm is raised? "Organisations can't simply provide a mobile phone and consider their lone worker health and safety obligations are covered," he insists. His company offers advice on system suitability: GPS devices are better for users who work outdoors or even off site, as their exact location can be pinpointe if the alarm is triggered. If a system is required indoors, only in a small area, then a two-way device with a loud audible alarm function could be suitable; in a larger indoor area, static beacons that update the worker's device (DECT, GSM or radio) can work well. Although such systems don't give exact location, they do narrow the search to a building, floor or even a room, depending on the number of beacons installed. Potts also highlights DECT systems with lone worker functionality, which can locate users to the nearest radio base station. Again, it's not precise, but an idea of location can save vital time when looking for an injured employee – and, because DECT is a communication system, all users can be alerted to the incident on their handset to help with the search, if needed. "To accurately locate to within a few metres, a VoWiFi solution can be used," he adds. A WiFi- based voice-over-IP service, this uses bespoke software to determine where an IP device is, based on the signal strength, with various access points. Of course, not all PPE has such high-tech considerations. Nevertheless, sophisticated design and testing does go into the products, yet the aim is that they should be simple to apply, easy to wear and, importantly, compatible with other PPE. Jo Partridge, technical services manager in 3M's safety division, underlines this point: "For most types of PPE, quality of fit is paramount to ensure optimum protection... Items which are incompatible may result in reduced levels of protection." For example, says Partridge, protective eyewear could interfere with a respirator's face seal, or safety spectacles may sit too high on the face if worn with respiratory protective equipment (RPE). "The issue can be compounded if the wearer experiences discomfort, since they may be tempted to move one of the items to a more comfortable position – or even remove it altogether," she adds. RPE also requires a carefully managed programme if it's to work to best effect, educating workers as to the need for its use and allowing employers to measure effectiveness, says Mark Andrews of Scott Safety. Key steps for a successful programme, he suggests, include risk assessment, selection procedures, fit testing, training, maintenance and – often overlooked – correct storage. "RPE has to be stored properly to prevent damage and contamination," explains Andrews. "An effective RPE programme should provide a suitable area for cleaning, maintaining and storing RPE between uses. This should be a clean area away from the workplace hazard, ideally with enclosed lockers or boxes." Record-keeping, he adds, is not only needed for compliance but also to give the business the information it needs to assess programme effectiveness. For a free download of HSE's 'A short guide to the Personal Protective Equipment at Work Regulations 1992', go to www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg174.pdf PPE: the rights and wrongs Do - ensure all risks have been assessed and, where possible, eliminated before issuing PPE - train individuals in the correct application, use and fit for each item - consider a regime of random checks by supervisors or team leaders so you can spot any potential breaches before problems occur Don't - assume kit is a one-size-fits-all solution – PPE must be an accurate fit for each wearer - run out of stock – replacement items of frequently used safety items must always be available Super sub deal Safety equipment supplier Arco has just won a new three-year deal to supply PPE and workwear to BAE Systems. The two companies have worked together for 50 years, with Arco supplying safety kit to BAE's employees working in diverse markets, such as aircraft manufacture, shipbuilding, cyber security and munitions. The contract includes provision of an on-site dedicated trade counter at BAE's Portsmouth facility – where it makes the Ambush submarine, pictured – to enable employees to try out and select equipment when required.