Comments by Nigel Hale

Nigel Hale
Member - 13 posts

Take a look at the MI5 website at http://www.mi5.gov.uk/output/Page56.html for some guidance.

Hope this helps

Nigel

Nigel Hale
Member - 13 posts

Libby,

I presume that we are only talking about small quantitities of chemicals so that COMAH does not apply, in this case a simple google search will turn up many examples to give you ideas of format and approach, but you must develop your own procedures based upon risk assessments for the specific chemicals that you have. Bear in mind that you need to protect staff, others on your site, the public and the environment. You may like to look at the HSE site under the COMAH section (http://www.hse.gov.uk/comah/sragtech/techmeasspill.htm), it's probably OTT for your situation but nevertheless the basic elements are still applicable. Hope this helps.

Nigel

Nigel Hale
Member - 13 posts

Take a look at http://www.londonprepared.gov.uk/business/businesscont/index.htm - it's not a policy as such but it will get you going in the right direction.

Nigel

Nigel Hale
Member - 13 posts

Peter

Paul Davies on 01992 535445, who runs our ductwork/ventilation system hygiene and maintenance business and will be able to give you chapter and verse on the requirments for ductwork maintenance - he can also offer robotic inspection and cleaning services.

Hope this helps

Nigel Hale

Nigel Hale
Member - 13 posts

Nigel,

Forgot to say that under Section 3 of the H&S at Work etc Act you have a duty of care to persons working on your site whether they are employees or not.

Nigel Hale
Member - 13 posts

Nigel

As someone who used to be involved with an agency we were always very careful to ensure that this issue was clearly addressed in our contract with the Client - otherwise it's one of those areas that everyone thinks someone else is dealing with.

The Agency workers may well be self employed, but that is largely a matter between the agency and the worker, it's not always the case. Assuming that they truly are self employed then I don't see why the agency can't source PPE for the workers and charge them for that service (so long as it's not a condition of engagement by the Agency). Note however that under the Conduct of Employment Agency and Employment Business Regulations (among others) the Agency has an obligation to obtain information from the client about the hazards to which the workers may be exposed and essentially make sure that they will be adequately addressed by someone (usually the Client).

I'd be interested if the advice given by others is the same, as this question often arises in the Agency business area.

Hope this helps anyway.

Nigel Hale
Member - 13 posts

The environment agency's guidance used to state that fluoresecent tubes containing mercury are not special waste so long as they are disposed of in small quantities along with other waste (i.e. not separately collected). Is this still the case when considering them as hazardous waste? The real question for small businesses is whether or not we can dispose of an occassional waste tube along with our normal business waste?

Nigel Hale
Member - 13 posts

Stephen,

You have to make that decision based upon your assessment of the risks. If you would like some advice in respect of DSE risks (generally) and specifically the implications for occassional home work then we have a Human Factors Consultancy that specialise in ergonomics who can help. Call them (EMS Risk Consulting) at 01925 751444.

Nigel.

Nigel Hale
Member - 13 posts

Stephen, in the general case, if your employee is working from home with your approval for whatever reason and your are paying them for that time then under the H&SAW Act you have a responsibility towards them. Of course, what this really means is that you should prepare a risk assessment and act on the conclusions of that assessment. If that means that the employee needs to upgrade facilities at home (desks, lighting, seating etc) then the employer has a duty to provide them.

If the worker is only occassionally working from home, doing simple paperwork type tasks then the risk assessment should be a simple exercise and would in most cases not throw up any problems. If, however, they are working with IT or chemicals or any other equipment that you supply or they work from home rgeularly then it may be a little more involved.

I would also suggest that if a worker has taken a day off (i.e. is on leave) and is working from home with your knowledge then it would be best to assume that your duty of care extends to that occassion too.

You might also want to check with your insurers to make sure that your cover extends to homeworking.

Hope this helps. It was only going to be a short answer but it just kept growing!

Nigel

Nigel Hale
Member - 13 posts

Tima,

Just to add to Ciaron's answer.

You may also wish to think the implications of the DSE Regulations (if staff are to use IT equipment) and BS EN 527-1:2000 'Office Furniture Work Tables and Desks. Dimensions..' may also be useful. And, of course, don't forget to consider the requirements of the disabled if appropriate.

Hope this helps. I'm sure others will chip in with other snippets too.

Nigel Hale
Member - 13 posts

Steve,

Some older artex typically contains between 2 and 5% chrystotile and although your survey samples have not identified any chrystotile, the surveyor is simply saying that there could be chrystotile in other areas of the covering. Without extensive sampling and analysis the surveyors would be remiss if they said anything else. The old addage is that 'Absence of evidence should not be taken as evidence of absence'.

The surveyors advice amounts to saying that the hazard from the artex is low so long as it is managed and it remains in a condition or location where it is not likely to become airborne or dispersed. In that case it should be made safe or removed. If you do decide to remove any areas of artexing or make any repairs you would be well advised to take further advice from an approved asbestos removal contractor - although there are circumstances where you can do some work yourself. For small areas the cost of geeting a contractor to remove the material is not likely to be great so that the savings associated with doing it yourself are equally not likely to be great.

Our Group of companies includes an asbestos consultancy and removal division who would be happy to provide further guidance if required. Should you wish to discuss this or any other asbestos related matters please contact Mr Chris Webber on 01992 535445.

I hope that this helps.

Nigel Hale

Environmental Management Solutions Group Ltd

Nigel Hale
Member - 13 posts

Presuming that we are talking about standard office laser printers and the like...

Your first port of call should be to read the manufacturers 'Material Safety Data Sheet' for your toner cartridges. HP ones are available on the net if you search around. You must however form your own opinion on the safety and can not legally rely entirely on manufacturers MSDs! Only you can do the required risk assessment for your work place and the way you use your printers.

Having said that, provided that they are used and handled in accordance with the manufacturers instructions they are not generally considered to be hazardous with the current state of knowledge. I have not seen any documented links between exposure from normal dust leves from laser printers and cancer but I do know of cases of staff having allergic reactions to contact with toner. It would therefore be sensible, if you have any such staff, to ensure that they are not asked to change toner cartridges.

Since some printers can produce low levels of ozone it is sensible to position them in well ventilated areas a sensible distance away from staff. You should also ensure that manufacturers instructions are followed regarding maintenance of filters and cleaning up of toner spills.

I hope that this helps.