OHS Management System - Case Study Example

Initial Status Review report Student’s Name: Subject: Professor: University/Institution: Location: Date: Abstract The entity that was used for the report needs to develop an OHS management system in line with possible certification to OHSAS 18001. Review of existing literatures show that an initial status review compares the present management of an organisation’s health and safety with associated legislation, with the organisation’s safety and health policy, and with best practice and performance in allied sectors. Literatures also indicated that an initial status review can be used by organisations to create a new or develop a current OH&S management system. In addition, established firms can utilize an initial status review to gauge an existing health and safety management system’s compliance with legislative requirements. Further, an initial status review enables a firm to accurately determine the needed resources for implementing its OH&S management system. An initial status review that utilised checklist questionnaires and interviews was used to determine hazards, applicable legislation and the current OHS management system’s success. Findings from the initial status review and policy review were then evaluated against OHSAS 18001 elements to detect areas in the current OHS management system that need enhancement via a self–assessment questionnaire. The investigation concluded that the Corporation’s current OHS management system needs to be improved. Contents 1.1.General Overview 4 1.2.Aims and Objectives 4 2.0.Literature Review 5 2.1.Initial Status Review 5 2.1.1.Concept 5 2.1.2.What is involved 5 2.1.3.Benefits of Initial Status Review 6 2.2.Alternative Approaches Considered 6 2.2.1.Perception survey 6 2.3.Conclusion 7 3.0.Methodology 9 4.0.Findings 11 4.1.ISR Findings 11 4.2.Policy review 13 4.2.1.Accurate and suitable reflection of risks 13 4.2.2.Improvement 13 4.2.3.Availability 14 4.2.4.Applicability of legislation and other requirements 14 4.2.5.Document, implement and maintain 14 4.2.6.Communication and training 14 4.3.Requirements for meeting OHSAS 18001 15 4.3.2.Planning 15 4.3.3.Implementation and operation 16 5.0.Conclusion 17 6.0.References 18 1.0. Introduction 1.1. General Overview Mock Company is a construction corporation of medium size. The firm’s workforce is comprised of 20 management staff, 166 tradesmen personnel and 215 permanent contractors who can be subcontracted when necessary. The suppleness enables the corporation to not only be competitive, but also carry out vital construction projects. The firm often works at client’s premises due to the nature of its operations and is accountable for its yard sites and firm offices. The entity faces hazards from its activities that result in considerable costs. Consequently, the firm needs to align its OHS management system to OHSAS 18001 to attain optimal returns from its staff, clients and operations. 1.2. Aims and Objectives To identify hazards, applicable legislation and determine the current OHS management system’s success; To suggest recommendations for enhancement of OHS management practices and, an OHS management system framework for the Corporation. 2.0. Literature Review 2.1. Initial Status Review 2.1.1. Concept An initial status review compares the present management of an organisation’s health and safety with associated legislation, with the organisation’s safety and health policy, and with best practice and performance in allied sectors (Zanko& Dawson 2012; p. 328-334). Initial status reviews can be used by organisations to create a new or develop a current OH&S management system. It is often the first step in setting up of a complete health and management system for newly established entities. It also helps the newly established companies to find out the arrangements for an effective OH&S, and the statutory requirements that have to be met (Zanko & Dawson 2012; p. 338-344). Reese (2011) notes that established firms can utilize initial status reviews to gauge an existing health and safety management system’s compliance with legislative requirements because it offers information that influences the decision on the extent, satisfactoriness and implementation of the existing safety and health management system. 2.1.2. What is involved The first phase of the initial status review entails recognizing hazards and related risks that an entity faces from its actions (Hughes &Ferrett 2011). The second part of the Initial Status Review is to confirm whether an institution is utilising legislation that is current and relevant to the organization. The third step of the initial status review entails looking at the instruction, information as well as the guidance on the OH&S that is already in place at the organization. The section involves looking at the documented procedures that guarantee the application and understanding of general health and safety policy statement of an entity. The documentation could be inclusive of specific instructions that cover operations conducted in the organization or guidance that summarizes the legal requirements that apply to the institution. The next step is the determination of best practices and guidance within specific sectors of the industry (Hughes & Ferrett 2011). The section encompasses the instruction and guidance on occupational safety and well-being obtainable from trade associations and institutions in the same field of activity. The subsequent step entails the determination of the current resources that have already been devoted to health and safety management. The aspect involves evaluating the success of the present OHS system. It needs an open and full evaluation of an entity’s controls and procedures. 2.1.3. Benefits of Initial Status Review An initial status review enables a firm to accurately determine the needed resources for implementing its OH&S management system. In addition, the initial status review aids in making the implementation plan official. It also enables an organization to find out the help and information that are available from both the internal sources and the outside sources. It also helps an organisation to realize its current position in managing OH&S issues. Further, an initial status review can result in a rational comprehension of OHSAS 18001 requirements. 2.2. Alternative Approaches Considered Perception survey and system auditing are the alternative approaches to reviewing OH&S management systems that have been evaluated. 2.2.1. Perception survey A perception survey offers information on the beliefs, attitudes and values of employees towards OH&S (Robson & Bigelow 2010). It could also evaluate the efficiency of OH&S management system in an organisation. Further, the perception survey can lead to safety culture among employees being promoted. Employees who are the primary stakeholders in OH&S can be involved in the assessment of the organisation’s OH&S management system via questionnaires and interviews. An employee perception survey is also capable of revealing the perception gaps between the management and frontline employees (Robson & Bigelow 2010). However, the outcome of perception surveys could be affected by questions set in the questionnaire, statistical techniques and demographic aspects that are adopted for analysis. The perception survey cannot collect information about myths that are part of a firm’s culture. 2.2.2. System auditing System auditing entails comparing the current procedures and management practices of an entity with the intention of the components in an OHS management system standard (Granerud & Rocha 2011). Inspection, interviews, questionnaires and checklists are some of the review tools that can be used for conducting the review. System auditing approach enables an organization to not only assess the efficiency of OHS systems, but also gauge the OHS performance. The approach can be used proactively to monitor the efficiency of OHS management system implementation when administered correctly. Auditors have to be competent and suitably trained to carry out the audit. Auditors also have to be autonomous of the organization’s activities to maintain neutrality (Goh, Brown & Spickett 2010). However, generic type of questions may be utilized for all forms of organisations. In addition, auditors may be subjective when going through the audit questions. 2.3. Conclusion An initial status review was the chosen methodology because it enables an organization to find out the help and information that are available from both the internal sources and the outside sources. In addition, it helps an organisation to realize its current position in managing OH&S issues. Further, the initial status review enables a firm to accurately determine the needed resources for implementing and enhancing its OH&S management system. 3.0. Methodology The first phase of the initial status review entailed not only recognizing hazards and related risks that Mock Company faces from its actions, but also identifying those defined by law. A checklist comprising possible hazards and connected risks for a construction company was employed to identify the hazards and related risks. The author visited the Corporation’s offices and worksites and combined interviews with the checklist in the identification of hazards. The design of the checklist facilitated the identification of risks that the organisation has addressed by ticking 1 and those that the institution needs to address by ticking 2. The second part of the Initial Status Review was to confirm whether Mock Company is utilising legislation that is current and relevant to the organization. In addition, the regulatory control obligations that Mock Company is required to meet were also determined via a checklist that contained possible legislation for the entity and its circumstances. The checklist information was acquired from sources such as professional bodies, HSE, health specialist, trade associations, safety consultants, trade unions and local authorities. The checklist was employed to recognize instances when the statutory requirements are clearly understood due to the nature of Mock Company’s activities. In addition, the checklist included the regulatory requirements that are less applicable to construction companies and those that are obligatory for all organisations. Further, the checklist was inclusive of more specific regulatory control that outlines duties and responsibilities, that are applicable to a construction company’s work environment. The risks that had been identified earlier were used to determine the applicable legislative requirements that the organization has both met and is yet to meet. The third step of the initial status review entailed looking at the instruction, information as well as the guidance on the OH&S that is already in place at the organization. A checklist was utilised to recognize the documented procedures that cover safety aspects being applied to the entity. The fourth step entailed the determination of the current resources that had already been devoted to health and safety management. The aspect involved evaluating the success of the present OHS system. A checklist questionnaire was used to determine the state and performance of the current system. The organisation’s health and safety policy elements were then gauged against elements drawn from OHSAS 18001: 2007, 4.2. The author then measured the findings from ISR and policy review against OHSAS 18001: 2007 elements requirements by administering a self-evaluation questionnaire to determine the areas that need enhancement. 4.0. Findings 4.1. ISR Findings The business risks connected to the firm’s offices and work premises include: fire threat; forklift trucks; manual handling of deliveries; slips and falls; and display screen equipment such as VDU. In addition, the business risks related to Corporation’s worksites include: chemicals such as cement; first aid due to contact with body fluids; driving; fire; manual handling; public control; site management; noise; hot weather conditions; scaffolding erection; structure collapse; working heights; utilization of machines; and managing contractors. The subsequent legislative requirements are applicable to Mock Company; ‘The Health and Safety Act etc.1974’; ‘The Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1995’; ‘The Noise at Work Regulations 1989’; ‘The Manual Handling Operations Regulations 1992’; ‘The Health and Safety (First Aid) Regulations 1981’; ‘The Fire Precautions Act 1971’; ‘The Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 1992’; ‘The Fire Precautions(Workplace) Regulations 1997’; ‘The Personal Protective Equipment at Work Regulations 1992’; ‘The Health and Safety ( Safety Signs and Signals) Regulations 1996’; ‘The Provision of and Use of Work Equipment 1998’; ‘The Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992’; ‘The Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 1994’; ‘The Health and (Safety Consultation with Employees) Regulations 1996’; and ‘The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999.’ In addition, the entity that is a builder has particular responsibilities as stipulated by CDM regulations that offer guidelines to principle contractors and designers. The Organization’s documentation has covered the subsequent organizational safety and health aspects: accident, incident and ill health reporting and investigation; emergency arrangements; first aid; forklift trucks; induction training; lifting equipment; manual handling; noise; personal protective equipment; fire; scaffolds; steps and ladders; eye protection; security; and communicating information. However, the aspects that have not been covered by the organisation in its documentation of risks and related hazard include: safety targets and objectives; competency assessments; risk assessments; planned inspections; working in hot weather surroundings; and COSHH assessments. Mock Company has not adopted a method of hazard recognition and risk evaluation that is defined in terms of its nature, timing and extent to guarantee it is proactive. The entity has also not created and maintained a procedure to depict the legal and other OH&S requirements applicable to the entity. 4.2. Policy review An OH&S policy shows the general commitment of an organization by creating an overall sense of direction and by setting the principles of health and safety management (Holton, Glass, & Price 2010). It is an official commitment by an entity’s top management to deliver the essential monetary and human capital for efficient OH&S management. It is compulsory for all entities in the UK that have more than five workers to have on paper, a statement of broad policy on professional health and safety. Other countries also have similar legislative requirements governing the safety of employees. The organization has in place a general policy statement governing its health and safety that has been signed by senior management. The corporation has complied with the duties stipulated in ‘Health & Safety at Work Act, etc. 1974’, to guarantee the wellbeing, security and health of its workers. Specifically, reference has been made to providing secure work systems and arrangements to ensure the safe utilization, handling, transportation and storage of substances. The entity offers safety trainings and has analogous obligations to other people who might be either at its offices and worksites or affected by its activities. Staff members have duties as stipulated in the Act of taking sensible care of themselves, and the people that are impacted by their dealings. The employees are collaborating with their company in the execution of duties as per the Act. 4.2.1. Accurate and suitable reflection of risks Corporation’s current policy statement depicts the entity’s intent of offering sufficient control of risks that arise from its work activities. 4.2.2. Improvement Mock Company’s OHS safety and health statement show management’s commitment to reviewing and revising its policy as is essential and at regular intervals. 4.2.3. Availability The Corporation’s policy shows its commitment to offering instruction, information and supervision to employees and persons that are impacted by its activities. 4.2.4. Applicability of legislation and other requirements The Organisation has complied with ‘The Health and Safety Act at Work, etc. 1974’. 4.2.5. Document, implement and maintain Mock Company’s Managing Director has signed and dated the entity’s policy statement. In addition, the entity’s policy has stated general OHS goals and dedication to preventing injury and infirmity. 4.2.6. Communication and training The current policy statement of Mock Company shows the entity’s intent of providing information and instruction to employees. The entity is committed to indulging the employees in constant consultations. In addition, the entity offers adequate training to guarantee that workers are competent to perform their tasks. 4.2.7. Periodic review Mock Company’s OHS safety and health statement shows commitment to reviewing and revising its policy as is essential and at regular intervals. 4.3. Requirements for meeting OHSAS 18001 4.3.1. OHS Policy The organisation needs to commit to the continual enhancement of OH&S management. The organization also needs to make the policy accessible to all interested parties. 4.3.2. Planning Planning entails an organization guaranteeing that there is establishment and maintenance of procedures, continual risk recognition, risk evaluation and implementation of essential control measures covering activities, workplace and people accessing the workplace (Fernández-Muñiz, Montes-Peón & Vázquez-Ordás 2012). Mock Company needs to adopt a method for hazard recognition and risk evaluation that is defined in terms of its nature, timing and extent to guarantee it is proactive. The method will provide for categorization of risks and recognition of risks that have to be eradicated or controlled via measures such as programmes and objectives. The method ought to be consistent with the capability of the hazard control measures utilized and operating experience. The adopted method will also offer input into the choice of facility needs, training needs recognition and development of operational controls. The method will also provide for monitoring of its actions to guarantee efficiency and timeliness in their execution. Additionally, the entity needs to establish and maintain a procedure to depict the legal and other OH&S requirements applicable to the entity. The legal requirements need to be updated and made known to all germane parties. The institution needs to establish and document OH&S goals in support of the OH&S Policy that are quantifiable where possible to be utilized for continual enhancement purposes. The institution also needs to devise an OH&S programme that is frequently appraised to recognize the actions and designated responsibilities for attaining its OH&S goals in a definite timescale. 4.3.3. Implementation and operation The entity needs to ensure that the roles, responsibilities and authorities of personnel who manage, execute and authenticate activities with respect to OHS are documented and communicated. The management also needs to offer sufficient resources to ensure the effective implementation and development of the OH&S management system. In addition, management employees, at all levels, need to exhibit their dedication to the incessant enhancement of the OHSAS management system. Further, , the workers should be aware of their roles and responsibilities to meet the management system requirements inclusive of emergency preparedness. 4.3.4. Checking and corrective action The organization needs to enhance and maintain procedures to monitor and measure the performance of the OH&S on a regular basis. It also needs to enhance its operational criteria to meeting legislation and regulatory requirements. In addition, the entity needs to check the data recording and outcomes to assist with offering corrective and precautionary action analysis. Further, it needs to be checking the calibration and maintenance of equipment needed for any relevant measurements and preservation of the calibration records. The entity needs to review the remedial and preventive measures taken through risk assessment and execute and document any alterations in documented procedures. The entity needs to guarantee that it has in place procedures for internal auditing. Internal audits ought to be planned and carried out to confirm compliance with the entity’s systems with the requirements of OHSAS 18001. The audit rate has to be reliant on the probability of a risk evaluation of the relevant activities. The Internal Auditor carrying out the reviews has to be competently trained and autonomous of the activities being audited. Audit reports ought to be produced recognizing any non-conformances noticed and those supervisors responsible should take action to mitigate the problems .Audit issues that are erased should be followed-up to make sure that they are appropriately dealt with. 4.3.5. Management Review The organization needs to be undertaking an annual minuted OH&S management review to address all applicable factors concerning the suitability, sufficiency and efficiency of the system. It will cover a minimum the review of OH&S Policy, review and resetting of OH&S goals against targets and commitment to a continual enhancement and review of Internal Audit findings. 5.0. Conclusion The investigation concluded that the Corporation’s current OHS management system needs to be improved as per the recommendations stipulated in the requirements for meeting OHSAS 18001 section of the report. 6.0. References ROBSON, L. S., & BIGELOW, P. L. (2010).Measurement properties of occupational health and safety management audits: a systematic literature search and traditional literature synthesis. Canadian Journal of Public Health/Revue Canadienne de Sante'ePublique, S34-S40. MORARU, R. I. (2012). Current Trends and Future Developments in Occupational Health and Safety Risk Management.INTECH Open Access Publisher. ZANKO, M., & DAWSON, P. (2012).Occupational health and safety management in organizations: a review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 14(3), 328-344. REESE, C. D. (2011). Occupational health and safety management: a practical approach.CRC press. FERNÁNDEZ-MUÑIZ, B., MONTES-PEÓN, J. M., & VÁZQUEZ-ORDÁS, C. J. (2012).Occupational risk management under the OHSAS 18001 standard: analysis of perceptions and attitudes of certified firms. Journal of Cleaner Production, 24, 36-47. HOLTON, I., GLASS, J., & PRICE, A. D. (2010).Managing for sustainability: findings from four company case studies in the UK precast concrete industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(2), 152-160. GRANERUD, R. L., & ROCHA, R. S. (2011).Organisational learning and continuous improvement of health and safety in certified manufacturers. Safety Science,49(7), 1030-1039. HUGHES, P., & FERRETT, E. (2011). Introduction to health and safety in construction: the handbook for construction professionals and students on NEBOSH and other construction courses.Routledge. GOH, Y. M., BROWN, H., & SPICKETT, J. (2010).Applying systems thinking concepts in the analysis of major incidents and safety culture. Safety Science,48(3), 302-309. 7.0. Bibliography ABAD, J., LAFUENTE, E., & VILAJOSANA, J. (2013). An assessment of the OHSAS 18001 certification process: Objective drivers and consequences on safety performance and labour productivity. Safety science, 60, 47-56. ZENG, S. X., TAM, V. W., & TAM, C. M. (2008). Towards occupational health and safety systems in the construction industry of China. Safety science,46(8), 1155-1168 8.0. Appendices Appendix 1 Appendix 2 Appendix 3 Appendix 4: Read More