MANAGEMENT OF HEALTH AND SAFETY

Preventing another RB4 incident requires PrecisionWire to replace informal habits with clearly defined procedures that control how the machine is operated, accessed, isolated and maintained. Worker A`s fatal entanglement demonstrates the consequences of allowing unsafe interventions around a rotating spindle to become normal practice. Academia Support UK provides the complete scenario-based answer to this procedural controls task, applying recommendations directly to the conditions described at PrecisionWire. Plagiarism-free and AI-free assistance with individual NEBOSH submissions is available through our NEBOSH Assignment Help UK service.

UNIT GNC1
For: National General Certificate in Occupational Health and Safety. Risk Assessment support is also available.

UNIT GIC1
For: International General Certificate in Occupational Health and Safety and NEBOSH Interview Preparation

SCENARIO

PrecisionWire is a specialist metalworking organisation that draws and cuts steel wire for commercial customers. The drawing process involves pulling a steel rod through a series of drawing blocks to reduce the diameter of the rod and increase its length. The wire is then coiled onto a rotating spindle ready for shipping.

GET FULL ANSWER HERE

The organisation’s site consists of a large, open-plan main building that contains a production line where the wire is coiled. To the side of the main building is a small building containing two, old pieces of plant that are not in operation, and a small workshop to repair machinery on site. The finished product is stored ready for shipping in an outside storage area. At the other end of the site, there is a small administration office, and a break room with welfare facilities for workers.

PrecisionWire has been operating for over six years; it was previously called Legacy Wire Solutions (LWS), but that organisation went through financial difficulties and was sold. The new owner is an experienced businessperson, who had looked at the LWS accounts and thought it would be a good business opportunity. They changed the name to PrecisionWire and run the business as the Managing Director (MD). PrecisionWire inherited the existing machines and most of the workforce from LWS.

The workforce

PrecisionWire is run by the MD along with 24 production, maintenance, and office workers. There is no middle management, and all workers report directly to the MD. The working week is 09:00 -17:00, Monday to Friday. Three workers are non-native language speakers and use their second language while at work.

Most production workers are experienced in wire drawing, having worked for the previous organisation, LWS, for many years. They still follow LWS’ ways of working; there has been little innovation in recent years.

New starters always work with an experienced worker for a few days, but the experienced workers do not really know what to do with the new starters, and do not have the time or skills to provide the necessary training. The MD visits the factory floor infrequently, instead relying on the experienced workers to oversee production. The experienced workers wait until they see the MD on site to raise any concerns or report problems, as they do not have the authority or resources to implement changes themselves.

The wire drawing machine

Worker A operates a wire drawing machine known as Rewind Block 4 (RB4). It takes a thick metal rod and reduces the diameter by pulling it through tapered holes. It then coils the thin wire product onto a powered rotating spindle. When the spindle is full, the spindle is pulled out leaving a finished coil of wire. The coil is then moved to the outside storage area by a forklift truck.

The RB4 machine was purchased and installed by the previous organisation (LWS) around 1985; it was supplied without safety guards. No instruction manuals or safe system of work came with the machine when PrecisionWire inherited it. At some point, a worker fitted front and rear gates around the machine. These are secured using latches and bolts, but do not need any tools to open, meaning that anyone can open them. The gates are not interlocked, which means the spindle continues to rotate even if the gates are open.

Worker A needs to be constantly alert, as tangles may occur if the winding is not done under constant tension. If this happens, Worker A opens the machine’s rear gate while running the spindle slowly, and taps down loops of wire on the spindle with a piece of wood. It is common practice to wedge a block of wood between the machine frame and trolley wheels supporting the spindle, to stop rocking and banging as the spindle fills.

The RB4 machine and its guarding are not on any routine maintenance schedule and are only worked on when something breaks. The maintenance workers have worked with the machines for a while. They know that machine downtime costs the organisation money, making it essential to get repairs done as quickly as possible.

The incident

One morning, while operating the RB4 machine, Worker A became entangled on the rotating spindle and was dragged into the spinning machine. Another worker nearby saw the incident and immediately hit the emergency stop button. Emergency services attended, but Worker A was pronounced dead at the scene.

Information, instruction and training

The MD understands that training is important, so they have personally delivered various training sessions. These are recorded in a one-page training log. The log does not give any details of content, or signatures of attendance. It lists that in November 2022, workers attended training on the following topics: wire drawing; straightening and cutting; mechanical maintenance; office admin and environmental awareness.

According to the log, Worker A attended all of these training sessions except for mechanical maintenance. Historic training records from LWS are still available, and Worker A had a checklist of skills that they had learnt ‘on the job’. It lists topics such as, familiarity with wire drawing machines; personal protective equipment; electricity supply and emergency stops; manual handling; and basic risk assessment.

Consultant visits and reporting

An external health and safety consultant, a friend of the MD, was appointed two years ago. They were given a three-year contract to provide: two site visits per year, a written health and safety policy, a worker handbook, assistance with risk assessments (for the first year only), and to act as the organisation’s competent person. They provide only the necessary paperwork and do not have the means to support PrecisionWire when they are not on site.

When the consultant started working with PrecisionWire, there was no machine-specific risk assessment for RB4. A generic ‘wire drawing’ risk assessment was available. This was dated from when the organisation was owned by LWS. It identified people who might be at risk as ‘workers’. The only risks it identified were inexperience, fire, paper cuts, and fall of gas bottles.

The consultant also provided a one-page draft statement of general policy, to replace the existing one provided by LWS. The consultant had written:

‘PrecisionWire is a small, specialist metalworking organisation. They are committed to working safely and helping to ensure that machinery and equipment are safe to use. They will always fulfil legal requirements and meet customer expectations. Their objective is to prevent injuries and ill-health to all of their workers. To do this, the organisation will identify workplace hazards and risks, investigate incidents, and provide training to workers. PrecisionWire will also involve workers in health and safety matters.’

The MD was pleased that the statement of general policy is short. The MD had signed and dated it, and put it in their filing cabinet.

Six months prior to the incident, the consultant conducted an initial site audit. The MD led the consultant around the site. The consultant noticed that visiting customers were walking unattended around the production line, and that there was a lack of signage to prevent this. The MD showed the consultant both the small building containing the old plant, and the workshop. They returned to the main building, standing just inside the entrance, while the consultant glanced at the production line and marked it off their checklist. The MD stated that this concluded the tour, and they returned to the office. Back in the office, the consultant asked the MD if there had been any incidents recently. The MD had no written record of incidents and said that they could not recall any.

One month before the incident occurred, the consultant visited the site again to continue their audit. The consultant and the MD mostly stayed in the office during this visit. While there, they spoke with two workers who were in the break room eating their lunch, and asked what they knew about the statement of general policy and risk assessments. Neither of the workers were aware of these. The consultant then asked the workers about their health and safety training at PrecisionWire, and they replied that they have not received any. The consultant suggested to the MD that they should put up a noticeboard in the break room to display the policy and risk assessments so that the workers could read them during their breaks. The consultant concluded in their report that ‘no issues were identified’.

Task 1: Procedural controls

What procedural controls could be put in place to help prevent a repeat of the incident?

Note: Your answer must relate directly to the scenario.

(12)

Task 2: Consultant management

Explain how PrecisionWire failed to adequately manage the consultant, including failing to act on the information provided by them.