I'm new to OHS&S but seem to be getting involved in a conventional metal bashing organization

OHSAS 18001:2007 requires that "All those with management responsibility shall demonstrate their commitment to the continual improvement of the OH&S performance".

How would you address this requirement when implementing a system and how would you, as an auditor, evaluate compliance.

I'm new to OHS&S but seem to be getting involved in a conventional metal bashing organization

OHSAS 18001:2007 requires that "All those with management responsibility shall demonstrate their commitment to the continual improvement of the OH&S performance".

How would you address this requirement when implementing a system and how would you, as an auditor, evaluate compliance.

I googled and came across this one - (http://www.marsden-international.com/OHSAS%2018001.htm)
The OHSMS Auditor should consider the following areas ;-

· Do the Objectives relate to significant risks (not all objectives have to be, but there should be at least one objective that deals with major issue

· Are the objectives achievable? Seek evidence to support this by seeing how each one is progressing against the timescale set. Are persons committed and understand their part to play in achieving the objective.

· Is each stage measurable? Check that the words are meaningful and that people are using the targets and timeframes as benchmarks.

· Do objectives provide evidence of continual improvement of OHSMS performance? One company had a 0.1% reduction in vehicle related accidents as a target. Can they measure to such a degree of accuracy? Is it a worthwhile target that demonstrates continual imporovement? Probably not!

· Are objectives reviewed and checked for achievement or are they forgotten?

Thanks for the reply.

I'm trying to get a feel for the difference in approach from ISO 9001 and ISO 14001. For example, the similar requirement in ISO 9001 clause 5.1 refers to "top management" and gives 5 requirements to achieve compliance.

OHSAS 18001 clause 4.4.1 referes to "all management" with no supporting requirements.
It's that little word "all" thats getting at me.

Thanks for the reply.

I'm trying to get a feel for the difference in approach from ISO 9001 and ISO 14001. For example, the similar requirement in ISO 9001 clause 5.1 refers to "top management" and gives 5 requirements to achieve compliance.

OHSAS 18001 clause 4.4.1 referes to "all management" with no supporting requirements.
It's that little word "all" thats getting at me.


All means, each, every, no deferments, so on and so forth.

Committment means they have to be able to personally demonstrate more than lip service when it comes to OH&S. Management has to get up off its fanny and personally be involved at some level in OH&S issues.

Management in this case means ...if they have personal control over another working for or on behalf of the organization during the course of work, or if they are at the decison making level that could create risk for another person working for or on behalf of the organization.

Of course I could be mistaken, but that's essentially how it's explained in both the current version of 18002 and the present Draft version.

If someone has anything they think is better please pass it on because I have been asked for comments to the 18002 Draft currently being worked on.

:applause:Right on Randy - if you manage one person you are responsible to make sure they work in a safe environment, have the training and equipment to perform their job, have available caution signs and specifications (i.e. MSDS Material Data Safety Sheets)available in the workplace. Company Policies should be in place to assure EH&S. :thanx:

All means, each, every, no deferments, so on and so forth.

Committment means they have to be able to personally demonstrate more than lip service when it comes to OH&S. Management has to get up off its fanny and personally be involved at some level in OH&S issues.

Management in this case means ...if they have personal control over another working for or on behalf of the organization during the course of work, or if they are at the decison making level that could create risk for another person working for or on behalf of the organization.

Of course I could be mistaken, but that's essentially how it's explained in both the current version of 18002 and the present Draft version.

If someone has anything they think is better please pass it on because I have been asked for comments to the 18002 Draft currently being worked on.

Well said, Randy. They also have to put the resources behind their stated "commitment." OHSAS requires real results, and improvements, not just a program.

I kinda left the resources as a given......

The new 18002 will be going into greater detail with this. I personally don't like the new format, but it's what we will be stuck with.

All means, each, every, no deferments, so on and so forth.

Committment means they have to be able to personally demonstrate more than lip service when it comes to OH&S. Management has to get up off its fanny and personally be involved at some level in OH&S issues.

Management in this case means ...if they have personal control over another working for or on behalf of the organization during the course of work, or if they are at the decison making level that could create risk for another person working for or on behalf of the organization.

Of course I could be mistaken, but that's essentially how it's explained in both the current version of 18002 and the present Draft version.

If someone has anything they think is better please pass it on because I have been asked for comments to the 18002 Draft currently being worked on.

Thanks for the replies.

In my second post, I missed out a key bit from the first. I'm trying to determine how all members of management demonstrate their commitment to continual improvement.

I can undestand that all have to demonstrate their involvement in the operation of the OH&S system but how does a supervizor who has not been involved in an improvement programme demonstrate his/her commitment to continual improvement? What evidence would you seek as an auditor?

Thanks for the reply.

I'm trying to get a feel for the difference in approach from ISO 9001 and ISO 14001. For example, the similar requirement in ISO 9001 clause 5.1 refers to "top management" and gives 5 requirements to achieve compliance.

OHSAS 18001 clause 4.4.1 referes to "all management" with no supporting requirements.
It's that little word "all" thats getting at me.

I agree with most of what has been posted. The couple of things I would add that I look for are:

Involvement with departmental inductions (including safety)
Delivering tool box talks
Involvement with workplace inspection
Hazard spotting
Involvement with safety committees - not necessarily as the rep. but contributing ideas
Anecdotal evidence - just examples of what they have done


IMHO the important thing is for managers to understand their obligations to provide a safe workplace, safe equipment and safe ways of working. All of the above are examples of how they can show they understand.

I can undestand that all have to demonstrate their involvement in the operation of the OH&S system but how does a supervizor who has not been involved in an improvement programme demonstrate his/her commitment to continual improvement? If they are not involved with CI then it may not be relevant to them


What evidence would you seek as an auditor? What evidence would I seek? Only evidence which is relevant to the criteria as I stated above. If they aren't involved, they aren't involved. Everything is a matter of relevance.

Pretty good questions