K
After being asked by a client to modify our Safe Work Method Statement (SWMS)* template, I was googling for examples and was surprised by the number of companies selling pre-written SWMS.
They've taken what can be a great tool for hazard identification and risk control and turned it into another useless piece of paperwork that tarnishes the whole idea of workplace health and safety.
Not only do they contribute nothing to making a job safer, they reinforce the view among workers and management that safety is just ticking boxes and not a genuine effort to reduce workplace incidents.
I don't know if it is laziness or ignorance that would lead someone to purchase these and be satisfied that they've fulfilled their safety obligations.
Sorry for the rant, just had to get that off my chest!
*for those who don't know, similar to a JSA or task-based risk assessment.
They've taken what can be a great tool for hazard identification and risk control and turned it into another useless piece of paperwork that tarnishes the whole idea of workplace health and safety.
Not only do they contribute nothing to making a job safer, they reinforce the view among workers and management that safety is just ticking boxes and not a genuine effort to reduce workplace incidents.
I don't know if it is laziness or ignorance that would lead someone to purchase these and be satisfied that they've fulfilled their safety obligations.
Sorry for the rant, just had to get that off my chest!
*for those who don't know, similar to a JSA or task-based risk assessment.
Some of our bigger clients require them to be prepared by hand and not permitted to prepared electronically.
Some of our O&G clients require us to use their templates and their software. In one case I have seen, it works reasonably well as the JHA is written and this then opens up into an application for a work permit and then an isolation permit if its required.
At the end, the person prints it all out and it has be reviewed and signed by the supervisor for work concerned.
The bottom line is that nothing beats going out and asking people to list the risks the for job and the controls to test their knowledge of the approved way of doing the job.
But, as typical of safety, most of the responsibility for achieving injury free experience lies with the people on the bottom of the organisation who exercise the least amount of influence over safety performance. (20% company and 80% workers) according to Heinrich.
Compare this with the way the 80 -20 rule is applied in quality. See the head-on smash coming down the tunnel between safety and quality??