really helpful, thank you!

a completely fair question! I was pushing it with that vague, rushed question I posted. So more context, currently we are on a primarily paper based health and safety system which means we need to keep health and safety effective without overloading people with too much paperwork. So when people head out to a site, they will go over the risk register for that site, add any new hazards on the day and all workers will sign off the risk register before starting work on site as part of their pre start/take 5.

The general office risk register does not require workers signatures but I’m wondering if risk registers should be signed off for all our higher risk environments as a means to ensure we are tracking what workers have seen the risk register for that site/work area. There are of course other training and competency assessments for carrying out certain work activities in addition to be signed off on a register. But I thought it may be useful for keeping track of workers knowledge when the health and safety system is fairly immature?

Hi Steve, The manager for this area decided to not pursue the boat idea due to the safety requirements. That is useful information however. Thanks to you and Matt for the valuable information.

Hi Alex,
Thanks so much for this very insightful reply. That really helps weigh it up and give some perspective!

@MattD2 @KeithH I think the culture of the company needs to be weighed before jumping straight into an election process. As there is somewhat of an "old school" mentality towards health and safety, which has slowly been improving over the years, due to management creating more opportunities for participation from workers, particularly through the role of a health and safety committee, where the workers are given a voice through our "Voluntary HSRs".

However, slowly but surely is the approach being adopted for changing the culture of the workplace. With the intention for health and safety to be inherently part of the everyday culture rather than the ominous health and safety cloud that has people view it as something that slows down work production and stops autonomy of work.

Part of the bigger picture and evolving health and safety in the company, holding HSR elections are certainly an option to work towards in the very near future. There is some hesitancy due to the current "Voluntary HSRs" having dedicated themselves to their roles, and are the ones keenly interested in H&S. At this stage, it may do more harm than good to hold an election, when they are more than likely voted in again due to lack of interest and they are left feeling less than valued.

@KeithH @Tony Walton Talking this through with my manager this morning, who posed the question, can they be called "Voluntary H&S Representatives". In your opinions, is this moving far enough away from the HSR title and the subsequent election requirements?

@MattD2 Thanks Matt. That sounds sensible. After discussing with them today they felt health and safety issues could easily be raised with the appropriate people and they felt they were managing risks ie trip hazards by implementing controls straight away.

@keithH Thanks for the additional information Keith, if the HSRs were not specifically requested by the workgroup, but as a way the PCBU has chosen to implement greater worker participation and a better representation for workers outside of management, are they still classed as HSRs? It should be noted, all "HSRs" volunteered and it was made optional to any person, as there was only a handful of volunteers they were all selected.

Thanks Tony, I look forward to reading Paper Safe first.

Thank you I will certainly read it.

I am expanding my question here, as I am unable to add to my original post.
My understanding is a workshop pit needs mechanical ventilation under AS/NZS 60079 ZA.4.1, along with lighting and electrical equipment being "intrinsically safe". If this is in place no other warning systems are needed. ie an adequate fan ventilation system and correct lighting/electrical equipment is enough to ensure the ventilation of the pit is safe for workers to access.

The Psychosocial hazards in work environments and effective approaches for managing them was published in April 2019 by Work Safe. Bullying and sexual harrassment is most certainly a hazard. It is a useful document to read and includes success factors for workplace bullying interventions, https://worksafe.govt.nz/dmsdocument/5417-psychosocial-hazards-in-work-environments-and-effective-approaches-for-managing-them

This may be all the information you have already, but according to the HSNO Your Practical Guidelines, "If your workplace keeps spare acetylene and oxygen cylinders, store
them separately to minimise the potential for harm if an incident involving a set
of cylinders occurs", and yes it seems they should be stored at least 3m away from each other. These guidelines from Boc Gas are useful, particularly page 24, https://www.boc-gas.co.nz/en/legacy/attachment?files=tcm:U435-82369,tcm:435-82369,tcm:35-82369.

Current speed limit is 10km. It is a single speed limit for the whole site. There are several motor vehicle work shops on the one industrial site, including a truck workshop. The purpose of enforcing the speed limit is for everyones safety who is working in the workshops or walking around the premise.

Hi Andrew,
I agree with you, as it is a safety culture issue. I am not confident there is a strong enough emphasis during inductions on the no speeding policy. "No faster than walking" is a great way to keep it in perspective and at the forefront of everyone's minds. Considering speeding is a constant issue and is a high risk due to the traffic management on site with the number of vehicles and pedestrians in one place at one time, means I do agree that a disciplinary process needs to be taken to highlight the seriousness of speeding.

Thanks for taking the time to respond.

Hi Michelle,

Thanks so much for the really helpful response. That is exactly what needs to be done.

Cheers,

Lucille