Are your SOPs "Safe" or "Standard" Operating Procedures?
There is a distinct difference between them, and (sometimes) until that difference is fully understood, a standard operating procedure transforms into a safe operating procedure. In turn, this misunderstanding leads to a plethora of procedures.

A safe operating procedure is a set of mandatory guidelines designed to prevent hazards, while a standard operating procedure is a collection of best practices for improving efficiency or quality.

Safe operating procedures are mandatory and focus on avoiding potential risks, whereas standard operating procedures are not always mandatory and are less specific.

Safe operating procedures may include the standard procedures for tools and equipment used in a task.

Sorry, I probably haven't answered your question outright, but maybe a review of the number of SOPs will help answer your question.

@Venessa
Firstly - I know nothing about your industry, so the following could quite possibly be laughed off the forum...but I'll go out on a limb and ask these questions anyway.
1. Has the company fully investigated the thing that is causing the cuts? Are the knives, shears, and other cutting thingies (technical term, of course) fit for purpose? Are there alternative sharp-cutting things?
2. Has the company investigated to see if there is a trend of where, when and how the cuts occur? Do they happen more frequently in the mornings or afternoons? Is it from cutting a particular vegetable? Is it a particular shift?
3. Has the company consulted with the staff about what they see as the best way to control the risk (other than "being careful!")
4. Has the company sat down the 2 or 3 workers to find out why they don't see gloves as the fix?

Before resorting to PPE as the preferred control, companies should, through consultation with their employees, look at alternative and higher-level control methods.

Hi @Shayla McCormick
Off-the-shelf training courses have their place, but the information taught is generic and sometimes not relevant to a particular business or process.
There is the possibility you could do something in-house - tailored to your business.
This is a good base document that you could use to develop the training.
https://www.worksafe.govt.nz/dmsdocument/200-the-absolutely-essential-health-and-safety-toolkit
The training could be broken into sections, using the guide as a reference point, and you create a Q&A at the end to evaluate the level of comprehension.

What about getting your workers involved with developing or reviewing the risk register rather than getting them to sign a completed one?
The collective thoughts of those doing the job may produce insights for the company into work done rather than focusing on work planned.

Here is an interesting read:
https://deepgreenpermaculture.com/2021/04/21/how-to-neutralise-glyphosate-roundup-herbicide-contamination-in-soil/

I have used Sandra at https://kestrel.co.nz/ for many years. They conduct scenarios specific to your organisation and situation. Highly recommend.

You can go on naming the "first woman" of something, but none are the first in that field, so until you name the first was a female...you have no argument.

The question posed is real; it is sad and unfortunate that females are disproportionately represented in senior or executive roles; I am not qualified to enter into a discussion about why this is the case or why females do not apply for such roles. However, I believe I am safe to say your comments are one reason.
Thank you, you have successfully confirmed comment.

If you are your usual self, you will go on the offensive and try to justify your views and rip my post apart. Go on, I say; you have shown your hand, and it's outdated, bigoted and not welcome.

Walk on Andrew

Why not ask the rep what additional training they would like to do?

The Standard does say an experienced and/or qualified person does the six monthly — Steve H

Hi Steve
Can you please point me to the section in the standard that says this?

I suggest you get a copy of AS/NZS 4503. This standard details the requirements for handheld extinguishers.

If you follow the maintenance and inspection sections and keep records etc, as per the standard, AND your insurance company is happy with that regime, then I don't believe you need to send them away for inspections.

You need to follow numerous duties under the PECPR Regs; as this is a legal requirement, I suggest you start here.
As far as 'required' inspections, you need to have a current certificate of inspection, commonly known as an M&I certificate. These are valid for 12 months.
Any other inspections are as you decide, such as frequency and content.
Go to the Crane Associations Shop - they have a Gantry Crane inspection book available to buy
https://shop.cranes.org.nz/en-NZ/products/8999/Gantry-Checks-Lite-Version-/

Set up the inventory using the calculator here: https://www.hazardoussubstances.govt.nz/
Once it is set up, give the pin number to your sub-trades for them to complete.
When they enter the storage location, get them to enter their trade name first - this way, you can distinguish different locations and owners.
Then get them to update their sections as required.
We used this very successfully for 40+trades on a single site

Maybe not quite what you are looking for; I implemented this around four years ago.
Anyone on site (commercial construction) can issue a "safety plus card" whenever they see something or someone does something good.
The card is in two parts, one half for the staff receiving the card to have and one part for the issuer to write the receiver's name and what was seen/done. This part of the card is then given to the site manager.
Each week, at the toolbox talk, all returned cards are talked about, and everyone who got a card gets a chocolate fish.
Each month, all cards are put in a "hat", and one card is drawn out. the winner receives a $200 grocery voucher or meat pack
Having a chocolate inspired weekly prize removes the incentive to do it for the prize, and any suggestion of favouritism is removed by randomly drawing the monthly winner. the best sites give out 15-20 chocolate fish each week (most sites have over 100 people on them)
The sites that use the system also get effective two-way communication at the toolbox talks. the banter and feedback a chocolate fish creates is quite incredible!

There is quite a bit to unpack here - and without all the details, I could be off the mark.
You highlight multiple 'failures" from when the downstream PCBU contracted the upstream PCBU.
But what happened before the upstream PCBU was engaged?
Did the downstream PCBU accurately specify what they wanted?
Was a comprehensive prequal completed to ensure the upstream PCBU could design the plant correctly?
Did the downstream PCBU know of the 'minimum' standards, and did they perform their own checks on the design for compliance?

Notwithstanding the multiple failures after the plant was designed - I would be targeting any questions about what was requested to be built and by whom - long before I went down any path of Sec39 Upstream duties.

Shame. I thought we had moved on from such bogus navel gazing data. — Andrew

Andrew, sadly as the national transport agency has publically shamed themselves with an unachievable zero road toll aim...those in the transport industry have been forced to navel gaze

Thanks, Steve - I understood all that.
My question is simple - in what regulation is it written for a company to part charge their employee for PPE?.

Some interesting approaches to providing PPE. Can someone please point me in the direction of the HSWA Regulations that say it is legal to ask employees to contribute (money) to providing PPE when PPE is required - Maybe I've missed it

The solution to poor SSSP's is in the documents name.
Focus on the first two words, "SITE SPECIFIC". If an SSSP turns up and is not site-specific (filled with any amount of generic b******t), push it back and ask for a safety plan specific to your site - an SPSS!

Anyone working in healthcare or education that is not fully vaccinated after 1 Dec & 1 Jan will not longer be employed. It won't be difficult to manage, its the law. — E Baxter

It will be the law - as of today, right now, it is not the law. Please be careful with the words we use.
We, as H&S professionals and businesses, will be able to figure out what to do once the government sets the mandate in legislation.

What is still factual (Under the current Health Orders, Privacy Act, Bill of Rights, etc.) is that we cannot mandate vaccinations for a person. As safety professionals, we can only identify roles required to be performed by vaccinated workers.
Keeping that as the first thought when this topic comes up, I believe, makes finding an answer easier. The focus needs to be on the role’s potential exposure to the virus, not the worker performing it.

Before mandating any role as a vaccine required role, we must assess the role for the role’s exposure risk to the virus. As with any assessment, it needs to happen in collaboration with the workers and HSE representatives.

The risk assessment for exposure to COVID-19 should consider two factors about the role:
1. Identifying the likelihood of COVID-19 exposure - the likelihood of a worker being exposed to COVID-19 while performing the role, and
2. Identifying the potential of that exposure on others - the potential consequences of that exposure on others (e.g. community spread).

To help work out potential consequences, consider if the role involves regular contact with others that may be at high risk (of severe illness) if they contract COVID-19.

Completing the risk assessment
If there’s a high likelihood that the role will expose the person performing it to COVID-19, and the consequences would be significant for the worker and other people, then, in that case, it’s likely the role needs to be performed by a vaccinated person.

And of course, as part of any assessment, it has to be acknowledged that no vaccine is 100% effective, and there is some chance a vaccinated worker may become infected with COVID-19 and still transmit the virus to other people!

Like mandating specific training requirements for a role (such as harness training when working at height), mandating a role required to be performed by a vaccinated worker means a PCBU meets their duties under the HSWA.

Finally, we all know of other risks associated with Covid that sit outside of safety; but other forums can debate them!