INSTITUTION OF OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH

Minute of the 112th Meeting of the Edinburgh Branch

C E White R Lovering N Doherty A Milne J Cowan  S Boucher D Manson A Hamilton J Purdie A Whyte   J Bruce P Colquhoun D Williams P Mainka W Weir K L Lloyd A McGowan D Cawkwell I Urquhart J Adamson   S Batley A McCartney M Batho W Hutchison R Hunter   J Turner E Brown J Toland D McGlade A Kirk   D Gladwin J Hepburn B Pill M Bancroft P Vietch   P Gotch I O’Neill R McLean L Young R Edward   J Smith D Forfar W Miedzybrodski D Devey I Murray   M Early J McCraith G Lyall J Berry A Green   R Staines J Owen G Miller G Lamond B McDonnell  G Smith G McNab G Cameron W Witherspoon H Gardner   R Walker J Craig M Johnstone R Mutch S Chisholm   B Davies

APOLOGIES

S Ashton K Wilson R W Bertrum R Atkinson R Innes   D Brown T Marchett

1.0 CHAIRMAN K L Lloyd

The Chair was taken by K Lloyd. Welcome was extended to all, particularly new Members and Guests. Mention was made of the recent events at Stanstead Airport and the involvement of Safety Practitioners including a Past President. Apologies were given regarding the change of venue at short notice and the lack of normal facilities but everyone did manage to get a seat

2.0 MINUTES

The 111^th Minute – January 2000 – was tabled two members did not receive copy and details were recorded; this will be checked and sorted. A full Mailshot had been undertaken both to circulate the Chairman’s letter and training course detail. The Minute was proposed by L Young and seconded by J Adamson as a true and accurate record.

3.0 MATTERS ARISING

3.1 Item Number 7.1 – LPG cylinder retrieval. No information came thro’ the secretary but a system was provided. M Johnstone has other detail.

3.2 Item Number 7.3 – Employee Consultation. The document is available and interest being shown by organisations to ensure detailed response. DDE 12 and on the web.

3.3 Item Number 7.4 – Drugs and Alcohol. No detail thro’ the secretary but the subject is to be addressed by an invited speaker at the June meeting. Other detail and a video could be available next meeting.

3.4 Item Number 7.5 - First Aid. No detail had been forwarded but an instant straw pole indicated that about half the companies represented gave some remuneration to their dedicated First Aiders.

The Secretary stressed the importance of using the availability of member expertise to network and to make greater use of the minutes for information seeking.

4.0 CORRESPONDENCE

4.1 Letters - B Bertram. Apologies
D Knight. SRLG meeting dates
C Wallace. Meeting places and dates for Executive
R Dixon. Executive committee working
D Forfar. Minute request
R Atkinson. Apologies

4.2 Membership - Details were given of the expanding membership and the up-grading of the recording system at Headquarters which has had some teething problems.

Copies of all the above mentioned correspondence was made available for the Members present. Further information is available upon request from the Secretary.

5.0 BRANCH EDUCATION OFFICER L Young

Mention was made of the number of portfolios being submitted for up-grading purposes and the additional work this entails; It was agreed at the Executive Committee meeting that a time limit should be set for the collection of completed portfolios. Three months. The guidance used to prepare for up-grading to Tech SP has a couple of amendments, which include the need to enclose a CV, and that no Risk Assessment should be older than two years

6.0 SPECIALIST GROUPS

6.1 MAPS CO-ORDINATOR M Johnstone

6.2 CONSTRUCTION C E White

The Branch was represented at the SG Meeting at HQ and the main item discussed was Consultative Document with collective response being prepared. Minutes will be provided once received and addressed at the next meeting.

6.3 ENVIRONMENTAL J Smith

Industrial Pollution and Control. The Scottish Executive have confirmed that there will be a 5^th consultation on the implementation of the IPPC, specifically addressing the proposed Pollution Prevention and Control Regulations. Since the current legislation regime in force is the one under existing legislation, SEPA is obliged to process applications in the usual way for the present. Consultants acting for companies in this connection may wish to keep this in mind when considering an application

Control of Major Accident Hazards. Detail was provided of the workings of the group set up to consider charging arrangements – copy containing detail available from the secretary.

7.0 MEMBERS ITEMS

7.1 Presentations. The Chairman spoke about the numbers of Fellowship within the Institution and particularly the fact that of these there are only 574 ladies. It was with pleasure that this Branch has increased that number recently. Congratulations were extended to Jan Smith, SEPA and presentation of her Fellowship Certificate made to her. The Members responded warmly.

7.2 District Forming. Mention was made of the Letter by the Chairman requesting up to date information and views from the Branch members concerning the forming of a District. All members were included in a full mailshot and already replies have started to come in. Replies will be sent to all that respond.

7.3 Annual General Election. Notification was given that the AGM will take place on 13 April 00 at Donaldson’s College and the Secretary outline the procedures for the election. All Principle Officers have to stand down but with the exception of the Chairman are eligible for re-election. Three Executive Committee members have to stand down and one is not eligible for re-election. Nomination should be lodged with the secretary by the latest next Meeting. There are seven posts open to the Membership. In addition a representative for the Construction SG and MAPS SG will be elected at the meeting. It should also be noted that there will be a free buffet and interesting guest Speakers. It is hoped that the Institution'’ president will be in attendance too.

8.0 GUEST SPEAKER

The Guest Speaker was introduced by C E White as Peter Gotch from Babtie and was invited to address the Members on the subject of CDM Regulations and associated ACOP.The speaker originally studied Production Engineering and Economics at Birmingham prior to joining the HMFI for 12 years. The last 4 of those years involved investigating 24 fatalities within the construction industry. For the last 10 years the speaker has been employed by Babtie as Senior Health & Safety Adviser and is currently a member of the West of Scotland IOSH executive.

Introduction

The speaker indicated that originally his presentation was to consider the latest/updated version of the CDM regulations & ACoP but as they have been under discussion and consultation for some time now the revised version is not anticipated until late summer. The topic of discussion was change to practical considerations of the CDM Regulations.

The client is the key player in CDM – they have more defined duties than any of the other positions identified in CDM. However one of the major difficulties is defining the actual client. Many appointments are made late and the proximity of the end of a financial year. Further complications arise when several projects interface. Some dividing of projects into smaller sections to bi-pass the regulations brings more hassle than gain.

It was suggested that designers are given insufficient training in health & safety matters. The Management Regulations require them to carry out Risk Assessment and most of the problems discovered on site are too late to have a design out capability. Many examples were highlighted including the Home of the Future and the Glenrothes Bridge.

Should be a body as opposed to a single person. The Association of Planning Supervisors was mentioned and particularly the entry qualification. Some even take on the full package including monitoring health and safety on site. Many examples discussed.

The main issue discussed was how to select a competent contractor – often by questionnaire with suspect questions and even more suspect and irrelevant answers. This section had a lengthy discussion with numbers points expounded.

The list of hazards the speaker believed should not include those, which were obvious to the specialist, the Plan needs to be related to the project and consider the issues pertinent to it. An example was quoted where a plan indicated a structure being loaded onto the roof of the clients building, then ceiling break though would be undertaken from inside – This included taking a Mobile crane to front door of the building – Lifting the kit up – Break through the roof etc. It did not however take into account that the building was a hospital and the room was the kitchen. No thought to ambulance access or food preparation in a kitchen, which could not be shut down, had been considered.

All pre-start construction plans should go through the following: -

• Assess the adequacy of the plan
• Decide on the adequacy of the plan – Then either
• If adequate = Permit construction phase to start
• If inadequate = Advise/prove deficiencies in the plan

A lively question session then rounded off the afternoon.

The Chairman voiced a Vote of Thanks and a small token of the Members appreciation was offered – the members responded warmly.

9 DATE OF NEXT MEETING

Members were reminded that the next meeting had been set at:

With the topic being

Mr Frank Sharp, Director of Human Resources. East of Scotland Water

10 CLOSURE

The Chairman thanked all for their attendance and contribution and bade them a safe journey homeward; then closed the meting with the invitation to have tea and then mingle.