C E White M Bancroft M Johnstone R Lovering G Lyall G Garry M Mitchell K Darling J Adamson S Boucher M Scott-Smith C Arnott B Pill B Byrne G Dick G Pearson J McCraith I M Murray S Page J Hepburn R Walker J Usher J Little R Edward M Gorman J Craig R Paterson D Sinclair T Reynolds D Duff V Stewart P Veitch I Wilson D Cawkwell C Wilmott N Robertson A Sharman S Macmorland I Ezzi R McLean P Conway M Crowston J Farquharson W Witherspoon A Evans I O’Neill R Graveling R Davies A Milne K Lloyd

Plus Visitors and Guests

D A Brown T Boyd B Bertram B Stainton A Reid G Macnab

1.0 CHAIRMAN- Brian Pill

Brian took the Chair and the meeting held within the Dining Hall. It was also explained that the AGM and Buffet would be in this room. Brian mentioned the importance of signing the Sederunt; it acts as the Roll Call in a fire situation, the parking restrictions and the importance of driving with extreme care within the College grounds.

2.0 MINUTES

The 131^st Minute was accepted without amendment. It was Proposed by M Bancroft and Seconded by J McCraith as a true and accurate record. It was noted that the full minute has been posted on the website complete with photographs. When printed out takes thirteen pages.

3.0 MATTERS ARISING – there were no matters arising from the Minute.

4.0 CORRESPONDENCE – Chris

It was stated that all copies of correspondence are maintained by the Secretary for the member’s attention and readily available at the front table during the tea break.

5.0 BRANCH EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT ADVISOR – Liz Young

The members were reminded that the Tech SP up-grade route is now closed and that only those Associates who are registered will have until December to complete their portfolios.

6.0 SPECIALIST GROUPS

7.0 DISTRICT REPORT – Brian Pill

The group recently met in Perth for their AGM and interest speaker on ‘T’ in the Park. There was a good attendance and the elections were successfully completed. Minutes are not yet available but will be tabled and posted on the Web. Brian informed the members that he would be the Branch/District liaison for the coming year and keep full contact at both Branch and Executive Committee meetings. The members were asked to show support for the District by signing the appropriate section of the intended application form.

8.0 MEMBERS ITEMS

8.1 Presentations. The Chairman was pleased to make presentations of framed Certificates to a number of Branch Members. He stressed the importance of the continual strive for better understanding of Health and Safety and the hard work this involves. CPD is one way and achieving recognition by obtaining higher grades of membership of our Institution is another. The following members were introduced to the Branch and presented with their Certificates:

	Dr Paul Veitch Technician Safety Practitioner TechSP
	Mr John Adamson Corporate Member MIOSH
	Ms Liz Young Fellowship FIOSH
	Mr Roddy McLean Fellowship FIOSH

The members supported the Chairman congratulations.

8.2 Annual General Meeting. The meeting was reminded of the importance of the forthcoming AGM and the need for members to play an active part in the running of the Branch. The Secretary outlined the procedure and the availability of nomination forms from the Secretary or the Branch Website stated. The AGM is on April 11 and will include a buffet, interest speaker – Old Edinburgh, address by the Chief Executive and elections.

9.0 GUEST SPEAKERS

The Chairman explained that the initial presentation of some 10 to 15 minutes would be a brief update from the IOM relating to the Manual Handling workshop, which was held at the Edinburgh Branch of IOSH in the June of last year. He then explained that the presenter was obviously not one of the original workshop leaders (Margaret Hanson & Alison Stewart) but was in fact Dr Richard Graveling

Introduction

The speaker indicated that the initial set of workshops had followed the process of consulting with manual handling practitioners and trainers, then consulting with scientific experts in order to establish basic principles and then to take those principle back to the manual handling trainers and practitioners to verify the application of the principles in practice.

Over 200 people attended the various workshops and all tending to agree that the original guidance note L23 did not fit

The intention here was to utilise some 34 experts, some of which provided guidance via paper responses whilst 22 of them attended a meeting in London to offer comments to consider the Principles of good manual handling technique.

The basic principle being gained the process now is of achieving a consensus against the offered principles

Richard then handed out forms with a number of principles listed and asked the members present to fill in their responses and return the form to him by the end of the meeting.

The Chair suggested that having taken a look at the form and noted its depth of questioning it might be more appropriate for the form to be completed during a period after the meeting and then send it back to Dr. Graveling.

To do this the Fax number was quoted as – 0131 667 0136

Alternatively it could be posted to IOM at 8 Roxborough Place, Edinburgh, EH8 9SU

Either method of return should be employed within the next two weeks.

12 Basic Principles were listed on the form =

• 1 Try to warm up prior to handling
• 2 Plan the task
• 3 Prepare for the handling task
• 4 Minimise the horizontal distance between the lower back of the handler and the centre of gravity of the load throughout the handling operation
• 5 Create & maintain a stable base = Have feet apart with one leg forward & Be prepared to move your feet if necessary
• 6 Get a secure hold of the load
• 7 The lumbar spine, hips and knees should be moderately flexed (bent) at the start of the lift
• 8 Don’t flex the spine any further as you lift
• 9 Try not to twist the trunk or lean sideways especially whilst the back is bent
• 10 Keep your head up when handling
• 11 Move smoothly
• 12 Don’t lift more than you can easily manage

Each of these topics had to be rated with your level of agreement (Strongly Agree – Agree – Have no opinion – Disagree – Strongly disagree) and also given a priority rating

Each of the 12 principles were then requested to be considered to verify if you had a disagreement with it for each of the following operations

• One handed lifting
• Large bulky loads
• Large flat vertical loads
• Lifting from a container
• Lifting in limited headspace
• Lifting while seated
• Team lifting
• Lifting light loads

Following the consultation period and agreement on the principles which is due to be finished by the end of March 2002 a report will be issued to the HSE by July 2002 and hopefully that will then lead to further revision of the L23 guidelines.

**************************************************************************

Margery Mitchell was then introduced to the members. Margery is employed by the HSE within the Health Unit – which means she is not currently part of the operational field force.

Margery indicated she intend to give brief talks on two topics –

• HSE FOD (Field Operations Division) Approach to preventative Inspections
• A revision of the OEL Framework (by using previously prepared visuals)

The FOD Preventative Inspections are from the 1^st April, to follow a new approach aimed at meeting the Revitalizing of Health & Safety and the Securing Health & Safety Together documents.

These as is probably well known by now place targets reductions of –

• 30% reduction in days lost
• 20% reduction in ill health
• 10% reduction in fatalities all by 2010 with a halfway reduction by 2004

This placed an increased emphasis on Occupational Health plus shared targets with the RHS (rehabilitation service) which for Scotland amounted to –

• £0.5m per annum from workplace accidents
• £2.2m per annum days lost from ill health

It has been widely indicated that the Construction, Agriculture and Health service areas of employment are to be targeted

With 5 priority areas of –

Stress, Falls from height, musculoskeletal injuries, Workplace transport and Slips, Trips & Falls.

To these FOD were to add a further 3 priorities –

Hand & arm vibration, Noise and Asthmagens.

Both strategic documents look to 5 key areas – Compliance, Continual improvement, Knowledge, Skills and Support.

As and from April 2002 the FOD will be undertaking more Preventative Inspections – this is where they turn up on your doorstep, not chasing accidents or observed unsafe practices etc, but just arrive to check out how good the accident control and management of the company is working. These inspections will be concentrating specifically on the 5 HSC and the 3 FOD priority hazard areas. = Stress, Falls from height, Musculoskeletal injuries, Workplace transport, Slips, Trips & Falls, Hand & arm vibration, Noise and Asthmagens.

You may have already notice there has been an increase in the numbers of HSE Inspectors of late and this is one factor that was considered necessary (more Bobbies on the beat) in order to gain a real measure of performance on each of these topics and hence gain a significant improvement.

Each of the topics will be assessed against a defined set of risk indicators. These will be termed RCIs (Risk Control Indicators) and will be rated from 1 (good) to 4 (bad). The rating of 4 may even be considered sufficient to consider enforcement action on some of the topics whilst on others it will only be equivalent to guidance & suggestions. Stress being an example where there will only be 2 RCIs, whilst Noise will have 3 RCIs.

The 3 factors considered (where necessary) to assess noise performance being –

• Noise Management System – which will consider the arrangements, including provision of information and supervision, health surveillance etc
• Control of Noise at Source – the HSE are currently looking to reduce the quantity of guidance note down to 2 or 3 to avoid the levels of confusion currently experienced, but they will be looking to see what is being done on a reasonably practicable front rather than constantly resorting to PPE
• Ear Protection Programme – are there ear protection zones, is the type and form of ear protection supplied suitable etc

Margery then answered questions on this section of her presentation

A lot of the detail contained in the original EH40 listing of MELs and OELs was adopted from the States, as it is difficult to gain definitive set levels of what is safe. It is not possible to stop ALL exposure and the intention is consider what should be done in the future with setting levels.

OEL limits are considered safe (as good a control as you can get practically) but there are no human exposure evidence details to prove they are safe. MELS are often the result of when it has gone severely wrong.

MELs (Maximum Exposure Levels)

• Limits must be met
• Required to reduce exposure below limit so far as is reasonably practicable
• Limit is not to be exceeded

• Standard should be met
• No requirement to reduce exposure further
• Standard can be exceeded providing steps taken to reduce so far as is reasonably practicable

These organisations often have problems in getting to grips with the different standards required of occupational exposure to chemicals and the levels enforced by the environmental agencies.

There are thought to be 3 options for the future control of chemical exposure limits –

• Maintain but update the existing system with minor adjustments as necessary
• Utilise Good Practice as the standard with a single limit
• Good Practice supported by a 2 tier system of limits with flags for carcinogens

The real issue is of a move to CONTROLS rather than working to standards

Margery then showed the COSHH Essentials – a step by step guide to controlling chemical hazards, although she did agree that certain changes were necessary to be made to avoid the possibility of users of the guide going "over the top" with the levels of PPE being used, rather than putting controls in place.

A fully integrated system for chemical control, freely available on the Internet for anyone to use.

The Chairman thanked the Speakers on behalf of the members and was encouraged by the numerous and testing questions posed and answered. He offered token of appreciation and the members responded warmly.

10.0 DATE OF NEXT MEETING

Brian thanked the members for their attendance; he then set the date for the next meeting as:

11.0 CLOSURE

The Chairman closed the meeting by encouraging the members to mingle over the tea, have informal chat with their peers, and consider nominations for the elections at the AGM in April. Remind all that the last date for submission will be the next meeting 14 March.

Christopher E White MBE, FIOSH,RSP