GENERAL HEALTH &

SAFETY INSPECTION OF
WORKSHOP

INSPECTION CARRIED
OUT BY KEVIN FORBES
ON 9

OF FEBURARY
2005
AT 11.30AM
TH

INTRODUCTION
Inspection of workshop area to identify areas
of good practice and to highlight hazards to
health and safety
The inspection was carried out using
observation sheets and grouping hazards.
Risks to health and safety were prioritised as
follows.
HIGH - Requires immediate attention
MEDIUMRequires action within 1 month
LOWRequires action within 6 months
These risks were then prioritised according to
timescale required for remedial action.
IMMEDIATEMEDIUMLONG TERM-

1-3 DAYS
1-4 WEEKS
1 MONTH+

Many of the deficiencies identified have no

cost implications since remedy would be
within
the
scope
of
normal
supervisory
responsibility. Others may be expensive to

cure and in order to give some indication of

the costs involved, the following guidelines
have been adopted
NO COSTSupervisory responsibility
LOW COST- Under 100
MED COST- 100- 500
HIGH COST500+

The following abbreviations are used within

the reportCOSHH-

Control of substances hazardous

to health regulations 2002
MWSWRManagement of health and safety
at work regulations 1999
WHS&WWork place health safety and
welfare regulations 1992
H&SHealth and safety

At time of my inspection there was no one

working in area so noise levels, crowding,
dust and machinery movements could not
be assessed.
SUMMARY
The inspection showed that overall H&S was
lacking in several key areas, some of which
require immediate attention as current H&S

legislation is being contravened, with serious

risk of injury to persons.
BREACH OF STATUTORY DUTIES CAN RESULT
IN CRIMINAL PROSECUTION & FINES UPTO
20,000

MAJOR ISSUE 1
HOUSEKEEPING
Numerous examples of poor housekeeping
were found & are listed on the observation
sheets. They are producing trip hazards, fire
hazards and hygiene issues & therefore the
risk of
injury
to
employees,
visitors
&
contractors. The WHSWR require that the
workplace be kept clean and tidy, also section
2 of Health & Safety at Work etc. act 1974
requires that employers provide a safe place
of work.
It is recommended that the workplace is
cleaned
&
all
waste
materials
removed
immediately. Covered rubbish bins should be
provided and a system of daily emptying
should be implemented within 1 month. These
represent low cost actions.

In the long term it is recommended that the

possibility
of
employing
a
caretaker
be
explored. This would be effective in helping to
maintain a safe, clean place of work, however
this would involve significant cost & would
require a cost/benefit analysis to be carried
out.
All employees should be trained on induction
on general house keeping procedures including
the correct storage of tools. This would
involve little cost as it could be carried out in
house by supervisors.
MAJOR ISSUE 2
ELECTRICITY
Evidence of poor maintenance of electrical
equipment was observed together with trailing
cables, which produce a tripping hazard. The
risk of electrocution, fire or burns to staff is
stressed & requires urgent action. Both to
protect personnel & to comply with the
electricity regulations and PUWER 1998 It is
recommended
that
visual
checks
of
all
electrical
equipment
be
carried
out
immediately and any equipment with frayed
wires or any other damage, be removed from
workplace,
marked
do
not
use
and
be
quarantined. In addition a competent person
(electricity at work regulations) should carry
out PAT testing within 1 month. Annual testing
should be carried out thereafter & a system of
testing
new
equipment
before
use
in
workplace should be introduced. This would
involve medium cost as external provision and
training of competent person maybe required.

This will result in significant risk reduction.

Cables need to be re-routed immediately as
they pose a significant risk & a review of
electrical sockets should be carried out within
1 month. Any additional provision of electrical
sockets should be included in next years
budget as it may involve high cost
MAJOR ISSUE 3
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES
Examples of unlabeled & incorrectly stored
substances
were
found
as
indicated
on
inspection sheets. All substances should be
labelled according to CHIP regulations &
storage of substances should be implemented
within 1 month to comply with COSHH
regulations. Any unlabeled substances should
be investigated by a competent person to
establish what they are, and then either
labelled or disposed of safely. Action required
within 1 week at low medium cost depending
on availability of competent personnel and
disposal requirements.

MAJOR ISSUE 4 FIRE

A foam fire extinguisher was provided but its
position was not clearly identified and it was
located
some
distance
from
machinery
producing sparks and heat.
The only major hazard was a locked fire door
that contravenes the fire precautions act
1971. The fire door must remain unlocked
when workshop is in use and instruction for

there operation should be displayed. The door

must
be
unlocked
immediately
and
fire
extinguisher re-located and clearly signed
within 1 week. (The H&S, Safety Signs &
Signals Regs 1996) Little cost is involved in
these actions but significant risk reduction
can be achieved.
CONCLUSION
My inspection revealed good levels of lighting
and
provision
of
PPE.
However
all
the
foregoing suggests that we are not even
achieving the minimum standard of safety
required by legislation. This may leave the
company open to action to by the HSE either
by means of an improvement or prohibition
notice
or
even
prosecution.
In
addition
employees who are injured may have a good
case for compensation under civil law. We
should move from a position of reactive safety
to proactive safety. I recommend initially a
meeting
with
yourself
&
the
workshop
supervisor to formulate a milestone plan to
achieve full safety compliance.

The following are the main recommendations

arising from this inspection

1.
Review
supervision

the

level

and

quality

of

2. Review the general and specific training

requirements within the department
3. Create proper storage facilities
4. Identify and control hazardous substances
5. Reinforce the importance of good
housekeeping
By improving H&S within the organisation you
could increase staff moral creating a positive
H&S culture, ultimately leading to increased
production and a happy work force.