 |
| Block 3: Occupational Health Management - Section 2: Occupational Health Programme |
| OHM2.2: A 10 step approach to establishing an Occupational Health Programme (Part 1) |
|
| Block 3: Occupational Health Management - Section 2: Occupational Health Programme |
| OHM2.2: A 10 step approach to establishing an Occupational Health Programme (Part 1) |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Introduction: All Health and Safety programmes have, as a core process, a common sequence of events. These are the 10 steps described below. Depending on the scope of the programme envisaged, all evaluated hazards can be included in the process described below. Alternatively, one specific hazard (noise) could be the focus and the process still applies. The first 5 of these steps will be discussed on this page, while the other 5 are treated on the next page. |
 |
(See the HRA guidelines document). This is the process whereby the hazards in the workplace are evaluated in terms of their potential risk to the health of the employees. Remember that a hazard is not a risk unless there is significant potential exposure. Hence risk is a function of harmfulness ("consequence") and degree of exposure ("probability"). HRA’s should take into account both of these components, not only simply listing the hazards, but prioritising them according to their composite risk. HRAs vary in their intensity according to the requirements of the company. They can be very simple (a Hazard Scan), or very complicated. Complexity should only be necessary in companies where toxic materials are handled by a number of people or where hazards exist which pose serious threats to health. Often a Hazard Scan is used as a first step in complex HRAs. Whatever the complexity, the outputs are essentially the same - Steps 1, 2 and 3 of the process (see below).
(See the OREP document) This step outlines the key features of each occupation in the company - including the inherent requirements to meet the standards allocated to the job, as well as a description of the potential health risks to which this job is exposed. OREP stands for Occupational Risk Exposure Profile. Line management is best placed to complete these documents, with the assistance of the medical staff, with instructions and guidelines. The establishment of rational OREPs is critical to the rest of the programme and particularly to the development of defendable recruitment practices in terms of the Labour Relations Act and Employee Equity Act (Step 5).
The OREP is a unique document, and carries a special place. Firstly, it comprises the important "Standard-setting" phase required for rational design of the medical screening programme, by providing the operational requirements for each job category. This is used to determine the medical standards for adjudicating job fitness (see design of WASPs" later). Secondly, it describes the health risks associated with each job category, incorporating the hazards as well as the degree of exposure to each, by job category. This is used to determine the medical screening tests to identify early adverse health effects of exposure (see design of WASPs" later).
(See the Toxicology document). This step covers the detailed evaluation of all the hazardous substances (especially the chemicals) in the company. This includes a listing of all the substances, followed by a detailed analysis of their toxicological effects on the human body (taken from reliable material safety data sheets (MDSDS’s) and other sources. MSDSs are frequently inadequate when it comes to long term or chronic effects of exposure. Other sources are medline (and other dedicated toxicology database) searches and the ILO encyclopaedia. When this is completed, the various chemicals are linked with the occupations and workplaces where the exposures take place.
GREG YOU NEED TO RATIONALISE THIS
This is performed by the use of specially designed analytical datasets.
WHAT ARE THESE? Tee hee. These are my jaw-droppers. An example is on the cd, under "SYNERGEE\STARTER PACK\03 - PROJECT MANAGER - HRA\HRA Forms & Templates\02 - Haz Chem Substances\Databases, and called "Toxicology Profile" (Excel spreadsheet). The version you have has since being substantially updated. I will have to show you how it is used to transform the modern approach to Chemical Risk Assessment!! I am uncomfortable with putting this file on the disc, as it is commercially valuable, and carries some company stuff. But, I am willing to work at this and find a way to make something available, that can be "played with". GREG TO PROVIDE A SCALED DOWN VERSION AS AN APPROACH TO THE TOPIC - THIS WOULD BE A GENERIC APPROACH FOLLOWED BY ONE OR TWO EXAMPLES.
Figures 2 & 3 are images from the Toxicology document that could be used here. Jonny, when the picture is a little clearer, perhaps we could revisit this spot. The wood is so dense right now, I cannot see the trees....
(See the WREP document) This step covers the detailed evaluation of health risks in the various working places of the company. WREP stands for Workplace Risks & Exposure Profiles, which is the workplace or location (as opposed to job) equivalent of the OREP. The use of checklists and inventories is essential. It provides a useful crosscheck of the information collected for the OREPs. This is conducted by those trained in health risk assessment, such as the risk officer, occupational health nurse and doctor, but can also be conducted by trained line staff and health and safety representatives.
Workplace risk assessments can be conducted by Process or by Location.
The Process-based risk assessment yields information regarding the risk associated with activities and operational processes. This form of risk assessment is useful to link risks with activities, (and job categories that perform these activities) and product lines (the assessment looks at operational processes, regardless of their location in the company). The final output is a listing of high-risk activities and product-lines, and the underlying causes of the risks. Interventions (and management follow-up) are therefore directed at the activities (work procedures) and product lines (elimination, substitution, etc.).
The Location-based risk assessment yields information regarding the risks associated with specific workplaces. This form of risk assessment is useful to link risks with places of work, (and job categories that are are placed there). The final output is a listing of high-risk workplaces, and the underlying causes of the risks. Interventions (and management follow-up) are therefore directed at the workplaces and conditions of work.
The relationship between OREPs and WREPs.
See figure 2, page 5 of the WREPs document.
GREG TO PROVIDE A SUMMARY
EXPOSITION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN WREPS AND OREPS AND WHY OREPS ARE
ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT FROM THE POINT OF
MEDICAL SURVEILLANCE AND PARTICULARLY LINKING EXPOSURE SURVEILLANCE IN A
MEANINGFUL MANNER TO HEALTH SURVEILLANCE RATHER THAN THE CURRENT RELIANCE ON THE
WREP APPROACH ONLY WHICH IS VERY DIFFICULT TO RELATE TO MEDICAL SURVEILLANCE.
The Risk Assessment culminates in the establishment of a Risk Matrix, which is used in steps 4, 5 & 6. SHOULD THIS THEN NOT BE STEP 4?? Nope. THEN WE CAN BRING UP THE BOOK MARK BELOW? OTHERWISE WE CAN LEAVE AS IS. IT IS JUST THAT IT IS NOT VERY PROMINENT. The info from the "Risk Matrix" section below could be placed here.
For more details on the above, see the HRA Guidelines and the HRA Policy documents
WE ALSO NEED A WORKED EXAMPLE OF EACH WHICH CAN BE LINKED - USE A HYPOTHETICAL WORKPLACE TO ILLUSTRATE THE POINTS INVOLVING WREPS, OREPS, THEIR RECONCILIATION AND THE RESULTANT RISK MATRIX.. THIS IS TYPICALLY CONFUSING FOR PEOPLE AS THE NAME HRA IS QUITE THREATENING TO ALL CONCERNED. IT WOULD BE GOOD TO UNPACK THIS BY WAY OF EXAMPLES ESPECIALLY SHOWING THE LINKAGES BETWEEN COMPONENTS AND STEPS. Good idea. I will work on something. It can also be something that they should work towards during their factory visit exercise. GEORGES COULD ALSO USE THIS AS AN INPAGE EXCERCISE.
The Occupational Health and Safety Act and Regulations repeatedly refer to the employer’s obligation to provide sufficient training to employees in order to enable them to protect themselves from unnecessary health risk. Its importance is reflected in its repeated reference throughout this piece of legislation, most notably the Occupational Health and Safety Act, Section 13(a), in which it requires employees to be conversant with the hazards of the job. This training is largely determined by the outcomes of the Risk Matrix and OREPs, which outline the potential health risks and the job’s inherent requirements. CAN WE NOT PUT IN SOME LINKS HERE
(See the OREP document) The establishment of OREPs and inherent (fitness) standards (still to come) enables rational recruitment practices without fear of reprisal under the Labour Relations Act or the Employment Equity Act. However, these standards need to be defendable and underpinned by a sound HRA. Prospective employees (job applicants) should not be engaged (or allowed to leave) until the appointed Occupational Medical Practitioner has cleared them. Furthermore, an induction programme should be instituted, including training. HOW DOES THIS RELATE TO THE DISABILITY REQUIREMENTS OF THE AACT This is covered extensively in the Medical Fitness and certification Guideline.
The Risk Matrix is the formal documentation of the results of the Risk Assessment, listing all the elements of the assessment in a single record, including location and exposure group. It comprises a matrix of the following:
NOT CLEAR TO ME HOW WREPS FEATURE HERE - IS IT IN THE GROUPING BY DEPARTMENTS?
HOW ARE WREPS RECONCILED WITH OREPS TO BE PUT INTO THE MATRIX.
OR IS IT PERHAPS THAT OUR MEDICALLY ORIENTED SYSTEM RELIES RATHER ON OREPS AND NOT ON WREPS
I AM CONFUSED ABOUT THIS - IT WILL NEED TO BE CRYSTAL CLEAR TO THE STUDENTS
Spot-on, Jonny!!
Whilst both OREPs as well as WREPs could be represented in the Risk Matrix, the medical team are much more interested in representing the OREPs, which enable occupation-oriented interventions (training and medical screening) that target high risk activities and occupations. WREPs would be of interest to Risk Managers and Line Managers, for whom process (or location) oriented interventions would be appropriate.
The relevant fields are populated by risk-related data, in an easy to see format ("blank" means not applicable, and asterisks from * - ****, indicating degrees of harmfulness, exposure or risk, from low (*) to extreme (****)). Instead of asterisks (*), numbers from 1-4 can be used.
Analysis of this data enables easy "birds eye-view" evaluation and prioritisation IS THIS EVALUATION OR PRIORITISATION FOR EVALUATION of the risks (high or low) associated with various workplaces, departments and occupations, for every conceivable hazard. Inter-departmental and cross-occupational comparisons are therefore easy. Furthermore, subsequent risk reduction interventions are used to update the matrix, thereby enabling trends downwards or upwards to be visualised or recorded..
This enables rapid comparative analysis of relative risks CONFUSING
USE OF THIS TERM
agreed! COULD YOU NOT RATHER HAVE
PRIORITISED
RISKS AND THEIR TRENDS, across the organisation.
It is also a powerful tool for planning and organising proposed risk reduction strategies,
and measuring the effects of these strategies.
