SCAUM H&S manual

[achingknees]

Been a while since we visited this but just had a look at the results of the poll

http://www.bajr.org/BAJRPolls/result.asp

Bit disappointing eh? Especially as the 1997 manual Preface states that SCAUM 'believes that copies of the document should be readily available for consultation by all levels of staff...'

Project Managers and Unit Directors: pull your fingers out and your socks up. SCAUM: your members clearly are unable to disseminate such important documents. Please bypass them and make this document free to all. :face-confused:

[BAJR Host]

They have been asked to consider making this document available... still no answer after nearly 2 months.... Any SCAUM members want to ask why? A direct request from BAJR.... please either say yes or no with a reason.....

Another day another WSI?

[muddyandcold]

In my experience of units, most have a copy of SCAUM tucked away somewhere in the bowels of the office.... As most field staff are exactly that 'Field Based' they do not have much opportunity to see this document. Certainly, it is not brought to their awarness upon being employed.

If they do know about it (again from personnel experience) the response they get is either,
1) not enough time on site to allow you into the office to look at it - it's not that important,
2) can't let it onto site, it might get dirty

Has anyone else had any other responses?

[troll]

Just a quickie really....
Thank you Achingknees and Mr Hosty for your endeavours on this issue.I really do believe that with a bit of effort from everyone, health and safety in British archaeology can be dragged from the Industrial revolution into the 21st century.All we ask is that our well-being is considered and provided for in an equal fashion to that of our building industry colleagues.At least.The Scaum manual has to be available to all staff and especially those who work in the field.I`m afraid there can really be no excuse.I`m pleased to say that my current employer provides for a copy of their Health and Safety policy on site alongside a risk assessment.The Scaum manual issue is suprising me. Just why don`t Scaum and/or unit directors want site staff to have access to the document?It would`nt be because an informed workforce in full possession of knowledge relating to health and safety (and their rights) is seen as a hinderence in a commercial environment now would it? Surely not.........a bit harsh on my part I accept-but, would`nt hurt Scaum to take the time out and respond to the enquiry penned by Mr Hosty would it? Scaum-a response please or we are just going to have to draw our own conclusions.}

..knowledge without action is insanity and action without knowledge is vanity..(imam ghazali,ayyuhal-walad)

[1man1desk]

I strongly suspect inertia, rather than evil intent, is the culprit here.

1man1desk

to let, fully furnished

[beamo]

Hi everyone

Not really wishing to be a bit of a party-pooper here but I feel that the desired result of your endeavours will have not the slightest effect on site H&S. I wirte as someone who was previously responsible for H&S at one of the UKs biggest field units and therefore some experience in the matter (and yes - I do have COSHH and IOSH certification).

The SCAUM manual basically tells archaeological units which H&S regulations, policies and guidance are likely to apply to their work. In this it is fairly accurate and up to date, but there are some contentious issues. For example, with regard to the CDM Regs. the SCAUM manual states that archaeological units may become 'Contractors' undere these regs. but nothing beyond that. In actual fact, the unit that I worked for had been Contractor, Principal Contractor, Designer and Client - everything in fact other than Planning Supervisor, a role that we had declined on several occasions due to lack of experience, qualified personnel etc.

The SCAUM manual does not provide practical guidance on how to actually implement safe working paractice, and is couched in the usual H&S terminology of 'reasonably practicable'. what is more crucial for site staff to see is the company H&S policy, as this is the document that lays down how the unit has interpreted H&S guidance etc. and taken it forward to a practical level that can often be tighter than the actual HSE material.

For instance there is the issue of the safe depth of excavation with vertical sections. A common misconception is that there is a legal limit of 1.2m depth for vertical; sections. Not so - there used to be an HSE guidance note that suggested 4 feet (c. 1.2m) as a safe working limit, but note that this guidance, not legislation. It was then superceded by another guidance note that refered only to 'safe working depth' according to conditions etc (see HSE document 'Be Safe and Shore'). One way that a unit can deal with this is to have a policy that limits vertical sections to 1.2m maximum. Therefore excavation beyond this depth, whilst not illegal, is contrary to company policy and leaves the person responsible open to internal disciplinary action.

Risk Assessments can therefore cross-reference to company policy as well as HSE documents. Remember - any company with 5 or more employees needs a written H&S policy, and it is a legal requirement that that all employees (including temps) are entitled to see the policy on request. The Risk Assessments for any project (and all projects need them) must be easily available and read by all site staff - one way to achieve this is to set up a system whereby they are displayed in the site office and countersigned by all staff to agree that they have seen them.


Beamo

[achingknees]

quote:Originally posted by beamo


The SCAUM manual basically tells archaeological units which H&S regulations, policies and guidance are likely to apply to their work. In this it is fairly accurate and up to date, but there are some contentious issues.......Beamo

Hi Beamo

I have to disagree. The SCAUM manual is more than that. It does offer advice and guidance on setting up safe systems of work and sets these within the up-to-date legislative frameworks. Even if it was as basic as you describe it would still be a very worthwhile resource for the field archaeologist. By its legalistic nature H&S documentation is couched in terms like 'reasonably practicable' - such legal terms are there for good reason. Let's take your example of 1.2m depth limit. Our H&S manual does not state a depth, for the same reason that SCAUM don't. Different soils have different properties (a topic well covered in the SCAUM manual) - they require assessment. 1.2m on soils with little cohesion would be daft!

You are right that all staff should see a H&S policy doc, but it is hardly going to equip you with all the required info. These documents are often written because they have to be, with all the right boxes ticked.

Bottom line though - I would like all fieldwork staff to have access to this so they can assess its worth.

Cheers

PS also have a background in H&S implementation

[beamo]

Achingknees

I agree with much of what you say.

Soil properties are indeed different, and any decent policy should set 1.2m as a maximum for decent material rather than a standard for any soil/subsoil/natural type.

Where I disagree is on the role of the company policy - this is the document that should be used to tighten up the necessary vagueness of the legislation and guidance, and lay out some clear statements on what should and should not be done in order to remain in line with the legislation and guidance. Rather than being a document aimed at ticking boxes, it should aim to be a useful and practical guide.

I see the company policy and the project risk assessments as the most important documents to have on site for ready access to all employees - not the summary poster of the 1976 HSAW Act or the Liability Insurance details or even the SCAUM Manual, although I do agree that every little helps.


Beamo

[achingknees]

Beamo,

We just disagree about the relative importance. My misgivings about H&S Policy Statement is solely based on my unit's document. While it does give the H&S infrastructure, details of responsibilities and a list of relevant legislation etc it fails to provide the practical advice. Such is partly covered in our RA forms, but these often cross ref to generic RAs in our H&S MANUAL (akin to SCAUM). For example, recently there was a site access issue. The site director noted this in their RA form, and a decision to use a ladder was taken. The site director was pointed to a relevant section in our manual (which was remarkably similar to the SCAUM advice ) that gave appropriate advice and legislative background about correct and safe procedures. The alternative would have been to send him to the HSE web site to look into legislation, advice etc on putting up a ladder. There's lots to read and life's too short

[BAJR Host]

inertia or not though... would somebody in or near SCAUM please get in touch ASAP... it does not put out a good mesage if a question is not answered... for any reason. Though I do understand that we are all busy.

That said... I do believe there is more to Hand S than SCAUM manuals... and I hope that BAJR (and perhaps the IFA) can (with much assitance) put together a more practical guide to what it actually means in the field/office/lab etc

Another day another WSI?