PRS 4211 Managing Safety & Health Processes at Work

PRS 4211 Managing Safety & Health Processes at WorkFor this assignment you need to study an accident case study and carry out a technical report for management and action plan.

Provide an introduction that briefly describes your rationale for your intended approach to the accident case study including background to the accident. The main body of the assignment should clearly identify the accident in relation to the outcome and causation. There should be a description of the control systems in place and an analysis of the strength and weaknesses of those control measures which have contributed to the accident such as the lessons learnt and significance to safety management. The assignment should take into consideration the significant legal aspects of the case & be technical and evidence based.

The assignment is a management report of 2,500 words +/- 10%. Two copies handed into Unihelp (Week 24). Please provide name, student number, module name and leader details on the cover sheet.

Assignment Criteria

Criteria University 20 point scale Comments
1-4 5-8 9-12 13-16 17-20
Indicates structured approach to the analysis of the accident case study & report presented well.
Clear focus on module subject area with a suitable rationale and description of the accident with appropriate clarity of background to the accident.

Provided a clear overview of the accident in relation to the outcome and causation.
Discussed the significant legal, theoretical and evidence based aspects of the accident case study.

Explained the lessons learnt from the case study and the significance to occupational safety & health management.
Good use of supporting material/appendices and ability to formalise recommendations in an action plan.
1st Marker Comments:
2nd Marker Comments:

External Examiner Comments:
PRS 4211 Non Enforcement Case Study 2014

The site of the accident was a small garage, with one manager employing 5 full time staff. Recently trade in non commercial vehicle repairs had been flat, so the Manager had promoted their business to commercial vehicles (small vans) and this had recently become an important part of the business.

The garage floor was the scene of a fall by Mr. L., a young person, into an inspection chamber, resulting in a broken leg.

The incident has shocked both the Manager and the other members of staff. It is clear to all that the incident could easily have resulted in Mr. L’s death.

You have been asked to present a range of interventions that can be used by the manger to prevent any further accidents.

On investigation you find that Mr L. had been employed on a work scheme to learn tyre changing and repair and had been learning the job for 6 months. In that time he had had a number of “close misses” as described by the manager but his workmates saw this as part of “learning on the job”.

On the first day of his employment Mr. L had picked up an unlabelled container, he took a sniff to see if he could smell anything and was surprised by the strong chemical smell. Worried, he asked one of the workers what it was, and had been warned not to touch it, and that it would “remove the skin from his hands” if it come into contact with his skin. He later discovered that it was a paint stripper, used to remove paint before re-spraying cars.

On another occasion he had approached his manager about one of the other workers smoking inside the front door, as it was raining heavily outside. The manager had not been very sympathetic and told Mr. L. that he had to become one of the team so that he could learn the trade. Later the smoker threatened Mr. L as being a snitch after hearing about his complaint from the manager.

On the day of the incident, witnesses said that Mr L jumped back in surprise away from an approaching vehicle and into the inspection chamber.

The approaching vehicle was a commercial van, which was being positioned onto a neighbouring four post lift. The driver, an experienced mechanic, stated that on entering the garage he had sounded his warning horn and that at the time Mr L had had his back towards him and had not responded, he thought possibly because of the noise of the compressed air hoses.

Risk assessment for tyre changing had been carried out and no additional risk assessments had been completed after the introduction of commercial vehicles as the tasks completed had not been changed – a mixture of repairs and tyre changing.

An issue had been raised by a member of staff regarding the increased size of the vehicles and the position and lifting capacity of the four post lift, expressing concern that the lift was not large enough and incorrectly positioned. The manager had in response checked the size and load capacity and had satisfied himself that vehicles weights would not exceed the capacity and that the test certificate was valid.

Site of Accident