Skip to content

first draft of HSE procedure#77

Open
seventeenmagpie wants to merge 9 commits into
NottingHack:mainfrom
seventeenmagpie:main
Open

first draft of HSE procedure#77
seventeenmagpie wants to merge 9 commits into
NottingHack:mainfrom
seventeenmagpie:main

Conversation

@seventeenmagpie

Copy link
Copy Markdown
  • mags working to include Sam's HSE procedure
  • adding HSE to contents/index and updating count of appendices :P
  • Sam's HSE procedure
  • removed redundant definitions and linked to existing documentation.
  • added references and links for external resources
  • improved formatting
  • add risk matrix image to table
  • made title include appendix name
  • moved references to bottom of doc

@AaronJackson AaronJackson left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you for converting Sam's document into RST.

I've added lots of comments so we can start discussing bits (none of them are reflective of your efforts to convert the document), and are just broadly about the contents and how we can improve it.

When we are finally satisfied with this document, it will require a simple majority vote among trustees to merge.


Also, just to be annoying, if this document's audience is primarily the board and members of the safety team, it makes me wonder if it should be on Rules site at all, and should perhaps just become part of Sam's "Safety Portal" changes on the wiki?

Comment thread .gitignore

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is unnecessary and only useful if someone has the odt/rtf files. Better to git add a specific file rather than the whole directory to avoid accidents.

Comment on lines +4 to +8
======= ======== ========= ======== ====================================
Version Date Author Reviewer Description
0.1 14/12/25 S Roberts - First version for review by Trustees
\
======= ======== ========= ======== ====================================

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Let's remove this, since the document will be tracked by Git. The other pages on the rules site do not have similar tables.

(I know all of this stuff was just generated from pandoc but I'm still going to comment on it 😎)


* **NH** abbreviates Nottingham Hackspace Ltd
* **The landlord** refers to the organisation (currently BizSpace) from whom NH rents the space
* **PAT testing** abbreviates Portable Appliance Testing testing

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
* **PAT testing** abbreviates Portable Appliance Testing testing
* **PAT testing** abbreviates Portable Appliance Testing testing, although generally refers to In-Service Inspection and Testing of Electrical Equipment (ISITEE).


In this document, "member" refers to any person currently a member of Nottingham Hackspace as defined in section 2 of the Articles AND guests AND visitors.

QUESTION: should above instead be "participant in the space" or "user of the space"? (needs bikeshedding)

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes

Comment on lines +52 to +57
Non-members
-----------

Non-members are permitted in the space when accompanied by a member; they are subject to the same restrictions as members and must be supervised by a member.

Occasionally, NH organises events that allow non-members to enter the space for a specific activity. Such events require a risk assessment to be undertaken.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Outside of the rules site, I think this is worth having, but as an appendix of the rules, it leads to duplication and (potentially incorrect) summarisation of Rule 2. I feel we should remove this.


As far as possible, activities should be covered by pre-prepared written risk assessments. However, it is the nature of the varied activities and membership of NH that many activities are not foreseeable, and in many cases will be performed as a “one off” task (for example, moving a heavy piece of material). Dynamic risk assessments [dras]_ are a way to encourage (in the case of NH) members to stop and think about risks in a structured manner before undertaking an unfamiliar task, and to plan hazardous tasks in a more careful manner, without necessarily requiring formal risk assessments to be created.

**RECOMMENDATION**: add dynamic risk assessment to member guidelines, possibly with signage to encourage this way of thinking in the space.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
**RECOMMENDATION**: add dynamic risk assessment to member guidelines, possibly with signage to encourage this way of thinking in the space.

Comment on lines +399 to +400
**RECOMMENDATION:** when NH acquiring tools, a simple tick-list should be followed to confirm that the item has been risk-assessed, and PAT tested and inspected if it was a donation or purchased 2\ :sup:`nd`
hand.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
**RECOMMENDATION:** when NH acquiring tools, a simple tick-list should be followed to confirm that the item has been risk-assessed, and PAT tested and inspected if it was a donation or purchased 2\ :sup:`nd`
hand.

Changes to layout and use
-------------------------

**RECOMMENDATION:** similarly to adding new tools, new operations or the movement of operations to a different location should be tracked through some form of change management process, to ensure that risk assessments are not invalidated.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
**RECOMMENDATION:** similarly to adding new tools, new operations or the movement of operations to a different location should be tracked through some form of change management process, to ensure that risk assessments are not invalidated.

Regular RA review
-----------------

**RECOMMENDATION:** all risk assessments should have a validity period, and a regular review should be undertaken by the trustees or safety team to identify any risk assessments that require attention.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
**RECOMMENDATION:** all risk assessments should have a validity period, and a regular review should be undertaken by the trustees or safety team to identify any risk assessments that require attention.

The risk assessments currently have a nextReview parameter. As of just the other day these feed into a Category indicating that they are in need of review.

Getting the teams to review them is a whole different challenge 🙃

Comment thread risk_matrix.png

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The risk matrix has changed slightly to explain severities. We may want to update the screenshot https://wiki.nottinghack.org.uk/wiki/Template:RiskAssessment/Matrix

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants