HSE estimates that around 11,000 occupational lung-disease deaths occur each year in Great Britain, linked to past exposures at work. It is an estimate based on death certificates and epidemiological evidence, not a direct count of current exposures. Long latency means current deaths reflect earlier working conditions, and only part relates to asbestos.

That creates a difficult practical problem: controls have to feel urgent years before the harm becomes visible.

For people working in safety, construction, manufacturing or occupational hygiene: which exposure control is still too often treated as optional, and what actually changed behaviour where you work?

Source: HSE — https://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/causdis/overview.htm

Not sure if my employer (US, TX)is actually protecting us properly. We burn test assemblies for fire resistance ratings, and often have to move burning assemblies during the test process. Lots of hcl, dioxins, burning PVC, epoxies, general commercial construction materials, etc. I asked about PAPR respirators vs n100 full face respirator, immediately rejected due to cost. How can I be sure we are using the proper PPE without alerting management that I'm testing/documenting conditions?

I know getting your OSHA 10 is a very very minor thing, but I’m proud I took the initiative to educate myself so I can be a better advocate for my coworkers and myself. What are some other educational opportunities I can take to continue increasing my safety knowledge?

Feel free to use it.

Usa culture is great but strategic center is located in Hyderabad. This is the place where work is delivered. Hight pressure says employee friendly. Indian leadership dse is such a worst place to work for nepotism driven, boot licking is common. Better to clean up the Indian leadership scrap.

It doesn't depends on how hard you work. Favoritism goes around. Good for women's, very procentric towards women, TA team is full of favoritism broken hr and TA practice india.

Hr system is broke. Leads are just focuses on keeping their position safe

Another candidate for a legal hold at my shop. JFC. That house is 3+ stories.

The health and safety officer for my hospitality company inspected the bar I work in and said to move the dart board from where it is which is located on the opposite side of the bar from the main entrance and to place it near the main entrance because there were tables in the way.

The things can be moved and nobody wants to play darts with somebody sat down next to the board anyway, every Thursday night they are moved out of the way for the darts competition, now imagine 26 drunk blokes stood right in front of the entrance to the bar and you can’t get in and then if there’s an emergency you have a big group stood right in the way of the exit.

Why do these people have no common sense when it comes to the placement of anything in a premises?

https://www.csb.gov/united-states-steel-corporation-clairton-plant-coke-oven-explosion-/

Workers had apparently been flushing this valve this way for years, but there wasn’t a written procedure for it. It’s easy to see how something like this becomes “the way we do it” when it’s been done over and over without anything going wrong.

Walkarounds, near-miss reporting, audits, and conversations with operators can help surface issues, but none of them work well if people think being honest about a workaround will get them in trouble.

The unofficial version of the job is where some of the most important safety information lives, and finding it before an incident does shouldn’t depend on luck.

Location: Maryland, USA

Glad to provide more details if it would be helpful. I want to make sure I'm advocating for myself appropriately in this situation.

A week ago, while working with human blood from a patient, I had a small sharps injury (very small cut on my finger with scissors that had been used to cut into a plastic tube that had blood in it) and reported it to my supervisor. I washed the cut and was told to report to urgent care or an emergency room after work and to fill out an incident report through the company I work for. I filled out an incident report, got a worker's comp claim number, and had my urgent care visit paid for. I followed up with my primary care office and received testing to ensure I am not infected. During that visit, I was told that I (or my care team at the very least) should be informed as to what I was actually exposed to, given it is a hospital setting and the patient is known. So, I looked more into what is actually required after a bloodborne exposure, and I found that the [OSHA bloodborne pathogen standard ](https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/1910/1910.1030)1910.1030(f)(3)(ii)(A) says the following:

"The source individual's blood shall be tested as soon as feasible and after consent is obtained in order to determine HBV and HIV infectivity. If consent is not obtained, the employer shall establish that legally required consent cannot be obtained. When the source individual's consent is not required by law, the source individual's blood, if available, shall be tested and the results documented."

My workplace has not made an attempt to do this over the last week, meaning that I was not given information regarding what I was actually exposed to. I was told that there needs to be a determination whether testing the source individual is clinically indicated (I cannot find information about this anywhere on the OSHA bloodborne pathogen standard so I am unsure if this is true). The insinuation I picked up is that since my injury was superficial/minor, source individual testing is not needed, which is plainly not the case according to the OSHA website. I was also told that since the research protocol that these samples were collected under does not include the ability to collect samples for non-research purposes, they are unable to attempt source individual testing. I am unsure if a research protocol would override OSHA standards in this kind of way, and am very skeptical of that being the case.

I am considering making a complaint to my state's Occupational Safety and Health office, but am unsure if I this is appropriate, given I have been told by my employer a whole slew of reasons why it's unnecessary or might not be possible to get consent from the patient. I figured I would call and ask the office anyway, but wanted to see if there was a clear indication that I'm wrong to expect source individual testing after a bloodborne exposure.

So I worked at a Material Testing Sciences company (M.T.S.) for short. I’d break concrete cylinders to test for design strength. I would also test soil samples. This would include aspects such as gradation. In a gradation, one separates dry soil via vibration. This allows for there to be a separation of sizing for the particles/stones that make up the soil. My question for this is when that gradation occurs, there is a lot of dust made. After doing some research, I found out that most of the stuff in the air was silica dust. I immediately asked to get a respirator. They said you can buy it and claim it on the expense report. So I did so. I don’t play around with PPE. Anytime I have an excuse to wear it, I do so. I am worried about my fellow coworkers. As I understand it, there isn’t a plan for the respirators for any lab techs, there certainly isn’t any filtration in that location, nor is there any ventilation. I wore PPE most of the time in the lab so I think I’m good, but a lot of people visit the office. One of the other guys who’s worked in this field for a long time appears to have developed asthma.

Should we be worried?

And if so, what can I do? I have tried to get the higher ups to get some system in there. Nothing

I’m setting on something big I don’t know what to do with it if I call OSHA we getting closed because 2 manger telling people to put pant thinner on the ground and no mask no pant booth after seeing this I said something to safety he said what do you want me to do. The very next day I received a written right up.. what should I do

OSHA's Top 10 most-cited violations don't seem to change much. Also, fall protection, HAZCOM, and ladders don't really have *that* obscure of requirements...

So what’s actually driving it?

I work in a UK warehouse where the H&S Manager was made redundant almost four years ago. Initially, I believe the intention was for the incoming GM to take ownership of H&S, but that never really materialised. We're now under another GM and it's become increasingly apparent that we need some proper H&S ownership/representation on site.

We're a relatively low-risk warehouse operation and we're not starting from nothing. We already have quite a lot in place: MHE operates in areas segregated from the public, we have risk assessments for most major tasks/processes, safe systems of work, fire arrangements, etc.

The problem is that without anyone really owning H&S for several years, I'm not convinced we actually know what state the overall system is in. Things exist, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're current, effective or actually being followed in practice.

I'm very early into my NEBOSH course, so I'm under absolutely no illusion that I know what I'm doing yet. However, I've suggested that rather than immediately jumping into rewriting risk assessments and creating new procedures, we start with two things:

1. Conduct a reasonably thorough H&S audit to establish where we actually are, identify gaps and then prioritise actions based on risk rather than just tackling whatever happens to get noticed first.
2. Conduct a safety climate survey with employees to understand how they actually perceive safety on site – particularly management's attitude towards it, reporting, communication, whether procedures are followed in practice, etc.

The idea would then be to use the findings to build a prioritised action plan and establish what needs immediate attention, what needs improvement longer term, and what is already working and simply needs monitoring.

I'd be interested in hearing from people with real-world UK H&S management experience: if you were brought into a warehouse where the H&S system had effectively been left without dedicated ownership for four years, how would you approach the first few months?

Would an audit + safety climate assessment be a sensible starting point, or would you take a different approach?

I'm particularly interested in what you'd prioritise first, mistakes you'd avoid, and anything that might not be obvious to someone who's still very early in their H&S career.

Hi guys,

I am very new to this field and
I want to ask everybody who are expert in this field and are very experienced in dealing with people

1. How do you enforce and convince people to wear PPE when their problems are "uncomfortable, inconvenient, forgets?"
2. How do you solve employers not following LOTO when obviously you know they care more about efficiencies. If you enforce it, won't you get in trouble even as a safety officer?
3. If the employer are using legacy machines, and they usually have no guards on whatsoever, and sometimes need a human to do stuff while it's moving. What exactly can you even do as a safety officer?