THE DOMINO EFFECT
May 27, 2021EVOLUTION 5 is a registered trademark
June 10 2021
The debate shouldn't even exist in truth as the responsibilities are clear, defined and repeatedly reaffirmed by the Supreme Court.
Due to the crisis or due to MAXIMUM DOWN research this role is an accessory destined to be read as a nuisance rather than a utility for effective prevention.
We must pay close attention to costs but also make an assessment of what is required and the difference in roles between:
Client – Works Manager – Works Manager – Coordinator for Safety during Execution – Site Manager
Making a PSC or a generic general POS from SW without detailing what, where and how you are talking about, in perspective, can have much higher costs.
If the CSE asks for a lot of documentation BEFORE ACCESS TO THE CONSTRUCTION SITE, AND DOES NOT GIVE THE AUTHORIZATION FOR THE WORKS, IS IT REALLY A BIN-BREAKER?
Is he doing his job well or is he just a no-no?
As always, it depends on the case, the background, the experiences and the type of work you are talking about.
Today's article on puntosicuro referred to in the link is interesting, which clearly dissects the skills and dynamics.
Below is an excerpt:
"[ ] With reference to the activity of the safety coordinator, the Supreme Court reiterated that the new company safety system referred to in Legislative Decree no. 81/2008 is configured as a planning procedure for global risk prevention and this logic also guides risk management in the event of assignment of works to multiple contracting companies or to self-employed workers within the company or a single production unit of the same , as well as in the context of temporary or mobile construction sites.
In temporary or mobile construction sites where the presence (even if not at the same time) of multiple construction companies is expected, Section recalled. IV, the client, in the preliminary design phase of the work, must appoint the coordinator in matters of safety and health during the design of the work (CSP), a figure charged with the obligation to prepare the PSC (Safety and Coordination Plan ), consisting of a technical report and detailed requirements related to the complexity of the work to be carried out as well as any critical phases of the implementation process; requirements suitable for preventing or reducing risks to the safety and health of workers (art. 91, co. 1, letter a) Legislative Decree 81/08), fundamental for the correct prevention and accident prevention management of all work phases . The CSE is also called upon to scrupulously verify the suitability of the operational safety plan (POS) of each company, both in relation to the PSC and in relation to the works to be carried out, being able to suspend the individual adjustments made from the works until the verification of the companies interested.
The safety coordinator in particular, continued the Section. IV, holds a position of guarantee alongside that of the other recipients of the accident prevention legislation (employers, managers, supervisors), being assigned tasks of implementing the prevention plan aimed precisely at regulating the interference risk, also in relation to the succession of processes entrusted to companies that do not operate at the same time. It is clear that the execution coordinator is responsible for "high vigilance" tasks, which concern the general configuration of the processes and, therefore, not the precise and stringent moment-to-moment supervision, delegated to the operational figures, but the control over correct observance, by companies, of the provisions contained in the safety plan and coordination of work procedures to guarantee the safety of workers.
The CSE must also report to the client, as the Supreme Court has underlined, following written notification to the company or self-employed workers concerned, any failure to comply with the accident prevention provisions; and, in cases of serious and imminent danger, suspend individual processes until verification of the adjustments made by the companies involved. Of undoubted importance is the clarification that the control on compliance with the provisions of the plan cannot be merely formal, but must be carried out concretely, according to methods that derive from the conformation of the processes; it is essential that the provision of caution is followed by a verification activity of its implementation, which the implementing companies must take care of. [ ]”
