Risk Assessments

[tom_murphy]

Recently came across this new procedure while on camp in april and was wondering if anyone else heard of it being used in their units.
A risk assesment has now to be done for every and all activities carried out during training.
The person conducting the training is responsible for writing it up and, we were told will be held responsible for any incidents during the lesson.
I enquired of RDFRA about this but got very little feedback off them.
I bring it up because the way it came accross was that if a cpl is doing, say a COFD lesson then they need to do an assessment on the whole lesson.
It also brings up the equipment issue: are the RDF issue boots ok for tactical lessons, rain gear, webbing, etc etc......
I have a feeling its just confined to my "unit" but would like to hear if anyone else has heard of this.
I'm also aware that the cadre staff have done them already but now its seems that all nco's have to do them.

[Itchy]

...A risk assesment has now to be done for every and all activities carried out during training.
The person conducting the training is responsible for writing it up and, we were told will be held responsible for any incidents during the lesson.

...I have a feeling its just confined to my "unit" but would like to hear if anyone else has heard of this.

...I'm also aware that the cadre staff have done them already but now its seems that all nco's have to do them.

Are the Army running Actuarial courses now? Or any type of training with regard to assesing risk of particular activities?

If not then I cant see how one can be "held responsible" for not assesing the risk properly??? I for one would not be satisfied if my "unit" held me responsible for something in those circumstances...

[tom_murphy]

What we were told was for EVERY lesson you conduct, an RA MUST be done before hand and is to be done by whoever is teaching the lesson.
an example was, : a junior nco was doing some sporting activity and had to do one.
They receive NO training in assessing risks and was told if anything happened during the lesson it would be their fault.

[Itchy]

They receive NO training in assessing risks and was told if anything happened during the lesson it would be their fault.

If an NCO was negligent in his duty of care towards his men, then I can see why s/he would be held responsible. However, the army (should) provide training for any activity that requires it e.g. Driving (AF154), Mortor (Heavy lifting class) etc.

As I have never carried out a RA, I see it as;

a) Your officers shifting responsibility and showing poor leadership
b) A way for your NCO's to inform the higher ups of the standard of equipment/training
c) BS. You were not trained to carry it out, you are not responsible. And if someone is held responsible, appeal and sue!

[tom_murphy]

Personally I think its option A but I'd like to hear from a few more people first.

[rod and serpent]

Is it not the responsibility of unit commander to carry out a risk assessment. The same thing happens to us ,everytime we go away on exercise a risk assessment is carried to reduce the avoidable risks to the unit.

[tom_murphy]

Thanks for the info. Just thought Id mention it cause i know that in my civvy job we have them read out to us once a week on different aspects of my job by a superviser who done a course on them and the actual assessment is compiled by my safety officer who has a degree of some sort in safety management.
It just came over to the nco's, especially the junior nco's as a bit threatening.
One cpl was told if anything happened and the DF were sued then they'd be up the creek.....

[GoneToTheCanner]

Hi all
I thought the DF was exempt all that H+S stuff, because it was blindingly obvious that being in the Military is inherently risky anyway. Best thing to do is look for it's legal basis,i.e; which Act covers RA, whose authority is it based on,etc. This sounds like bureaucratic ass-covering.
regards
GttC

[bulldemboots!]

It's a new thing, brought about by the new H&S Act. The DF think they can get away with a proforma Risk Assessment form, and thiss will continue to be the case, until there is an audit by the HSA.

Surely civvie Health & Safety legislation doesn't apply fully to the DF?? If that was the case I know (and I'm sure you do too) of places which would have been shut down a long time ago.

[Big Al]

I enquired of RDFRA about this but got very little feedback off them.

shocker

[Docman]

Recently came across this new procedure while on camp in april and was wondering if anyone else heard of it being used in their units.
A risk assesment has now to be done for every and all activities carried out during training.
The person conducting the training is responsible for writing it up and, we were told will be held responsible for any incidents during the lesson.
I enquired of RDFRA about this but got very little feedback off them.
I bring it up because the way it came accross was that if a cpl is doing, say a COFD lesson then they need to do an assessment on the whole lesson.
It also brings up the equipment issue: are the RDF issue boots ok for tactical lessons, rain gear, webbing, etc etc......
I have a feeling its just confined to my "unit" but would like to hear if anyone else has heard of this.
I'm also aware that the cadre staff have done them already but now its seems that all nco's have to do them.

Risk assessments are no big deal. It is the same as A7 when it came in.... Everyone thought they knew what was in it but nobody actually went away and read it, hence a fear of the unknown. Risk assessments are not exactly hard to do..... and you don't have to fill one in for every activity.... well, not really.

As with any command position, you are (and always were) responsible for anything that happens while you are in command. Nothing new. As a commander, you would have assessed the risks involved in the activity and done your best to ensure that nothing too dangerous was being done. You were always in danger of being charged with negligence if you were negligent. It is something you should have always done in the past. RAs just put everything into words and formalise it. There is no way that negligent people can bluff their way through the system anymore.
As for filling out a RA for every lesson? Some one is pulling you leg. You don't do RAs for every activity (Sorry boss, can't get out of bed.... there is no RA done on that activity ), just those that carry a clear (or implied) risk. There is also no need to continuously do RAs for every risky activity. RAs have a shelf life, unless the circumstances of that training change.

The big thing about RAs is that it should make it clear to the commander that they accept the risk involved in the activity. There was never any "get out of Jail free" card (And RAs are not one either) for being negligent. If you did something in the past that was dangerous, you were just as liable as you are now. RAs don't change this, they just prevent the defence of ignorance (which was never a defence).

RAs cannot cover every eventuality. It is down to the common sense of the commander involved to assess any new risks. Common sense, as always, should be the guide. And panic over RAs is just that.... panic.

[flash bang]

it is true , but think about it in civie street there are people who have done course's on risk assesment and how to make a judgement call . i was asked to fill out a risk assesment form , i said i would'nt because i hav'nt any course done . would you sign an army form that you no nothing about ? ps you have to fill a risk assesment for any form of training let the unit health and safety officer sign it he/she should have the course done

[Groundhog]

There's no need to panic.

Most people raised very valid points. Under the Safety Health and Welfare at Work Act of 2005 all employers with more than two employees including the DF have to make out safety statements and risk assessments. When you walk into your company stores have a look around and you should see the Safety Statement.

The good news for those who have to make them out, and the responsibility rests with the training staff not the NCO/Officer conducting any particular part of the programme of training, the DF intranet has blank proforma risk assessments for every conceivable DF activity. Since the risks associated with marching across the square in Cathal Brugha are the same as those associated with marching across the square in Sarsfield barracks, then all is required is to enter date and location. Unless there is a particular risk at any given location. Having complied with the law you then carry on as normal, it being recognised that life is inherently risky and military life even more so. The training nco/officer is no more nor less responsible than he or she ever was. If you kill your whole section in training you're in the shit. If Pte X breaks an ankle on a rock during a section attack then shit happens.

The DF runs Safety Reps courses, Safety Officers Courses and sponsors people to go on Health and Safety courses part time to Diploma and Degree level. I completed a week long Safety Officers Course a couple of weeks back. All RDF units in the Southern Bde were given the opportunity to send people on this course but only one RDF BQMS turned up. All barracks have at least one safety officer by now.

[tom_murphy]

Thanks for the info.

[hedgehog]

Since the risks associated with marching across the square in Cathal Brugha are the same as those associated with marching across the square in Sarsfield barracks,

We thought so as well

and we also thought if you did one risk assessment for ranges then it would cover for every range that year, but alas no

each activity is seperate, and I mean each activity- in theory ( just completed the risk assessment seminar in the Brugha)

a typical day

0830- morning check parade- RA required-
0900 Adjt Parade- Risk assesment required
0905- 1000- Interior economy- RA required
1000-1100- Funeral Drill- RA required
1100-1130- Break- RA required
1130-1245- PT - RA requires


every single activity every single day in theory requires a RA-

if you plan to do funeral drill on the square today and tommorow- then thats 2 RA's
etc

where initially it was a reasonable idea- we as a Defence Forces have cocked it up royally and now all that happens is that everything is given a high RA and just printed out anyway

so the RA is in effect just a waste of time

it will soon join such illustrious great ideas as the ho chi min jacket and the elmer fudd cap