The CSIT Building Occupational Health and Safety Committee (Meeting) ================================================================== Date: Friday 22 February 2008 Time: 15:05-15:55 Venue: CSIT N335 Present: Julie Arnold, Deanne Drummond, James Sheridan, Peter Strazdins (chair) Apologies: James Fellows, Lynnette Johns-Boast, Doug Palmer, MINUTES: 1. Apologies and Membership/OHS Role Changes Apologies noted. The Committee welcomed Julie, who is also the new OSLO. De is the new RACLO (acting, until training completed in March). 2. Minutes of previous meeting approved 3. Matters arising: 3.1 Incident and Hazard Reports: informing the Committee Peter requested the former area RACLO (Margaret Wigney) last Dec to notify the Chair upon any incidents. De agreed to continue this arrangement, placing hardcopies of any documentation in the designated folder in the DCS Office. 3.2 CSIT Building Inspection 07 - followup of repairs Peter reported that a request to F&S for the noted repairs was made by Julie on Jan 11, and a subsequent check indicated these had all been performed. The only exception was the face plate on the doors into the central stairwell, which F&S would not remove because it was essential for security. The Committee thought that if the face plate edge was more rounded (i.e. filed) and some felt was glued to it, the hazard for potential hand injury would be mitigated. ACTION: Peter to request James F to look into this. 3.4 Tagging of Electrical Appliances in CSIT It was noted that DCS remains behind with this. While there is College financial support for University-level checking (with the advantage of maintaining a university-wide database), Peter reported that the DCS person in charge, Bob Edwards, felt this was too disruptive and would prefer to do the testing himself. Some concerns were expressed to the effect that workload issues may make this approach difficult. ACTION: the Committee to watch this issue until it is resolved. 3.5 Warning Notice in CSIT Lift De reported that this had not been done, but that the lift's current instructions on how to obtain help in case of an emergency was sufficient. 3.6 Draft Policy on Footwear James S reported that he reviewed it Last December and it seemed reasonable, with most of the policy not being applicable. 4. New hazard and injury reports Peter reported there were none. 5. Discuss draft ANU Health and Safety Management Arrangements attn sections 6.6.3, 7.2.7-7.2.9, 7.3.5, 7.6.2, 10.4, 11.1, A.3 The Committee considered the above sections of the draft. Several sections prompted changes for the Induction Manual. The Committee welcomes the active role of supervisors in OHS required (7.2), although it noted that this was not the tradition in DCS. It was questioned whether there was sufficient awareness of the Emergency and evaluation procedures (7.3.8). Peter noted that the roles of Safety Officer and deputy (7.6) were currently carried out in CSIT by the Safety Co-ordinator and Safety Officer (see cs.anu.edu.au/ohs,) respectively. There was some discussion over the section of OHS Request compliance with the Budget Unit (10.4). The Committee felt that the section on Local OHS Committee (A.3) reflected its current modus operandi. ACTION: Peter to bring 7.2 to the notice of Henry Gardner and Bob Edwards, who act as direct supervisors to most people in DCS. Peter to carry the Committee's comments to the CECS OHS meeting on Feb 25. ACTION: De to seek a softcopy of Emergency and Evacuation Procedures posters (obtain floor plans from DOI?), and see that more posters be put up. 6. Update of OHS Induction Manual From the above and other discussions, it was decided that the OHS Induction Manual needs to be updated in the following ways: * include the local policy on Children and Hazardous places * ensure it complies with HSMA 11.1, in particular to have a reference to the HSMA document * include a copy of Emergency and Evacuation Procedures (or a link to a softcopy) * the lists of the people in current safety-related roles to be maintained, but prefaced with a note that this is only current at the time of printing and to seek the web pages for up-to-date lists * that a hardcopy be handed out upon induction ACTION: De to look into this. 7. OSLO office checks 2008 Julie reported her plan was to check a couple of people per week from March. There was a list of priority people, and De noted there a need to be proactive in identifying areas of risk. For example, certain offices are currently in a situation of risk where the occupants should be advised. PhD students when writing up should also receive extra attention. ACTION: Julie to undertake this, and keep a record of inspections carried out (time, person, office, and any issues). Meeting concluded 16:15