MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
As above, Manager at a friends workplace has insisted Staff continue to use the failed equipment (Catering equipment in a commercial kitchen)
Clearly dodgy as... but can someone point me in the legislation which covers this ? Surely its illegal...
IANA HSE specialist
PAT testing isn't in itself a legal requirement, IIRC. However, provision of safe workplace equipment is and PAT testing is an effective proxy for that.
If they hadn't done the testing and the equipment proved to be faulty and an accident occurred, they'd be liable but potentially to a lesser extent (omission or ignorance is not a defence) - but by doing testing, that shows it's faulty and then going ahead and using it nonetheless - is a bigger issue.
Why do the PAT testing if they were going to ignore it anyway?
Who is doing the PAT? If it was me (and I do look after my team's kit) any failures would be labelled and segregated. As said above, PAT is not a legal requirement, however; it is recognised by HSE as best practice to demonstrate electrical safety. The IEEE Approved Code of Practice will say that failed items must not be used. If you want I'll look at my copy tomorrow and get back to you. The Managers response suggests the safety culture is poor from the top down which will make it hard for anyone on the 'shop floor' to do the right thing. Is there a Union Safety Representative or an Representative Of Employee Safety?
Have a look at Puwer, electricity at work regs 1989 and management of health and safety at work 1999
Pat isn't a legal requirement but shows good practice.
I would let anyone use items that have failed PAT
I would let anyone use items that have failed PAT
You monster!
Swift whistleblower call to HSE will see it responded to.
Of the occasions I've witnessed someone peformaing PAT, it just seems a case of a quick look at something and then shove a sticker on it.
I'm sure it's useful if done properly but more often than not it isn't.
Thankyou, STW wisdom prevails as always.. (a god send as the HSE website is down at the moment)
Not the first of such things and probably not the last... report to HSE it is then. Small company with just said Manager in top (or not) if such things.
I am a Health and Safety Trainer - the legislation I recommend you use is as listed below, speak with your employer first and outline your concerns, and give them chance to remedy the problem. If repairs are required to the electrical items they need to be undertaken by a qualified electrician, and the PAT test repeated. If the employer refuses to do anything and is making you use the equipment you can report your concerns to the Health and Safety Executive, online or via phone. www.hse.gov.uk.
Primary Legislation is The Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974
Section 2 General duties of employers to their employees
(1)It shall be the duty of every employer to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of all his employees.
(2)Without prejudice to the generality of an employer’s duty under the preceding subsection, the matters to which that duty extends include in particular—
(a)the provision and maintenance of plant and systems of work that are, so far as is reasonably practicable, safe and without risks to health;
(b)arrangements for ensuring, so far as is reasonably practicable, safety and absence of risks to health in connection with the use, handling, storage and transport of articles and substances;
(c)the provision of such information, instruction, training and supervision as is necessary to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health and safety at work of his employees;
(d)so far as is reasonably practicable as regards any place of work under the employer’s control, the maintenance of it in a condition that is safe and without risks to health and the provision and maintenance of means of access to and egress from it that are safe and without such risks;
(e)the provision and maintenance of a working environment for his employees that is, so far as is reasonably practicable, safe, without risks to health, and adequate as regards facilities and arrangements for their welfare at work.
Secondary Legislation that could be used:
Provision and Use of Work Equipment 1998
Reg 4
Suitability of work equipment
4.—(1) Every employer shall ensure that work equipment is so constructed or adapted as to be suitable for the purpose for which it is used or provided.
(2) In selecting work equipment, every employer shall have regard to the working conditions and to the risks to the health and safety of persons which exist in the premises or undertaking in which that work equipment is to be used and any additional risk posed by the use of that work equipment.
(3) Every employer shall ensure that work equipment is used only for operations for which, and under conditions for which, it is suitable.
(4) In this regulation “suitable” means suitable in any respect which it is reasonably foreseeable will affect the health or safety of any person.
Reg 6. Inspection
(2) Every employer shall ensure that work equipment exposed to conditions causing deterioration which is liable to result in dangerous situations is inspected—
(a)at suitable intervals; and
(b)each time that exceptional circumstances which are liable to jeopardise the safety of the work equipment have occurred,
to ensure that health and safety conditions are maintained and that any deterioration can be detected and remedied in good time.
^^GlennQuagmire And that is the exact reason I test my teams kit. An external contractor comes to our facility and one guy will 'test' 400 items in a day, at most just a earth bond. It takes me about 3 days to do our 200 items properly and half of those are just 110v leads.
^^GlennQuagmire And that is the exact reason I test my teams kit. An external contractor comes to our facility and one guy will ‘test’ 400 items in a day, at most just a earth bond. It takes me about 3 days to do our 200 items properly and half of those are just 110v leads.
👍 Thumbs up for doing it correctly and taking your time. 'Testing' 400 items seems unrealistic but external contractors have quotas to fulfil and often cut corners. It needs doing correctly otherwise it's just a pointless exercise.
Thanks, we're taking kit to use on customer sites (that happen to be power stations of the nuclear variety) and it's got to work and be safe. I am lucky that my management are supportive and and provide the kit and training to get critical kit done right. The external contractors test the more domestic office type stuff. Sounds like the OPs friend is not so lucky.
One tester at a place I worked at cut the leads off any failed items.
The IEEE Approved Code of Practice will say that failed items must not be used
For UK the relevant code is the IET Code of Practice for In-service Inspection and Testing of Electrical Equipment, 5th Edition
NO is the biggest loudest voice you can find!
Join a union
GlennQuagmire
Free Member
Of the occasions I’ve witnessed someone peformaing PAT, it just seems a case of a quick look at something and then shove a sticker on it.I’m sure it’s useful if done properly but more often than not it isn’t.
I see this far too often, plug it into a dumb machine that gives a red or green light and you think you are done.
I have seen items passed that are clearly dangerous but have passed a simple test. The majority of failures are picked up through the visual inspection, even before you connect the equipment to a PAT tester.
I am an electrical engineer who has to sign off newly designed equipment as part of the CE requirements. As a result of that I sometimes get asked to PAT test items that have been missed by our contracted testers or items that have been tested but modified. I see so many items that have been passed that should have failed. Things like damaged housings, no cable restraint, incorrect fusing, daisy chained earth bonds, incorrect cable sizing, insulation damage.... I could go on, it is frightening. I once had a professional PAT contractor ask me if I had some super glue because he wanted to glue together the top of a cracked plug!
In addition to that I have seen items with long leads fail because the tester did not understand the resistance implications and why his machine was telling him it had failed.
If something has failed PAT, it should be immediately put out of active use.
I'd be asking if the Inspector was competent.
Many are not. It's a 2 day course. And they, generally, rush through the items.
What did they fail on?
I've seen failed items before that have come to me to be fixed, 'no earth continuity'. when it was double insulated. 'No earthing on metal parts' again, the drill was double insulated.
And numerous items that have been passed, but should have failed, such as mains leads loose, plugs damaged (but they still pass the plug in test).
Join a union
^This x 100.
One tester at a place I worked at cut the leads off any failed items.
That what I used to do, but the equipment was looked after/bought by me.
Though failing the kettle of the guys who were constant knob heads was quite pleasing.... obviously, I didn't dry boil it for a few seconds before testing it.....
Has the employer put this in writing? If not that's the first thing I'd insist upon.
Write them an email saying "I'd just like to clarify that you want me to continue working with the equipment that failed the PAT test."
If you don't do this they'll deny ever saying it - possibly try to blame the employee - if something goes wrong.
Always get it in writing.
PA Test...
As a sparky I agree with ESKAY - plug top fuse ratings are a personal favourite of mine.
I used to do inspections long ago and had one guy who kept finding old uninsulated pin plugs with 13A fuses to refit to his machine which I kept failing... Extreme conditions so 90 day retest schedule. After the third time, I cut the cable off at the machine end and poked the remainder through the case!
I've seen brand new equipment failed by incompetent testers and also seen brand new equipment legitimately failed - the only rule is that there are no rules!
If the boss thinks that the failures have been applied incorrectly he should at least communicate this to his staff...
PA Test…
I usually hate this sort of thing but as PAT stands for portable appliance testing then portable appliance testing test isn't quite at the level of stupidity as ATM machine or spelling laser with a z.
Even if the tests are wrong the equipment should not be used until its shown to be safe