Question |
Quantitative |
Intrepretation Guide |
Reviewer Notes |
1.1 |
Any confirmation of guideline criteria is acceptable. Can state all four in notes or state all 4 criteria met (and provide examples) |
Question 1.1 - The intent of question 1.1 is to verify the company has a written overall corporate commitment policy/statement/ health and safety policy. This question is asking for verification of general health and safety responsibilities, not a detailed specific listing of responsibilities at each level such as job descriptions. The three-bullet points stated in the instructions are required content for the policy, ensure the declaration of commitment to the health and safety that addresses physical, psychological, and social well- being of employees. Auditors need to be clear they are referring to the overarching corporate commitment/health and safety policy not the entire health and safety manual. Interviewees often confuse the two. The auditor also needs to quantify their response in the notes such s "4/4" criteria are met. It is acceptable in situations for employers such as School Boards or very large complex organizations, to have the policy approved by the Board or signed by the Chairman of the Board. All 4 criteria must be included. |
* Example/details needed |
1.5 |
Any confirmation of guidelines that includes - the number of levels where H&S responsibilities are identified (Senior Managers, Managers, Supervisors or Workers)** unless a level (s) does not apply to the employer being audited. |
Question 1.5 –This question is about specifics, not the general reference to responsibilities, as asked for in 1.1. The company must have a list of health and safety responsibilities for each level (Senior Manager, Manager, Supervisor, Worker) within their HSMS. Do not combine levels together. Health and safety responsibilities may be written in their job profiles, and may be included as part of a written directive in each element of the health and safety management system. Read the instructions carefully and comment on each level that applies. If one or more levels do not apply to the company, make sure to explain it in the notes. |
If Senior Manager and Manager responsibilities have been combined, 100% may not be awarded. Managers in a senior-level position may possess many of the same responsibilities as a manager, though on a more strategic level. Senior-level managers possess the knowledge and expertise to guide managers in their roles. Because this position is a level up from the role of a manager, the level of responsibility increases in a broader scope. In legislation supervisors are responsible for workers under their supervision, not all employees within the company. Further to that, it is a manager (employer) responsibility to ensure whom ever supervises the employees is competent and understands their OHS duties, so it should be two very different roles. The auditor can give the company recognition if they identify more levels than the identified four in the guideline, but the question must be scored on just the 4 levels |
1.12 |
State number of meeting minutes which verify management participation |
Question 1.12 - is to verify if management (senior management., managers and supervisors) participate in meetings where health and safety is discussed outside of committee meetings. The auditor will verify through documentation review if management levels are involved in regular health and safety discussions. The auditor could refer to general health and safety meeting minutes, team meeting minutes, a general assembly, whether management leads tailgate/toolbox meetings, or any other meetings where health and safety is a topic. |
This is a H&S leadership question. Auditors will review meeting minutes and identify if there was management participation. As a best practice however, auditors should be examining if different members of the leadership team (i.e. senior managers, managers, and supervisors) participate in meetings where H&S discussions take place, or are you noticing it is consistently the same members of management participating in all meetings (you might want to make a SFI if this is identified), however points would not be deducted for the question. Do not sample HSC meeting records for this question, HSC meetings and practices are measured in Element 4. |
2.1 |
Number of jobs included in formal hazard assessments compared to the number of jobs listed in organizational chart and/or staff listing. |
Question 2.1 - In this element auditors need to have a detailed look at the entire formal hazard assessment process, sampling is not acceptable. Question 2.1 to determine if there is an inventory of job assignments, look for formal hazard assessment documents that would match up with the organizational chart or staff listing. The auditor needs to be aware there may be like positions that will share a formal hazard assessment. Example would be administrative positions may all be captured on one administrative hazard assessment. The key is to ensure all positions included on the organizational chart have been included. This should also include equipment as ""equipment operators"" may be identified as a position with tasks. A quantitative measure must be included in your notes (i.e. formal hazard assessments reviewed included for 34 of the 40 positions on the organizational chart and state specific on what is missing. |
Look at your organization chart. Is there a Hazard Assessment created for every position. Remember when building hazard assessments it is possible to have one hazard assessment which covers several alike positions (i.e. Administrative). The Hazard Assessment should clearly however state all the positions it applies to. |
2.2 |
Number of jobs that have tasks assigned compared to the number of completed formal hazard assessment. |
"Question 2.2 is a dependency question – read guidelines carefully to ensure a greater percentage is not awarded in 2.2 than awarded overall in 2.1. Review of all formal hazard assessments is required, sampling is not acceptable in this question. For each of the job assignments included in the inventory there needs to be a list of all common daily tasks. This does not mean the list needs to include every task a person may be asked to do in a lifetime; common daily tasks are what we are looking for. Involves the identification of all equipment, machinery, work areas and work processes where employees may be performing a task. The intent is not to have a list of 100+ tasks rather to have a listing of common daily tasks performed by employees on a regular basis. Tasks that employees may be asked to do on an occasional/ rare basis should be dealt with through site-specific hazard assessments." |
Examine job descriptions for each job identified. Look for common daily tasks and ensure they are carried through to the task portion of the hazard assessments. |
2.3 A & B |
Number of tasks that have hazards identified/compared to the sample size of tasks chosen for verification. |
Question 2.3 is also a dependency question – ensure a higher percentage is not awarded for identification of either health or safety hazards than was awarded in 2.2. Auditors must provide good notes explaining what types of health hazards and what types of safety hazards have been identified. This question will be scored as a percentage for health hazards and a separate percentage for safety hazards. Neither of which can exceed the percentage awarded in 2.2. The auditor needs to outline their sample size (which jobs/positions they chose to review). |
"This is a two part question and you need to first determine if health hazards are identified and then score question 2.3a based on your sample size and positive findings, and then determine if safety hazards are identified and then score question 2.3b in the same manner. You are examining the HA's to determine of there are examples from all categories (Physical, Chemical, Biological, Psychological and Ergonomic). Check to ensure that ""Workplace Violence and Harassment"" and ""Working Alone"" are included as per legislation. Note: ergonomic type hazards must also be considered in addition to the four listed in the guideline column, as per the AASP. |
2.4 |
Number of H&S hazards that have been evaluated compared to the total number of H&S hazards chosen to be sampled. |
Question 2.4 - This is a dependency question – ensure a higher percentage is not awarded then the average percentage of 2.3. Auditors need to keep an open mind when looking at hazard evaluation. There are many ways to evaluate the level of risk for each hazard, it is not the auditor's responsibility to tell the client they are wrong; if in fact they have evaluated each hazard, at minimum, using a two measure such as severity and likelihood. However, keep in mind the instructions state ""each"" hazard identified, meaning each hazard must be independently evaluated. Do not evaluate hazards in groups. State the quantitative measure based on sample size in your notes. |
In this question you need to not only identify how hazards are being evaluated (Frequency, Severity, Likelihood), but you need to describe how this is being done. If at least two measurement factors are used, state what the values for those factors are, and how the final risk rating is determined (added together, multiplied, averaged, etc.). Check to see that each hazard is evaluated separately (not group rated, unless they alike or the same hazards such as mould and spores). EXAMPLE: The company evaluates hazards using a matrix of Probability X Severity. Probability measures the likelihood of an occurrence of hazard pre-control and is measured on a scale of one to five with 1 being unlikely and 5 being certain to occur. Severity measures the type of injury likely sustained is measured on a scale of one to five with one being minor injury and five being a fatality. The probability total is then multiplied by the severity total to determine an overall risk (Tolerable, Moderate or High). |
2.8 |
Number of employees trained in HA compared to the number of employees leading the HA process. |
Question 2.8 - The guidelines for this question are clear, not all employees require formal hazard assessment training, the key employees involved in the development process must be trained. Auditors should reference the formal hazard assessment documents to determine which employees were involved in the development, then check training records to verify training. Leaders of the hazard assessment process need to be formally trained. As a general practice employers will train the HSC/HSR to take the leading roles. |
Although formal training is preferred (i.e. in-house or third-party hazard assessment training), it is acceptable to award scoring if completion of the AASP's Module 1 – Guide to Develop a Health and Safety Management System (or an approved equivalent) can be verified for the individuals who led the employer's formal HAs. In-house training may also include content related to the company's site-specific hazard assessment process; however, this question is referring to training for formal hazard assessments only. If training is delivered in-house, auditor to verify the training content meets the intent of formal hazard assessment training. Consider verifying it contains hazard types/categories, the hierarchy of control, as well as training on the company's document/process and evaluation system, at a minimum. |
2.9 |
Number of bullets verified, compared to the 6 bullets listed in guidelines. OR This can be confirmed within the note (either restating each bullet point or specifically stating ALL, then providing examples. NONE also accepted in lieue of 0/6 criteria |
Question 2.9- the auditor will be looking for a directive/policy that states the six criteria for a successful formal hazard assessment process. The predetermined frequency mentioned in the first bullet of the guidelines is meaning at least once every three years' minimum. The other five bullets are self-explanatory. The auditor will review documents outlining process/procedural changes and updated hazard assessment forms. There must be a policy/process written that includes all criteria to award points. Auditor must state the quantitative value in their notes (e.g. 4/6 bullets were identified therefore points cannot be awarded, it requires 100%)". |
Read the guideline carefully, review the company's hazard assessment policy and/or process to ensure formal hazard assessments are required to be reviewed. Ensure each bullet point is addressed in your justification notes. |
2.11 A & B |
Do not require a quantitative note for this question. Either the company has a process or not. |
Question 2.11 - For this question the auditor will be looking for a written directive/policy and/or process and procedure, in regards to site-specific (field level) hazard assessments. A policy/directive states the company's expectation and requirement; a process is the expected flow of events; a procedure is a written step-by-step method required to accomplish the task. a) example could be a warehouse upgrade - same place new activities - renovations in one area introduce new hazards requiring a site specific hazard assessment. Example - a) could be scored 1/1 but not n/a. |
