FEATURE
health and safety requirements of the directive. However, worrying data has emerged that with the growth of the industry, comes the increased risk of CE marked products that do not conform, which could result in an individual not being adequately protected.
INADEQUATE PPE IN THE MARKET Procedural weaknesses within the EC type approval and CE marking process can allow a less reputable manufacturer or importer to gain CE certification for products they wish to market and then subsequently make changes to the product. These changes could impact on the product’s safety performance as further testing may not be conducted as the CE certificate is already available.
CAMPAIGNING FOR QUALITY
Arco’s Neil Hewitt discusses the issues of non-compliant, CE marked PPE and the steps the industry can take
to minimise the risk of these products entering the European market.
Despite Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) having the required EC type approval and CE mark, recent tests have indicated that some of the products you assume to be safe, may not actually be fit for purpose.
The seriousness of this issue was recognised by the British Safety Industry Federation (BSIF), when it wrote to its members saying: ‘This situation poses an obvious risk to end users, and is a timely reminder that only relying on CE certification for certain product types is no guarantee of ongoing quality assurance.’
This February new PPE regulation was adopted by the European Parliament, reclassifying products, introducing a five year limit on CE certificates and identifying obligations of all economic operators in the supply chain. It also clearly defines that an importer or distributor who markets a product in Europe under their own name, brand or trademark becomes liable for the full manufacturer’s obligations.
The document that currently underpins the legislation is the PPE Directive 89/686/EEC. The role of which is to ensure that suppliers of protective equipment follow the correct approval procedures before placing the product on the market. Category two and three items of PPE must follow an EC type approval and carry the ‘CE mark’ to prove certification. Whereas category one or minimal risk PPE are self certified and CE marked by the manufacturer after they assess the product against the
8
Although, manufacturers of category three PPE are required to have a third party monitoring process in place for the actual product or a quality management system, there is no third party production monitoring process for category one or two PPE. It is up to the manufacturer to ensure the product continues to conform to the standards. Currently the UK’s competent authorities for market surveillance of PPE are under increasing pressure due to reduced budgets and this may be exploited by less reputable manufacturers.
TOE CAP FAILURES An example of these failures came to light when Arco performed a number of tests on safety footwear toecaps, products at the front line of safety across a wide range of industries. Traditionally toe caps were made from steel to ensure toes were not crushed in the event of an accident, but non-metallic materials have entered the marketplace, offering lightweight design and the ability to minimise disruption in security areas and specialist manufacturer where metal detection is required. Some of the non metallic toe caps are made from composite glass fibre and others are injection moulded thermoplastics.
Arco carried out compression testing in their lab on their own brand footwear along with a sample of footwear currently available on the market. During the testing, safety footwear with injection moulded plastic toe caps performed significantly worse than the fibreglass composite toe caps during compression testing.
If the foot is compressed, these substandard toes caps would not protect the wearer as intended, resultant injuries being broken bones or even amputation. The use of a thermoplastic toe caps in safety footwear construction is not immediately evident and purchasers are relying on the CE mark being accurate.
This issue has compelled Arco to assure customers that we do not allow the use of thermoplastic toe caps in the construction of our own brand products.
The UK has a strong health and safety record, of which we are very proud. As a participant in the BSIF’s RSSS and with safety at the forefront of everything we do, Arco will continue to lead the charge, working with the BSIF, to raise the standards of compliance in the UK.
www.arco.co.uk TOMORROW’S HEALTH & SAFETY YEARBOOK 2016/17
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76
