brodidit for students
Home / NEBOSH IGC / Hazard examples
GIC2 hazard examples
16 worked hazard entries use the GIC2 layout: hazard category, description, who might be harmed, how, existing controls, further actions, who and when. Together with the full print-shop example, these cover 21 of the 21 hazard categories. They are invented examples, not NEBOSH samples and not wording to copy. Coverage means an example exists; it does not mean that one entry teaches the whole category or proves assessment readiness.
Additional categories in the full print-shop example: Hazardous substances, Working at height, Slips and trips, Machinery, Fire, Electricity.
Each entry includes dated references to the official guidance used. These are educational examples, not workplace approvals or operating procedures. HSE guidance describes Great Britain; CCOHS guidance is Canadian. Read GOV.UK guidance for its stated jurisdiction and check local legal duties. Any planning targets are illustrative. Put effective precautions in place before exposure; shorten deadlines or pause affected work if protection is inadequate.
Noise: Noise in a joinery workshop
A joinery workshop with eight workers
| 2.1 Hazard category | Noise |
|---|---|
| 2.2 Hazard description | Workers use a thickness planer and a circular saw in the main workshop while the dust extraction fan runs next to them. Workers have to raise their voices to talk at about two metres, which is only a prompt to investigate and not a measurement. The planer and the saw are used for most of each shift. |
| 2.3 Who might be harmed? | The machine operators and the other workers in the workshop, including the apprentice and the cleaner. Visitors who enter the workshop. |
| 2.4 How could they be harmed? | Gradual hearing loss and ringing in the ears from long exposure. The damage is painless at first, so workers often notice it only when it is permanent. Noise also makes it hard to hear warnings and to communicate, which increases the risk of accidents. |
| 2.5 What you are already doing | Earmuffs are kept in the store and some workers use them. A noise assessment was made four years ago, before the saw was replaced. There is no sign for hearing protection and there are no hearing tests. |
| 2.5 Further action needed | 1. Before the next noisy task, get competent advice on interim protection. Keep unnecessary people out, reduce time exposed and provide suitable hearing protection where needed. Check its condition and fit, teach workers when and how to use it, and supervise use. Pause affected work if exposure cannot be adequately controlled; do not wait for a future assessment or budget. 2. Replace the outdated assessment with a representative estimate of each person's exposure, including the saw, planer, extraction fan, task durations and peak noise. Use reliable data and measurements where needed, compare with applicable local action and limit values, and identify anyone at particular risk. Establish required protection zones and signs from the findings. 3. Reduce noise at source: maintain machines and extraction, ask the supplier about compatible low-noise saw blades and quieter planer tooling, and assess suitable enclosures or relocation of the extraction unit. Have competent specialists design changes that preserve guards, access and effective dust capture. Do not turn off dust extraction to reduce noise. Check exposure after changes before withdrawing interim measures. 4. Arrange hearing surveillance through an occupational health professional for workers identified as at risk, explain symptom reporting and act on the advice received. Hearing tests do not reduce exposure. Select hearing protection to avoid excessive attenuation that masks warnings; compulsory use depends on the assessment and local requirements. 5. Check controls and required protection use each shift and review after equipment changes or signs of ineffective control. If limiting task duration, calculate the resulting exposure for everyone involved. Do not rotate an untrained apprentice onto machinery or spread hazardous exposure among more people. |
| 2.6 Who will do it? | Workshop manager accountable overall. 1: Workshop supervisor with a competent noise adviser. 2: Competent noise assessor, appointed by the manager. 3: Manager and competent machine/extraction specialists, with assessor verification. 4: Manager arranges an occupational health professional. 5: Workshop supervisor with assessor support for exposure review. |
| 2.7 By when? | 1: Before the next noisy task, with checks each shift. 2: Complete within 7 days, sooner if needed for safe interim arrangements. 3: Agree the plan within 7 days; complete and verify measures within 4 weeks, sooner if interim protection is inadequate, or keep affected work paused. Do not defer necessary controls to the next budget year. 4: Arrange occupational-health advice within 7 days; carry out indicated checks promptly on that advice, with a baseline before new exposure where practicable. 5: Each shift and after changes, symptoms or other evidence of ineffective controls. These deadlines are illustrative planning targets, not permission to continue uncontrolled exposure. |
What makes it a good entry
- The hazard description says what the noise is, where it comes from and how long people are exposed. It does not simply say noise is a hazard.
- Source reduction remains the priority. Suitable hearing protection may also be needed immediately while other controls are developed; calling it the last resort does not justify delaying protection.
- Action numbers link each control to a responsible role and a timescale. The manager retains responsibility for delivery rather than leaving all actions with the assessor.
- The raised-voice observation is a warning sign, not a measured exposure or proof of a limit breach. The replaced saw makes the old assessment unreliable for the current work. Review real task durations and everyone affected, including the apprentice and cleaner.
- The 7-day and 4-week targets illustrate a plan for this fictional workshop; they are not deadlines prescribed by HSE. Shorten them or pause affected work if adequate interim protection cannot be maintained.
Official guidance for this example
This source check covers the joinery noise entry. HSE guidance describes Great Britain; check the legal requirements where the workplace operates. This is an invented learning example, not a machine-modification procedure or a site-specific noise assessment.
Sources checked: November 14, 2026.
Vibration: Hand-arm vibration in a road repair gang
A road maintenance depot with a gang of six workers
| 2.1 Hazard category | Vibration |
|---|---|
| 2.2 Hazard description | The gang uses a petrol-driven breaker and a plate compactor for repair work on roads. Two workers use the breaker for most of the day, holding the handles with both hands. The breaker is old and the rubber handle covers are worn. The tools are in use for several hours a day, on most days of the week, and in cold weather. |
| 2.3 Who might be harmed? | The two workers who use the breaker for most of the shift, and the other workers who take turns to use the breaker and the compactor. New workers who have not been told about the risk. |
| 2.4 How could they be harmed? | Long exposure to hand-arm vibration can damage the nerves and blood vessels in the hands and arms. The first signs are tingling and numbness in the fingers, and fingers that turn white and painful in the cold. In time the damage can be permanent, with loss of grip and feeling, so that workers cannot do fine tasks or hold tools safely. |
| 2.5 What you are already doing | Gloves are given to the workers. There is no record of how long each person uses the tools, and no one checks the vibration of the machines. There is no health surveillance and the workers have not been told what the early symptoms are. Tools are repaired only when they stop working. |
| 2.5 Further action needed | 1. Before further breaker or compactor use, assess whether a method avoiding hand-held vibration is practicable. Stop use of defective equipment and obtain competent advice on safe interim work and exposure limits; do not wait for the next budget year. Explain symptom reporting and safe tool use before the task. 2. Estimate daily exposure for each person using representative vibration information and actual trigger/contact time for all tools used. Supplier emission figures may not represent this job. Compare with applicable action and limit values and set justified use durations. Do not simply share excessive exposure among more workers. 3. Select suitable lower-vibration equipment or a different work method, maintain it and verify the improvement under real use. Keep hands warm and dry; gloves, including anti-vibration gloves, must not be relied on as vibration protection. Arrange risk-based health surveillance through a competent occupational health provider and act promptly on symptoms or fitness advice. |
| 2.6 Who will do it? | Depot manager accountable. 1: Supervisor and competent equipment adviser. 2: Competent vibration assessor. 3: Maintenance manager, equipment supplier and occupational health provider. |
| 2.7 By when? | 1: Before further affected work. 2: Before exposure limits can be justified; complete the documented assessment within 7 days, sooner if needed. 3: Agree equipment measures within 7 days and implement within 4 weeks or sooner as risk requires; pause affected tasks if interim controls are inadequate. Arrange occupational-health advice within 7 days, with surveillance on its advice. Check controls each shift and after changes. These are illustrative targets, not permission to continue uncontrolled exposure. |
What makes it a good entry
- Actual time in contact with a vibrating tool matters, not just the shift length. Include combined exposure from the breaker and compactor.
- Gloves help with cold conditions but do not establish control of vibration exposure. Health surveillance detects harm and informs action; it does not remove the source.
- Training and interim precautions precede exposure. Future purchasing plans do not justify using defective tools or exceeding applicable limits.
Official guidance for this example
Sources checked: November 14, 2026.
Radiation: Industrial radiography of pipe welds at a fabrication yard
An open fabrication yard where pipe spools are made for a power plant
| 2.1 Hazard category | Radiation |
|---|---|
| 2.2 Hazard description | A contractor checks pipe welds with a radiography source. Two radiographers set up the equipment in the yard. The source is exposed for a few minutes for each weld, and welders and fitters are working in the same area, some of them within a few metres. The yard has no fixed shielded room. Rope and a warning sign are placed around the area, but the rope is often moved to make room for a crane. |
| 2.3 Who might be harmed? | The two radiographers, the welders and fitters working near the test area, crane operators, and visitors or delivery drivers who may enter the yard without knowing about the test. |
| 2.4 How could they be harmed? | Ionising radiation can damage body cells. A high dose in a short time can cause burns, sickness and, at very high levels, death. Lower doses received over a long time raise the risk of cancer. The radiation cannot be seen, smelled or felt, so a person can be exposed without knowing. The main routes are being too close to the source, being exposed for too long, or being in the beam when the source is not properly shielded. The source can also be lost or stolen, and a person who picks it up can receive a serious dose. |
| 2.5 What you are already doing | A rope and a sign mark the test area, and the radiographers have personal dosimeters. The area is not checked with a survey meter before work restarts. The welders have not been told when the tests take place, and the times are not planned around the work of the yard. The source is kept in a locked van at night, but the van is parked in the yard and nobody checks it. There is no written plan for what to do if the source does not return to its shielding. |
| 2.5 Further action needed | 1. Suspend radiography until a competent radiation protection specialist and the site manager have agreed a task-specific plan, verified required regulatory authorisations and secured the controlled area. Prefer a suitable shielded enclosure where practicable. Night working alone does not make the site safe; address access, lighting, fatigue and other work. 2. Have the specialist determine boundaries from the source, shielding, geometry and survey results, with barriers, warnings and access control in place before every exposure. Coordinate all contractors and check every approach, including other levels. Trained authorised radiographers use suitable checked survey instruments and dosimetry under written local rules. Verify source return to its shielded position after each exposure; do not rely on the exposure timer or personal dosimeter alone. 3. Before work starts, establish and rehearse contingency arrangements for a stuck or missing source, accidental exposure and transport incidents. Keep people out, raise the alarm and obtain specialist help; untrained workers must not retrieve a source. Verify secure authorised storage, inventory, transport arrangements and availability of competent emergency assistance. Review dose information and any medical surveillance required by the applicable rules. |
| 2.6 Who will do it? | Site manager and radiography contractor accountable for coordination. 1: Contractor with competent radiation protection adviser. 2: Radiation protection supervisor and authorised radiographers, with site access staff. 3: Contractor emergency lead and site manager, supported by the adviser. |
| 2.7 By when? | 1 and 3: Before radiography begins, including briefing and a suitable contingency rehearsal; no one-month delay for an emergency plan. 2: Before and during every exposure, with source-return checks afterwards. Reassess after changes, boundary failures or abnormal readings. Work remains suspended until the necessary controls and authorisations are established. |
What makes it a good entry
- Time, distance and shielding work together; they are not a fixed sequence of controls or a universal exclusion distance.
- A personal dosimeter records exposure; it cannot replace a survey meter or access control. Boundaries must account for the actual source and site.
- This is educational planning, not a radiography operating or source-recovery procedure. The emergency plan must exist before the first exposure.
Mental ill-health: Pressure and long hours in a customer billing department
An open-plan office where about 40 staff handle billing queries for a utility company
| 2.1 Hazard category | Mental ill-health |
|---|---|
| 2.2 Hazard description | Staff answer calls and emails from customers who are often angry about high bills. Each person has a target for the number of cases closed in a day, and the figures are shown on a screen for the whole team to see. Overtime is expected at the end of each month, and several people regularly work 11 hour days. Two team leaders have left in the last year, and the vacancies have been filled by agency staff who are not familiar with the systems. Staff say that they cannot take their breaks because the call queue is always full. |
| 2.3 Who might be harmed? | The 40 billing staff, the team leaders who carry the extra workload, the agency staff who have little training, and the people who live with them and see the effects at home. |
| 2.4 How could they be harmed? | Long term stress can lead to anxiety, depression, sleep problems, headaches and, over time, heart disease and other illness. It can also lead to errors, poor decisions, conflict at work, higher sickness absence and people leaving the job. The causes at work include high demands, little control over how the work is done, a lack of support from managers and colleagues, unclear roles, poor relationships, abuse from customers, and change that is badly managed. The effects are not the same for each person, and some may be affected by things outside work, but the employer must still manage the work causes. |
| 2.5 What you are already doing | The company has an employee helpline that staff can call, but few have heard of it. The targets are set by the head office and have not been reviewed for two years. There is no record of workloads or of overtime, and the team leaders have had no training on spotting signs of stress. Sickness absence is recorded but is not looked at for patterns. There has been no stress risk assessment, and staff have not been asked for their views. |
| 2.5 Further action needed | 1. Act on current pressure now: arrange cover so staff can take breaks, review excessive hours and urgent workloads with team leaders, and offer a confidential route for concerns and occupational-health support. Do not wait three months to make breaks possible. Review the public individual-ranking display with staff and suspend it where it contributes to harmful pressure. 2. Assess work-related stress with employees and representatives, covering demands, control, support, relationships, role and change. Agree realistic caseloads and staffing with head office, clarify agency workers' roles and training, and involve staff in changes. A survey supports discussion; it is not a diagnosis or a substitute for action. 3. Implement an agreed action plan with staffing, supervision and manager training. Use a clear route for abusive calls and prompt support afterwards. Review workloads, hours, absence and staff feedback without exposing individual health information. Adjust measures promptly if problems persist; a helpline alone does not control harmful demands. |
| 2.6 Who will do it? | Head of customer services accountable. 1: Team leaders with HR and occupational health support. 2: Department manager with staff representatives. 3: Service manager and HR for delivery, monitoring and training. |
| 2.7 By when? | 1: Start today and before the next shift; respond to individual concerns promptly. 2: Begin consultation within 7 days and agree an initial plan within 4 weeks. 3: Interim staffing and training support now; deliver agreed longer-term changes to risk-based dates and review weekly at first, then at least quarterly. These are illustrative planning targets; bring actions forward if people remain at risk. |
What makes it a good entry
- The six Management Standards areas help identify work factors. They are not a medical diagnosis.
- Address demands and working arrangements as well as offering confidential support. Staff should not have to disclose a diagnosis publicly to obtain help.
- The plan sets immediate measures while staffing and organisational changes are developed.
Official guidance for this example
Sources checked: November 14, 2026.
Violence at work: Abuse and assault at a hospital emergency reception
The reception and waiting area of the emergency department of a city hospital, open 24 hours
| 2.1 Hazard category | Violence at work |
|---|---|
| 2.2 Hazard description | Reception staff register patients and answer questions from worried relatives. The waiting area is often full, and waits can be several hours. Staff report that people shout at them, threaten them and sometimes hit the counter or push the staff. One receptionist was slapped last month by a relative who was told that the doctor was busy. There is one security guard for the whole building, who is often called away from the area. The counter has no barrier, and the staff work alone on the night shift. |
| 2.3 Who might be harmed? | The reception staff, nurses and doctors who deal with relatives, the security guard, other patients and visitors who may be caught up in an incident, and staff who work alone at night. |
| 2.4 How could they be harmed? | Verbal abuse, threats and assault can cause physical injury, fear and lasting psychological harm to staff and people nearby. Assess actual behaviour, distress, communication problems, waiting conditions and access to help. Do not assume that a person is violent because of a mental-health diagnosis. |
| 2.5 What you are already doing | A sign says that abuse of staff will not be tolerated, but nobody is told what will happen. The guard has a radio but no training in calming people down. Staff are told to call the police in an emergency, but the police station is 15 minutes away. Incidents are not recorded, since staff say that reports lead to no change, and there is no support for staff after an attack. |
| 2.5 Further action needed | 1. Protect the next shift: agree reliable security response, a tested means of calling for help and an unobstructed retreat route. Given the reported assault and lack of nearby support, replace unsupported lone reception work with a safer staffed arrangement now. Record incidents immediately and offer affected staff medical care and confidential support. 2. Assess the risks with reception, clinical and security staff, using incident information and shift patterns. Plan suitable counter protection, sightlines, waiting-time information and safe interview space without trapping staff or blocking access for patients. Staff allocation and alarm response must match the assessed risk; one extra guard is not automatically sufficient. 3. Train staff in de-escalation, withdrawal and summoning help; they are not expected to physically restrain people. Any restraint is for appropriately trained authorised personnel under lawful clinical/security procedures. Apply a proportionate incident policy that respects patient care and rights; signs or automatic removal are not a complete control. Test response arrangements and review after incidents. |
| 2.6 Who will do it? | Emergency department lead and security manager accountable. 1: Shift manager and security lead. 2: Department manager with staff and competent design/security advisers. 3: Clinical/security training leads and HR for staff support. |
| 2.7 By when? | 1: Before the next shift; support and reporting immediately after an incident. 2: Start now and complete the initial assessment within 7 days. Agree design/staffing measures within 4 weeks with risk-based delivery dates and adequate interim protection. 3: Brief staff before duties; specialist training before the relevant intervention. Check response each shift and review after incidents. Dates are illustrative, not permission to leave staff unprotected. |
What makes it a good entry
- A history of assault calls for protection now, not only an assessment or a future alarm purchase.
- Risk assessment considers behaviour, circumstances and available support; a diagnosis alone does not predict violence.
- Safe retreat, timely assistance and de-escalation take priority over untrained intervention.
Official guidance for this example
Sources checked: November 14, 2026.
Substance abuse at work: Alcohol and drugs among forklift and crane drivers at a port yard
A container yard at a port, where drivers of forklifts and mobile cranes work in 12 hour shifts
| 2.1 Hazard category | Substance abuse at work |
|---|---|
| 2.2 Hazard description | Drivers move heavy containers in a busy yard where trucks, people on foot and equipment share the same space. Some drivers work 12 hours on night shifts, and a supervisor has noticed that two of them have slurred speech and seem drowsy at the start of some shifts. A bottle was found in a cab last month. One driver has told a colleague that he takes strong painkillers for a back injury and also drinks to sleep. There is no written policy on alcohol and drugs, and no testing. |
| 2.3 Who might be harmed? | The drivers themselves, the workers on foot and the truck drivers who work near the equipment, the supervisors, and visitors who enter the yard. |
| 2.4 How could they be harmed? | Alcohol and drugs, including some prescription medicines, can reduce alertness, slow reactions, harm judgement and affect balance and vision. A driver who is affected may hit a person or another vehicle, drop a load or tip a machine. The effects can last into the next day. Long shifts, night work and stress can make misuse more likely. Substance misuse can also be linked to personal problems, which need support and not only discipline. Containers weighing many tonnes mean that a mistake can kill. |
| 2.5 What you are already doing | A sign at the gate says that alcohol is forbidden, but it is not enforced. Supervisors have no training on how to deal with a worker who may be affected. Workers do not know whom to talk to if they have a problem, and nobody has told them that some medicines can affect driving. There is no record of near misses or of the concerns that were raised. |
| 2.5 Further action needed | 1. If a driver appears unfit, stop safety-critical work immediately, secure the equipment safely and arrange private assessment and appropriate help. Drowsiness or slurred speech may reflect illness, medication or fatigue, not proof of misuse. Seek urgent medical help where indicated and arrange safe travel rather than letting an unfit person drive home. 2. Consult workers on a fair policy covering alcohol, drugs, medicines, confidential fitness-for-work advice, support and return to work. Workers should obtain advice on medicines that could affect safe work through an appropriate confidential route. Supervisors need clear instructions now; do not wait for the final policy before preventing unsafe operation. 3. Review long/night shifts, rest and near misses. Use occupational-health advice for restrictions and supported return to safety-critical duties. Consider any testing only with a justified, lawful and agreed process covering consent, accuracy, confidentiality and handling disputed results; a test alone cannot establish fitness or replace supervision. |
| 2.6 Who will do it? | Operations manager accountable. 1: Shift supervisor with first-aid/medical support as needed. 2: HR manager with worker representatives and occupational health. 3: Operations/HR managers with competent legal and testing advice where needed. |
| 2.7 By when? | 1: Immediately when fitness is in doubt and before operating equipment. 2: Interim supervisor briefing before the next shift; consult and agree the policy within 4 weeks. 3: Review shift risks within 7 days; any testing arrangements must be established before testing starts. Review after incidents and fitness concerns. Targets are illustrative and do not delay immediate safeguards. |
What makes it a good entry
- Observed impairment requires action on safety, not an unsupported accusation or diagnosis.
- Keep medical information confidential and separate fitness advice from unnecessary disclosure of prescriptions.
- Support, safe work allocation and fatigue controls are needed alongside a proportionate policy. Testing is not assumed to be mandatory or lawful everywhere.
Official guidance for this example
Sources checked: November 14, 2026.
Manual handling: Lifting sacks and cartons in a warehouse
A distribution warehouse where workers load vans with sacks of flour and cartons of tins by hand
| 2.1 Hazard category | Manual handling |
|---|---|
| 2.2 Hazard description | Workers lift 25 kg sacks from pallets to the floor of the vans and carry cartons of tins, which weigh up to 18 kg, across the warehouse and up a ramp. The pallets are on the floor, so the workers bend to the floor to lift. Some cartons have no handles. Workers load about 300 items each shift. The floor is uneven near the loading bay, and there is no trolley or lifting device. Several workers have back pain, and one is off work with a disc injury. |
| 2.3 Who might be harmed? | The loaders and the drivers who help to load, the temporary staff who come at busy times, and any person with an existing back problem or who is pregnant or young. |
| 2.4 How could they be harmed? | Manual handling can cause back injuries, injuries to the shoulders and arms, and strains and sprains. Heavy loads, repeated lifts, bending and twisting, carrying over a distance and uneven floors increase the risk. Injuries often develop slowly, from many lifts, and they may last a long time and stop the person from working. The risk depends on the task, the individual, the load and the environment, which can be remembered as TILE. |
| 2.5 What you are already doing | New workers are shown how to lift in a ten minute talk, and are told to bend the knees. There is no check on the weight of the loads, no assessment of the task and no equipment to help. Injuries are reported to the supervisor, but there is no record of the cause. Temporary staff receive no training. |
| 2.5 Further action needed | 1. Stop or reorganise the harmful loading task now, provide suitable assessed handling aids and safe routes, and respond promptly to workers with pain. Train all assigned staff, including temporary workers, before handling. A short lifting talk does not make this repetitive floor-level lifting safe. 2. Assess the task, people, load and environment, including lift frequency, van access and the damaged floor. Avoid the lift where practicable; otherwise select suitable lifting/transport aids, stable load presentation and smaller packages with suppliers. Check aid capacity, stability, slopes and separation from vehicles. Do not improvise pallet stands or assume a trolley removes pushing/pulling risk. 3. Repair or safely exclude the uneven route. A team lift needs its own assessment of coordination, handholds, access and individual capability; two people do not make every heavy sack safe. There is no universal safe lifting weight. Check the revised task with workers, support appropriate duties for affected people and review after injury or change. |
| 2.6 Who will do it? | Warehouse manager accountable. 1: Loading supervisor with competent handling/health advice. 2: Competent assessor, manager and equipment supplier. 3: Facilities contractor and supervisor, with HR for suitable duties. |
| 2.7 By when? | 1: Before further affected loading. 2: Assess interim arrangements before use; complete the written assessment within 7 days and agree permanent measures within 4 weeks, sooner as risk requires. 3: Exclude the unsafe route now and repair before reopening; check aids/routes each shift. Dates are illustrative and do not permit continuing harmful work. |
What makes it a good entry
- TILE helps structure the assessment; it is not a calculation of a safe weight.
- Mechanical aids and smaller packages must fit the actual task. Team lifting is conditional, not an automatic solution.
- Reported pain, damaged routes and untrained workers require action before continuing the task.
Official guidance for this example
Sources checked: November 14, 2026.
Load handling equipment: Suspended motor at a maintenance workshop
A maintenance bay where a chain hoist is used to remove motors from pumps
| 2.1 Hazard category | Load handling equipment |
|---|---|
| 2.2 Hazard description | A fitter prepares to lift a motor with a chain hoist attached to an overhead beam. The sling has visible damage and its identification is unreadable. The motor weight, suitability of its attachment points and beam capacity have not been confirmed. Other workers use the walkway beside the bench and could pass beneath the suspended load. |
| 2.3 Who might be harmed? | The fitter, anyone attaching or guiding the load, nearby maintenance staff and people using the walkway. |
| 2.4 How could they be harmed? | A dropped or swinging motor could crush or kill someone. Failure of the sling, hoist, support or attachment could release the load; people can also be trapped between it and the bench. |
| 2.5 What you are already doing | A capacity marking is visible on the hoist and the fitter has used it before. There is no verified lift plan or equipment examination record available for this task. The damaged sling is still in the lifting store. |
| 2.5 Further action needed | 1. Do not start the lift. Withdraw the damaged or unidentifiable sling and secure it against reuse. Keep people clear of the lift area; nobody should pass or work beneath a suspended load. 2. Have a competent person plan the lift for the actual motor, attachments, load path and surroundings. Confirm weight, centre of gravity, support strength and suitable lifting points; select compatible equipment and accessories with adequate capacity for the lifting arrangement. A hoist capacity marking does not establish that the beam or sling is suitable. 3. Verify applicable thorough-examination requirements, reports and any defects before use, as well as maintenance and pre-use checks. Provide suitable supervision, a competent operator and agreed communication/exclusion arrangements. Review the plan if the load, route or equipment changes; an examination report does not replace planning or checks on the day. |
| 2.6 Who will do it? | Maintenance manager accountable. 1: Workshop supervisor. 2: Competent lift planner with equipment/support specialists where needed. 3: Equipment owner, competent examiner and lift supervisor. |
| 2.7 By when? | 1: Before the lift or further use of the damaged sling. 2 and 3: Establish the plan, suitability, examination status and trained people before lifting. Check equipment before use and maintain examination/inspection intervals under applicable rules and competent advice. Keep the lift suspended until controls are verified; do not assign an arbitrary annual certificate rule. |
What makes it a good entry
- The category is lifting equipment because the load is suspended by a hoist, not carried by hand. The assessment includes the support, sling, attachment and people around the lift.
- A marked hoist or a coloured sling tag alone is not proof that this lifting arrangement is safe. Examination, maintenance, inspection and lift planning serve different purposes.
- The example does not calculate a sling angle, working load or beam capacity. Those require competent task-specific information.
Official guidance for this example
Sources checked: November 14, 2026.
Welfare and working environment: Unavailable washing and rest facilities on a warehouse shift
A distribution warehouse with day and evening packing shifts
| 2.1 Hazard category | Welfare and working environment |
|---|---|
| 2.2 Hazard description | The packing team handles dusty cartons and cleaning materials. The staff washbasin is out of service, soap and hand-drying supplies are missing, and workers rely on hand gel. One toilet is blocked and the alternative staff facilities are locked during the evening shift. Staff eat beside stored cleaning products, and drinking water is only available in an office that closes before their shift ends. |
| 2.3 Who might be harmed? | Permanent, temporary and evening-shift workers, including anyone with additional access or welfare needs. |
| 2.4 How could they be harmed? | Inadequate washing can leave dirt or contaminants on hands and allow contamination of food. Lack of accessible drinking water, clean toilets and suitable rest space can affect health, hygiene and wellbeing. The example does not establish that an infection or a particular illness has occurred. |
| 2.5 What you are already doing | Facilities exist elsewhere in the building, but access outside office hours has not been arranged. A cleaner attends in the morning. Hand gel is available at the packing entrance. |
| 2.5 Further action needed | 1. Provide accessible clean toilets, suitable washing facilities with running warm or hot and cold water, soap and hygienic drying, safe drinking water and a clean place to eat/rest for the current shift. Arrange suitable temporary facilities or relocate work if necessary. Hand gel does not replace the required washing facilities. 2. Repair the basin and blocked toilet and assess capacity, privacy, accessibility and access for everyone on each shift. Separate meals from chemicals and contamination; provide appropriate storage/changing arrangements where the work needs them. Do not assume the facilities are adequate because they exist behind a locked door. 3. Assign replenishment and cleaning responsibilities, check availability before every shift and provide a quick defect-reporting route. Consult workers and verify that contractors or temporary arrangements actually meet the identified need; a morning cleaning visit does not cover a fault during the evening. |
| 2.6 Who will do it? | Warehouse manager accountable. 1: Shift manager and facilities lead. 2: Competent facilities contractor with staff consultation. 3: Shift supervisors and cleaning contractor. |
| 2.7 By when? | 1: Before the current shift continues without adequate provision. 2: Start repairs immediately and verify facilities before reopening; use adequate temporary provision in the meantime. 3: Before each shift, during use as needed and immediately after a defect report. Repair lead times do not permit leaving workers without suitable facilities. |
What makes it a good entry
- This entry addresses welfare provision and availability, not every possible temperature, lighting or ventilation hazard in this category.
- Adequacy depends on the number and needs of users and the work. No universal toilet ratio or drinking-water quantity is invented.
- Existing controls describe what is actually available on the evening shift; further controls specify usable provision and how it will be maintained.
Official guidance for this example
Sources checked: November 14, 2026.
Confined spaces: Blocked pump in an underground wastewater chamber
A facilities team servicing a wastewater pump chamber beneath a yard
| 2.1 Hazard category | Confined spaces |
|---|---|
| 2.2 Hazard description | A pump has stopped and a technician is asked to climb through a narrow top opening into the chamber to clear it. The chamber connects to wastewater inlets, and the pump can start automatically. No atmospheric readings, isolation checks or entry assessment are available. A colleague is told to wait beside the open cover and call an ambulance if needed. |
| 2.3 Who might be harmed? | The technician, anyone who attempts a rescue and people who could fall through the open access. |
| 2.4 How could they be harmed? | Possible oxygen deficiency or harmful gases could overcome an entrant. Incoming wastewater could drown or trap them, and automatic machinery could injure them. These are foreseeable risks to assess, not measured conditions. Restricted access could delay escape and rescue. |
| 2.5 What you are already doing | The pump has a local stop switch. A colleague has a mobile phone. There is no documented entry system, verified isolation, trained rescue provision or barrier around the opening. |
| 2.5 Further action needed | 1. Do not enter. Secure the opening against falls and unauthorised access. Have a competent person assess whether the fault can be diagnosed and repaired from outside using suitable designed equipment or specialist assistance; avoid entry wherever practicable. 2. If entry is genuinely unavoidable, a competent assessment must establish a site-specific safe system before authorisation. Address all energy and material sources, including automatic restart and wastewater inflow, verified isolation, atmospheric testing, suitable ventilation/monitoring, safe access, communication and evacuation criteria. An open cover, stop switch or acceptable gas reading alone does not establish safety. 3. Put suitable, practised rescue arrangements in place before any entry, with competent available people and equipment appropriate to this chamber. A call to an ambulance alone is not a rescue plan. Plan non-entry recovery where feasible; do not assume a tripod will recover every casualty. The attendant must not attempt an unplanned entry rescue. A permit records verified precautions; it does not create them. |
| 2.6 Who will do it? | Facilities manager accountable. 1: Site supervisor and competent specialist. 2: Competent confined-space assessor and authorised entry supervisor. 3: Designated rescue lead with the site manager. |
| 2.7 By when? | 1: Immediately, before anyone approaches or enters the unprotected opening. 2 and 3: Before any authorised entry; keep entry prohibited until the controls and rescue arrangements are verified. Monitor conditions as the assessment requires and stop/evacuate if conditions change. Repair deadlines do not override the entry restrictions. |
What makes it a good entry
- The enclosed chamber and foreseeable risks make this more than a routine pump repair. Assessment must consider atmosphere, inflow, machinery and escape together.
- Avoiding entry controls the exposure more reliably than starting with PPE. A dust mask supplies no oxygen and cannot make this entry safe.
- This is a learning example, not an entry, isolation or rescue procedure. The actual chamber needs competent planning under applicable requirements.
Official guidance for this example
Sources checked: November 14, 2026.
Lone working: Evening cleaner without a reliable check-in system
An office building cleaned after other staff have left
| 2.1 Hazard category | Lone working |
|---|---|
| 2.2 Hazard description | One cleaner works alone across several floors in the evening. Their phone has no signal in the rear wing. The supervisor only checks the attendance sheet the next morning, and nobody is assigned to respond if the cleaner becomes ill or fails to finish. The cleaner is also expected to move heavy waste bags and reach high shelves when requested. |
| 2.3 Who might be harmed? | The cleaner, relief cleaners unfamiliar with the building and anyone sent to look for them after an incident. |
| 2.4 How could they be harmed? | A fall, illness, injury or confrontation could become more serious because no one notices or can summon help promptly. Working alone does not create every hazard, but it changes the likelihood of receiving timely assistance. |
| 2.5 What you are already doing | The cleaner carries a phone and signs an attendance sheet. Front-door access is controlled, but there is no tested contact coverage, agreed check-in interval or missed-contact response. |
| 2.5 Further action needed | 1. Assess which activities can be done alone and which need assistance or a different method. Do not assign high-risk access or heavy handling just because no other worker is present. Arrange a safer task or additional support before those activities; agree access/security and prompt first-aid/emergency arrangements. 2. Before lone work, establish reliable contact throughout the work area, agreed check-in and finish times, a named person monitoring them and clear escalation if contact is missed. Set the interval from the risk and response needed, not a universal hourly rule. A phone in a dead zone or an unmonitored alarm is not an effective arrangement. 3. Train the cleaner and the responder, test coverage and the response plan, and provide information on the location, access and hazards. Consider individual needs confidentially, review after changes or incidents, and keep monitoring arrangements proportionate. Additional supervision or a colleague is needed where the risks cannot be adequately managed alone. |
| 2.6 Who will do it? | Cleaning contract manager and building manager accountable for coordination. 1: Cleaning supervisor with the building manager. 2: Supervisor and named monitoring/responder staff. 3: Supervisor with the cleaner and relevant first-aid/security support. |
| 2.7 By when? | 1 and 2: Before the next lone shift or affected task. 3: Instruction and testing before lone work begins; confirm contacts and arrangements each shift and review after failures or changes. If reliable contact and response cannot be provided, change the work arrangement rather than proceeding alone. |
What makes it a good entry
- This entry focuses on delayed help and supervision. It does not assume that all lone working is prohibited or that two people automatically control every risk.
- Check-in arrangements need a person who notices and acts on a missed contact. The alarm/device is only one part of the system.
- Response planning must not expose a colleague to an uncontrolled hazard while searching for the worker.
Official guidance for this example
Sources checked: November 14, 2026.
Movement of people and vehicles: Pedestrians crossing a reversing delivery yard
A warehouse yard used by visiting delivery lorries and site forklifts
| 2.1 Hazard category | Movement of people and vehicles |
|---|---|
| 2.2 Hazard description | Lorries reverse towards loading doors while forklifts collect pallets. The staff entrance opens directly onto the vehicle route, and workers cross the yard to reach a break room. A painted pedestrian line is worn away, stacked pallets restrict visibility and visiting drivers are not told where to wait during unloading. |
| 2.3 Who might be harmed? | Warehouse workers, forklift and delivery drivers, contractors and visitors, including people unfamiliar with the yard. |
| 2.4 How could they be harmed? | A person could be struck or crushed by a reversing vehicle, moving forklift or load. Blind spots and mixed routes make it difficult for drivers and pedestrians to see each other and leave a safe escape path. |
| 2.5 What you are already doing | Staff have high-visibility clothing and drivers are told to sound the horn. There is no physical separation at the entrance, controlled crossing or agreed delivery procedure. |
| 2.5 Further action needed | 1. Stop conflicting vehicle and pedestrian movements now and provide a controlled safe route before reopening access. Keep uninvolved people outside loading/manoeuvring areas and give visiting drivers a safe waiting location and clear instructions. High-visibility clothing and horns do not provide physical separation. 2. Plan separate pedestrian and vehicle routes, protected doors and suitable crossing points using a competent site assessment. Remove blind spots, maintain lighting/surfaces and minimise reversing through layout and delivery arrangements. Select barriers and traffic rules for actual vehicles and access needs; do not invent a universally safe speed or separation distance. 3. Where reversing remains necessary, use an assessed system with competent drivers and any trained signaller kept in a safe position. Stop the movement if required communication or visibility is lost. Coordinate haulier/site responsibilities, check controls each shift and investigate near misses; cameras and alarms supplement rather than replace separation. |
| 2.6 Who will do it? | Warehouse/yard manager accountable with the visiting haulier. 1: Yard supervisor. 2: Competent transport-layout adviser and facilities lead. 3: Yard supervisor, authorised drivers and trained signaller where required. |
| 2.7 By when? | 1: Before further conflicting movements. 2: Assess the interim routes before use; agree permanent measures within 7 days with risk-based completion dates and maintain effective interim separation. 3: Brief drivers before site access and check each shift and after changes. The planning target is illustrative; unsafe access remains restricted until controlled. |
What makes it a good entry
- The hazard is vehicle interaction within the workplace, distinct from road journeys covered by work-related driving.
- Pedestrian separation and avoiding reversing take priority over relying on workers to spot a moving vehicle.
- A signaller must not stand in a crush zone. The example does not provide manoeuvring instructions or prescribe a yard speed.
Official guidance for this example
Sources checked: November 14, 2026.
Hand-held tools: Damaged hammer and cold chisel at a repair bench
A repair workshop where staff remove damaged fasteners with manual tools
| 2.1 Hazard category | Hand-held tools |
|---|---|
| 2.2 Hazard description | A mechanic uses a cold chisel with a visibly mushroomed struck head and a hammer with a loose wooden handle. The workpiece is balanced on the bench rather than secured, and another worker passes close to the striking area. Shared eye protection is scratched and staff have not been shown how to identify defective struck tools. |
| 2.3 Who might be harmed? | The mechanic, anyone holding the workpiece and nearby workers or passers-by. |
| 2.4 How could they be harmed? | Fragments from damaged tools or the workpiece could injure eyes or skin. A loose hammer head, glancing blow or slipping workpiece could cause impact injuries, cuts or crushed fingers. |
| 2.5 What you are already doing | Tools are kept in a shared drawer and replaced only when they break. Some eye protection is available, but no pre-use condition check or screen protects other workers. |
| 2.5 Further action needed | 1. Stop using and withdraw the damaged hammer and chisel, securing them against reuse. Supply tools of the correct type and condition for the job. Do not improvise a repair or strike another hammer; replacement or reconditioning must follow competent/manufacturer advice. 2. Assess whether a safer method avoids striking. Where it remains necessary, secure the workpiece with suitable support and position it so hands are clear of the impact area. Use appropriate screens or exclusion to protect others from chips and keep the bench clear. Show workers the correct use of the selected tools before the task. 3. Provide suitable, serviceable impact eye protection, with a face shield as additional protection where the assessment requires it, not as a substitute for safety glasses/goggles. Select any hand protection for the actual task; PPE does not make a damaged tool acceptable. Inspect tools before use, report defects and maintain/replace them under a clear system. |
| 2.6 Who will do it? | Workshop manager accountable. 1: Bench supervisor and tool-store lead. 2: Competent task supervisor with the mechanic. 3: Supervisor responsible for tool checks, training and protective equipment. |
| 2.7 By when? | 1: Immediately, before further use. 2 and 3: Safe method, protection for others, serviceable PPE and instruction before the task resumes; check tools before use and remove defects promptly. Keep the task stopped if suitable tools or protection cannot be supplied. |
What makes it a good entry
- This is a manual struck-tool example. It does not cover every powered hand-tool hazard; electrical safety, vibration or dust may need separate assessment for other tools.
- The damaged head and loose handle are specific defects, not just a general statement that tools are dangerous. Controls protect bystanders as well as the user.
- CCOHS is a Canadian official guidance source. Its tool-control advice supports the example; it does not establish compliance with another country's PPE or equipment law.
Official guidance for this example
Sources checked: November 14, 2026.
Load handling equipment: Lifting a crated museum exhibit with a hired gantry
A museum installation area closed for an exhibit delivery
| 2.1 Hazard category | Load handling equipment |
|---|---|
| 2.2 Hazard description | A contractor plans to lift a crated exhibit using a hired portable gantry and hoist. The delivery note gives a crate mass of 700 kg. The gantry has a 1,000 kg capacity marking, but the team has not verified the complete lifting arrangement, sling selection, centre of gravity or assembly conditions. A taped boundary can be crossed from the adjoining gallery. The figures are fictional and do not establish a safe lift. |
| 2.3 Who might be harmed? | Contractor installers, museum staff and any person who could enter the lifting area. |
| 2.4 How could they be harmed? | A dropped or unstable load, failed component or movement of the lifting arrangement could crush a person. A person beside the crate could be trapped between it and a fixed object. Nobody should stand beneath a suspended load. |
| 2.5 What you are already doing | The hire firm supplied instructions. One installer says they operated a similar hoist at a previous job. A capacity marking is visible on the gantry and tape marks the area. No one has yet verified the complete equipment configuration, assembly or examination records, and the museum has not agreed how access will be controlled. |
| 2.5 Further action needed | 1. Do not start the lift until a competent person has planned the operation and the required precautions are in place. Keep the exhibit supported in its existing safe position and establish effective access control for the work area. 2. Verify the load information, centre of gravity, lifting points and the suitability and capacity of the complete configuration, including hoist and accessories. Check the supporting surface, assembly and clearances using competent advice and the manufacturer’s instructions. The gantry marking alone does not approve the arrangement. 3. Check applicable examination and installation/assembly inspection requirements, defect reports and necessary pre-use checks. Do not use equipment with unresolved safety-critical defects. Provide competent operators and agreed supervision and communication. 4. Coordinate delivery and gallery access with the museum. Keep people outside the danger area, plan safe positioning and set clear stop arrangements if access or control is lost. Do not rely on tape or a person’s ability to step away from a falling crate. 5. Verify the plan and precautions before authorising the operation and review after any relevant change. Record equipment checks and hand over a safely completed installation before public access resumes. |
| 2.6 Who will do it? | Contractor lifting planner: suitable plan and equipment configuration. Contractor supervisor: checks, competent operation and supervision. Museum facilities coordinator: gallery closure, interfaces and acceptance. The contractor and museum retain their respective responsibilities. |
| 2.7 By when? | Actions 1 to 4: complete and verify before the lift; keep the lift postponed if any necessary precaution is missing. Action 5: before authorisation, after relevant changes and before gallery reopening. No arbitrary future deadline permits an uncontrolled lift. |
What makes it a good entry
- This is a different context within an already covered category, not an additional syllabus category.
- The 700 kg mass and 1,000 kg marking are illustrative. Capacity, stability and accessory suitability still need competent verification.
- Examination records, pre-use checks and operational planning serve different purposes.
- The actions state what must be established; they are not rigging, assembly or lifting instructions.
Official guidance for this example
Original learning example checked against HSE lifting guidance for Great Britain. Verify the applicable legal and technical requirements for the actual workplace; these details do not authorise a real lift.
Sources checked: 15 November 2026.
See the GIC2 practice kit for the whole template and a full worked example, and the submission checker before you upload.