Inscrivez-vous ou connectez-vous pour rejoindre votre communauté professionnelle.
Integrating the 2 on the surface seems as if you are saving money. you need two seperate departments or at least two experts in eadig these areas, if you are serious about each subject. Period!
An company that cares for its employees welfare should have a safety policy and adhere to the regulations .
Even admin offices should have a policy .
It has been in the area of the last three issues that quality and environment have most tended to fit together. Environmental management benefited particularly from the existing expertise with ISO because the implementation team was largely made up of environmental specialists who were not initially familiar with the intricacies of management systems aligned to ISO standards. Key lessons learned from quality management included the need to ensure that procedures were not too narrow and understanding the value of involving the workforce widely during implementation.
Quality management in turn benefited from the general review of procedures undertaken by staff. This process has helped to reinforce the message that it is staff themselves, rather than quality/environmental managers, who are the owners of company operating procedures.
The experience of health and safety management has been a further valuable source of learning on which to build. In fact, with respect to some business areas, the review of environmental controls largely followed the dictum that ‘anywhere in the procedures where safety is addressed, environment needs to be considered also’. For example, where safety issues were identified in risk assessments, environmental hazards such as potential emissions to air, drains or land were also identified and built in. Moreover, the scope of safety awareness raising activities and safety audits have been extended to consider H S E: for example, an environmental training module has been added to Amec’s safety training course. Collaboration over EMS development between the two corporate sites also tended to increase over time, as communication between the two implementation teams increased. The geographic distance between sites meant that close co-operation over aspects of EMS development were inhibited to some extent.
One of the clear successes of the implementation as a whole was the development of ‘new ways of working’, including improved networking and information exchange throughout the business on environmental and—by proxy to some extent—health, safety and quality affairs. The development by advisers of a three-year strategy for environmental management within Amec, nomination of focal points for particular environmental issues and greater peer review of documentation are all examples of this new way of working. Peer review has been particularly valuable in spreading best practice between advisers, for example in sharing approaches to documenting environmental aspects and impacts and commenting on newly developed procedures and guidance.
Yes, Ithink that it would be more benefical to teh company to integrate HSE with quality, I do believe that there's no boundaries between HSE and Quality, they are complementary, and for some companies, teh quality of service or product is mainly related to safety ... as in the construction field, ...
1- teh company will have an integrated management system : less of procédures, ...
2- there will be no division : less partners or contacts!
3- their integration leads to reduce the costs
....
yes , these are integrated, quality of any product of any compony will be good when its labour will be physically and mentally relex and this relexation are provded by HSE dept:
Integration of HSE with Quality system is always beneficiary provided all resources and focus is aligned together. It is deep if you are integrating. And its more beneficial if integration is implemented and complied.
Health Safety and Environment should be the overarching values of any particular industry/company. Therefore Integration with quality system will widen the horizon of HSE standards along with processes and quality. The fact that a competent work force is required to do so, it is not a big deal when you already have separate system.
For the beginners, again its an opportunity to do it the right way in the first attempt and then continually improving further.
Regards
Yes, I think so integrating HSE and quality would be beneficial to the company
Intergration of HSE and Qaulity is already implied by the structure set out in ISO 9001, 14001 and 18001. In essance the entire management system from the development of forms policy procedure and the management of data forms the basis of ISO 9001, the closer the business works at harmonisation (HSEQ) you can reduce operational inefficiencies and duplication.
e.g. Hazard register for ISO 18001 is essentially a risk Assessment (using this principal) Safety Environment, Quality Operational, product and financial risks can be entered into the same register utilising their own assessment process, just standardise the fields (provide a harmonised term of reference) and ensure that they are categorised into their respective fields.
Action management an essential for ISO 9001 is also required for 18001 and 14001 much like the risk management approach referenced above you can utilise the same process just categorise the actions appropriately to ensure that they go to the correct people for action.
As QMS (ISO 9001) is monther of all standards so its beificial to merge the policies & prodeures of HSE with QMS and develop IMS.
Offcource HSE implimentaion is beneficial for an organisation it can be QHSE or Separate that doesnt issue but it should work its more importent in an organisation.
