It seems that every week we see advertisements for products being recalled over safety issues.
These represent the end result of the 1980s Labour Government and subsequent governments opening up our economy to the free market without regard for the unregulated import of products -- some of which might requirespecial consideration and, perhaps, testing.
It's not just consumer products that are breaking down. We have heard recently about steel imports and we know China has mountains of surplus construction steel. It's not rocket science to put two and two together, and to suspect that some Chinese steel producers are dumping steel products on unsuspecting buyers, or cutting corners.
If I were a buyer of any steel product from China -- or anywhere else -- I would put in very careful pre-delivery checks on each consignment before I shipped it.
For instance, I would require the steel mill to be ISO 9001 certified -- that way I could have a product quality auditor actually in the steel mill, checking that the manufacture of the steel was done in accordance with agreed manufacturing processes.
Then, I would have my batch of steel placed in secure lock-up while selected samples were transported to a certified test laboratory (again, under control by my staff or the auditor) for testing under my supervision.
Only when the tests were completed and passed would I confirm my order. And even then I would have a secure process for dispatch to the port and shipping -- and I might even conduct more tests on arrival in New Zealand.
We must be aware that human lives are at risk when designers and manufacturers cheat or take short cuts.
For many years there have been systems in place to monitor the minimum standards that products must comply to.
From ISO 9001 as a method of checking the basic systems that a manufacturer uses to actual performance, there are standards that set the minimum requirements that industry experts have decided each product must meet.
NOT GOOD ENOUGH: There are concerns that some plastic safety helmets are substandard.
Then in New Zealand and Australia, most standards require actual batch testing of samples by the manufacturer before the products are sold. Frequently this is not the case internationally.
Many overseas manufactured products simply have a label stating they comply with NZ and Australian standards.
Our company manufactures a range of safety helmets used by emergency services around the world. We also buy and test helmets from other manufacturers, especially when we have concerns about their claims to meet certain standards.
Over the past year, we have had concerns regarding claims by some manufacturers of plastic hard hats that their helmets comply with AS/NZS 1801 Type 1 -- note: they rarely claim "certified".
Wearing a hard hat is mandatory on most worksites but these helmets -- bought in a Whanganui hardware store -- failed the impact and penetration test when we tested them in our physics laboratory.
So if we find an unsatisfactory helmet, what do we do? We are not the product "police" for every other safety helmet, but we are concerned that people's lives are at stake.
Standards NZ seems to have no ability to monitor these products, and perhaps one downside of universal ACC protection is that when a head injury occurs no one thinks too much about how unsafe the helmet actually was.
But somebody should take responsibly for this -- just as they should for any product that claims compliance to a Standard. Perhaps this is the real task of Worksafe NZ.
My question for employers who have staff wearing helmets is: "How do you know the helmets that you supply are actually certified to AS/NZS 1801 Type 1?"
David Bennett is chief executive of Pacific Safety International and a Whanganui District councillor
