Lawyer Monthly - January 2022 Edition

identify the hazards associated with the product. There are multiple documented tools for identifying hazards. Then they determine the level of risk associated with each hazard. Risk is a combination of how likely someone is to get hurt by a hazard (probability of occurrence of harm) and how badly they could be hurt by that hazard (severity of harm). If the risk is above an acceptable level, then steps should be taken to reduce the risk. The risk reduction hierarchy specifies the most effective ways to reduce risk: 1. Design it out. 2. Safeguard against it. 3. Provide warnings. 4. Use administrative controls. Once these steps have been EXPERT WITNESS implemented to reduce the risk, the team should once again evaluate to ensure that the risk has indeed been reduced to an acceptable level and that no new hazards have been introduced. The entire process should also be documented. Interestingly enough, I have never seen a lawsuit against a manufacturer that had a documented risk assessment for the product. How do some manufacturers often fail to meet the standards necessary to legally perform risk assessments on their equipment before taking it to market? Risk assessments and design safety reviews are not topics that are covered in most engineering curriculums. The closest they come is a basic failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA), which looks at what might happen if something breaks or fails. A basic FMEA is a part of a risk assessment, but is not a substitute. Often, the design engineers and even the engineering managers have no idea what risk assessments are or how to use them. On the other hand, a risk assessment is a basic tool for a safety professional, and companies that want to start implementing them can hire a safety professional full-time or can hire a consultant (like AED) for a specific project or to teach the process to their people. It is unfortunate that risk assessments are not more commonplace in the equipment industry; they are a simple and effective tool for reducing unnecessary injuries and death. Conversely, are there any common accusations plaintiffs make against manufacturers in product liability cases that may not have real grounding? Not every injury that happens is the result of a defective product or a product with high risk. Plaintiffs often fail to recognise that risk is based not only on how badly someone was hurt but also on how likely the circumstances that caused the injury were. They often fail to recognise that the injured person had to disregard several controls I have never seen a lawsuit against a manufacturer that had a documented risk assessment for the product. 60 WWW.LAWYER-MONTHLY.COM | JAN 2022