ENSHPO webinar with ATG®, with the support of AIAS | 27 October 2026

On 27 October, ENSHPO and ATG® brought together safety and health professionals for a one-hour online conversation on a question that is simpler to ask than to answer: what is the real cost of a hand-protection decision?

The session was moderated by Francesco Santi, President of ENSHPO and of AIAS, the Italian professional association for environment and safety, and featured two speakers: David Donnelly CMIOSH CRWM, Chair of the IOSH Northern Ireland Community, and Ian Pollard, Regional Manager UK South and ROI at ATG®, who has spent more than 20 years in hand protection.

Hand protection is often judged by purchase price. The webinar invited participants to look at three connected costs instead: the human cost, the business cost and the protection cost. This article summarises the main themes of the discussion.

The human cost: injury can change far more than the working day

The conversation opened with the consequences of a serious hand injury, and with the point that recovery is not only physical. Our hands allow us to feel, to hold and to manipulate tools, and to manage everyday tasks such as dressing, washing, preparing food and writing. When movement, sensation or dexterity are affected, the effects reach well beyond the workplace.

Participants were reminded that recovery means understanding what has changed and learning how to adapt: frustration when something once simple becomes difficult, and the sense of achievement when a lost task can be performed again. It can also change working life. Time away from work, changes to duties, workplace adjustments and, in some cases, a different job role may follow. As one of the key messages put it, a return to work does not necessarily mean a return to the same work.

The business cost: the impact travels through the organisation

For an organisation, the consequences of an injury extend beyond the incident itself. The discussion grouped them into six areas:

• People: lost working time, absence, replacement labour and retraining.
• Operations: downtime, production or service disruption and reduced capacity.
• Management: investigation, corrective actions and management time.
• Financial: insurance, compensation and remedial costs.
• Regulatory: enforcement action and, where applicable, potential prosecution and fines.
• Reputation: employee confidence and the impact on customers and stakeholders.

The speakers also noted that compensation and regulatory enforcement are two distinct processes. Using the United Kingdom as the reference point, regulators such as the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) may investigate whether health and safety duties have been met, while an injured employee may separately pursue compensation through a civil claim where the legal requirements are met. Participants working elsewhere in Europe were encouraged to consider how their own national frameworks apply.

Why the wrong protection gets selected

Poor protection decisions rarely have a single cause. The webinar highlighted six recurring patterns:

• Price-led selection: focusing mainly on the initial unit price.
• Limited product knowledge: not fully understanding what different glove constructions or technologies offer.
• Task mismatch: selecting around a job title rather than the work being carried out.
• Standards-only thinking: treating a test result as the complete specification.
• Limited wearer involvement: not understanding how the glove performs during real work.
• Weak control: uncontrolled substitution or inconsistent procurement.

The guiding principle was clear: do not specify the job, specify the task. That means asking what hazards are present, which materials are handled, whether sharp edges, liquids, oils or chemicals are involved, how much dexterity and grip are needed, how long the glove will be worn and what the environmental conditions are.

What effective protection requires

Prevention starts before PPE. Drawing on HSE guidance, the speakers reminded participants of the hierarchy of control: eliminate the hazard where reasonably practicable, substitute it with something less hazardous where appropriate, use engineering controls to separate people from the hazard, apply safe systems and procedures, and use PPE to protect the individual against the residual risks that remain. The aim is not to choose between controls, but to understand the risk and build appropriate layers of protection.

For machinery hazards, this means machinery controls: effective guarding, isolation from energy sources (including lock-out, tag-out and try-out procedures and the management of stored energy), and information, instruction and training. Controls on paper are not enough; they need to be real and routinely applied.

Standards matter, but they are not the whole decision. A test result tells you something important about the glove, but it does not tell you everything about the task. The actual task, the working environment, wear duration, fit, comfort, grip, dexterity and wearer behaviour all belong in the decision.

Protection only works when it is worn. This echoed Ian Pollard’s approach: if a glove is not comfortable, it will not be worn, and if it is not worn, it is not protecting anyone. Fit, dexterity, grip, flexibility, breathability and comfort all matter. A structured wearer trial should gather usable feedback on the task, grip, dexterity, fit, comfort over the required duration, performance during use and the reasons for replacement, and not simply ask “Do you like this glove?”

People are central to effective prevention. Human nature can favour the quickest route to completing work, and it is easy to believe “it will not happen to me”. Effective prevention therefore needs ongoing hazard awareness, a clear understanding of individual responsibilities, communication of potential consequences, training and reinforcement, involvement in PPE decisions and feedback from the people performing the task. Sharing lived experience can make an abstract risk feel real and influence better decisions.

What does the glove really cost?

Purchase price is only the starting point. The webinar introduced the idea of cost-in-use, which brings together purchase price, usable product life, replacement frequency, laundering where appropriate, consumption, waste and disposal, and operational performance.

The objective is not to buy the most expensive glove. It is to understand the real value delivered during use, and to ask how much usable protection and performance an organisation receives from each pair. Useful questions include why gloves are being replaced (wear, damage, contamination, loss of performance, loss of the glove, or routine policy) and whether replacement is happening earlier than necessary.

On laundering, the speakers noted that selected ATG® products are designed to be laundered in line with product-specific instructions, which must always be followed. The aim is to extend appropriate usable life, not to keep a glove in service beyond the point where it should be replaced.

The discussion also linked product life, consumption and sustainability, with an important caveat: sustainability should sit alongside protection, performance and usable product life, not replace them. As an example of sustainability in practice, ATG® reports that more than 50.1% of its energy needs in 2025 came from renewable sources, and that 142 megalitres of water were treated and recycled across the relevant facilities in 2025, up from 117 megalitres in 2024. These figures are reported by the manufacturer in its own sustainability report summary.

A practical process for better decisions

The webinar closed with a nine-step process for choosing, trialling and reviewing hand protection:

1. Assess the risk profile: task, hazards, environment and wearer.
2. Seek competent advice, using competent internal and manufacturer technical knowledge.
3. Review the market to understand the suitable solutions available.
4. Specify the protection and performance requirements.
5. Trial suitable options with actual wearers.
6. Review feedback, performance, product life and consumption.
7. Implement by controlling and rolling out the agreed specification.
8. Educate by explaining selection, use, replacement and laundering.
9. Improve by continuing to review the risk, product performance, sustainable use and advances in technology.

Participants were also invited to take six questions back to their own workplaces:

1. What happens if our current hand protection fails?
2. What could a serious hand injury mean for the employee and the organisation?
3. Why are we using the gloves we currently specify?
4. Have we matched them properly to the task, risk and wearer?
5. Do we understand their real cost-in-use?
6. When did we last trial and review the available alternatives?

Key takeaways

• Prevent first: PPE is part of the control strategy, not a replacement for controlling the hazard.
• Understand the consequence: serious injury can have lasting human and organisational effects.
• Specify for the task: risk, environment and wearer should drive selection.
• Consider the wearer: protection needs to work in real use.
• Understand cost-in-use: product life, replacement, laundering, consumption and waste influence overall value.
• Keep improving: trial, review, education and new technology should form part of an ongoing process.

About this collaboration

ENSHPO is pleased to have partnered with ATG® on this session, with the support of AIAS. Bringing together practitioner and manufacturer perspectives is one way ENSHPO works to encourage shared learning among occupational safety and health professionals across Europe. We thank David Donnelly and Ian Pollard for their contributions, and everyone who joined us.

For technical and practical support with reviewing hand protection, including specification reviews, wearer trials and cost-in-use, readers can contact Ian Pollard at ATG® (ianp@atg-glovesolutions.com) or visit www.atg-glovesolutions.com. Product-specific user information should always be used when confirming performance and laundering instructions.

Sources and further reading

• Health and Safety Executive (HSE): Personal protective equipment at work guidance.
• Health and Safety Executive (HSE): Using PPE to control risks at work.
• Health and Safety Executive (HSE): Machinery safety / safe isolation guidance.
• Health and Safety Executive (HSE): Health and safety law; Civil law: compensation claims.
• NHS: Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
• ATG®: A Green Handprint, 2025 Annual Sustainability Report Summary.
• ATG®: HandCare® – the philosophy behind ATG® gloves, 2024.
• ATG®: Individual product user information and declarations.