Decision inputs
Facts that change the policy answer
The request sits in workplace health and safety and connects task steps, hazards, exposed people and current controls with a risk-assessment draft. That context distinguishes it from a generic permission to use AI.
- 1Task and owner
- Risk assessor wants to draft a workplace risk assessment. Record the person who will stand behind a risk-assessment draft after the tool has finished.
- 2Information involved
- Task steps, hazards, exposed people and current controls. Check uploads, history and connected systems before describing the request as low sensitivity.
- 3Tool and account
- An approved company account. Treat a new plug-in or connector as a change to the approved setup.
- 4Intended result
- The expected result is a risk-assessment draft. Its destination matters: private working material creates a different consequence from a sent, published or automated result.
- 5Consequence if it is wrong
- The model cannot observe the workplace and may omit a critical hazard. That risk sets the level of review and the person who should receive an exception.
- 6Human review
- competent risk assessor should inspect, change, reject or stop the result. Make the review happen before reliance and give the reviewer a real way to stop the work.
Possible policy routes
The task name alone cannot decide it.
A published workplace policy can return different answers for the same task. These are the practical branches worth encoding.
A routine policy route may be possible
The least restrictive path starts only after the exact account is approved, only the minimum workplace safety information is used, a risk-assessment draft remains within the stated purpose, and competent risk assessor reviews it before use.
Approval may be required
Specialist approval becomes relevant if the account or data handling is uncertain, the model cannot observe the workplace and may omit a critical hazard, or a risk-assessment draft reaches people or systems beyond the requester’s authority.
The request may need to stop or change
The company may need a safer design when restricted information would enter an unapproved service, the output would act before competent risk assessor can intervene, or inspect the real work and make the qualified assessor own the assessment cannot be maintained. Consider less information, a controlled account or a non-AI process.
Request checklist
Questions to ask before using the tool
- 01
Will draft a workplace risk assessment run inside the approved company environment from start to finish?
- 02
Could task steps, hazards, exposed people and current controls be reduced to a short de-identified extract?
- 03
Will a risk-assessment draft remain working material, reach another person or make another system act?
- 04
Can competent risk assessor inspect the complete result and its source before reliance?
- 05
Which change in tool, data, purpose or impact would require a fresh request?
Worked request
What the employee should submit
This example supplies decision facts without pasting the underlying material into the approval record.
- requester
- risk assessor
- task
- Use AI to draft a workplace risk assessment.
- information
- task steps, hazards, exposed people and current controls
- tool
- An approved company account
- frequency
- Recurring work
- region
- Where the work and affected people are located
- purpose
- Analyse
- impact
- Safety decision
- review
- Complete human review
- owner
- competent risk assessor
Useful safeguards
Controls that fit this request
- ✓
Inspect the real work and make the qualified assessor own the assessment
- ✓
Start with a de-identified sample of task steps, hazards, exposed people and current controls before considering broader access.
- ✓
Treat a new purpose, region, data source or recipient as a new request rather than silently extending this one.
- ✓
Keep the submitted facts, competent risk assessor’s decision and the exact published policy version.
Questions people ask
About this AI use
Is using AI to draft a workplace risk assessment automatically allowed?
Permission depends on the facts submitted for this request. A different tool, information class, region or use of a risk-assessment draft can produce another route.
Which facts should be submitted before work begins?
Describe a risk-assessment draft, identify task steps, hazards, exposed people and current controls, name the exact tool and account, explain who will receive or rely on the output, and state how competent risk assessor will review it.
Which evidence makes the answer reproducible?
Keep the submitted facts, competent risk assessor’s decision and the exact published policy version. A classification and controlled reference may be enough when copying task steps, hazards, exposed people and current controls would create unnecessary risk.