x-business
uvex safety is your expert partner for professional, high-quality PPE. Read the latest news and information about our company, our events and much more here! Other press releases and more information can be found in the “Media” section of our website.
uvex x-pertblog — the occupational safety blog for experts from experts! Do you have questions about our products, our company or about occupational safety in general? Contact us here or leave us a comment under our blog posts. We’re always happy to help!
Nothing found.
Change to the standard regulating cut protection safety gloves: EN 388:2003 compared to EN 388:2016 and ISO 13997
In Europe, the standard EN 388:2003 is used to regulate protection classes of cut restistant safety gloves. To achieve a high level of cut protection, several technical materials – known as high performance fibres – are used.
uvex phynomic gloves eliminate skin irritation – a case study
How uvex helped to overcome a construction site managers skin allergy caused by the wearing of gloves at Rydon Construction.
Homestory #7: Eddie “The Eagle” on safety in sports and at work
Eddie “The Eagle” was the first (and, until 2002, the only) skier to represent Great Britain in an Olympic Ski Jumping event in the 1988 Calgary Winter Olympics – and he’s been a fan of uvex ever since.
A key account manager aims high
At uvex, we are all striving towards our common goal of protecting people, whether in their free time or at work. Real people are behind every pair of safety spectacles, every pair of safety footwear and every pair of earplugs.
PPE: saving lives from the hazard of electrical arcs
Fortunately, accident statistics reveal that electrical arc accidents are not all that common. However, if they do occur, electrical arcs can severely endanger the lives of people close by.
The difference between antistatic and ESD – a safety footwear example
There is often confusion between the terms ESD and antistatic, and not just when it comes to safety footwear. While one includes the other, to deduce the same is true in reverse is generally incorrect.