Cut-Resistant Glove Assessment Inspection Checklist [FREE PDF]

Reviewed by Jonathan Andersen, CSP, CHST

BCSP registration: CSP #22635, CHST #C1539

Review date: 2026-10-01 · Verification pass: 2026-10-03

Signed reviewer attestation (PDF) · Verify BCSP credentials

Evaluate applicable higher-level controls before glove selection, then task-specific performance data, condition, fit, use and disposition. Inventory, training evidence and incident trends are separate program controls. OSHA 1910.138 bases selection on task, conditions, duration and hazards. ANSI/ISEA 105 and EN 388 are different classification/test systems, not interchangeable cut levels or proof of task suitability. EN 388 applies only where relevant to the product, market or site specificatio

Industry: Manufacturing
Frequency: Before use and at manufacturer/site-defined intervals; apply any task-specific regulatory frequency
Estimated Time: 20-35 minutes
Role: PPE Coordinator
Total Items: 60
Compliance: OSHA 1910.132 / 1910.138 (applicable duties), ANSI/ISEA 105 (actual applicable classification edition), EN 388 (only where applicable to the product/market/site specification), Manufacturer task-specific performance and care data

Hazards, Other Controls and Glove Selection

Selection review before condition inspection; performance data are task/condition/duration specific.

Does the site PPE hazard assessment identify hand hazards, with its required hazard-assessment certification available?
Have applicable elimination, guarding, engineering and work-practice controls been evaluated and implemented before or with gloves?
Does the hazard assessment identify the type, sharpness, and shape of cutting edges or objects present?
Are pinch point, crush, and puncture hazards identified separately from cut hazards in the assessment?
Are simultaneous chemical, thermal or other hazards identified and addressed in glove selection?
Has machinery entanglement risk been evaluated and the task-specific safe method established?
Does glove selection consider task, conditions, duration and hazards, using relevant ratings as one input?
Are the product's actual rating system/edition and task-selection basis recorded without an assumed ANSI-to-EN equivalence?
Record the applicable ANSI/ISEA 105 level selected for this task, if used
Are gloves selected for dexterity, grip, and fit appropriate for the precision required by the task?
...and 1 more items

Product Identification and Performance Information

Ratings are inputs to selection, not interchangeable hazard levels.

Where EN 388 is used, are the applicable edition and relevant performance markings verifiable?
Where ANSI/ISEA 105 is used, is the supplied product rating verified against the site-selected level?
Where European conformity is required for this market/product/customer, is the applicable evidence available?
Can material composition and size be verified from labeling, packaging, technical data or manufacturer information?
Where supplied, is the manufacturer's care and replacement guidance available to users?

Physical Condition

Manufacturer/site discard criteria; primary consolidated integrity check.

Are gloves free from cuts, holes, exposed protective layers, thinning or seam failure meeting manufacturer/site discard criteria?
Is contamination compatible with the selected material and safely removable without secondary exposure or loss of suitability?
Do liners/coatings retain required grip/protection/integrity under manufacturer criteria?
Is the cuff and wrist area of each glove intact, without elasticity loss or structural damage that could allow the glove to slip off?
Are gloves with wire or steel strand liners inspected for broken wires that could cause internal puncture?

Fit and Observed Task Use

Follow task steps and established no-glove rules.

Are required gloves worn during the task steps specified by the hazard assessment?
Does fit meet manufacturer sizing guidance, secure retention, dexterity and circulation needs?
Are gloves donned for manufacturer-required orientation, cuff configuration and task coverage?
Where the established safe method specifies no gloves, do workers follow it?

Storage and Replacement Availability

Site policy: manufacturer storage guidance and suitable replacement access; no prescribed universal inventory quantity.

Do known storage practices meet material-specific manufacturer limits?
Site replacement control: is suitable replacement protection available before exposed work resumes?
Where the site's stock policy calls for it, are gloves rotated according to manufacturer storage or shelf-life guidance?
Are different cut ratings clearly labeled and organized to support task-appropriate glove selection?
Are glove sizes available to properly fit all workers performing the task (no gloves too large or too small)?
Are new glove deliveries verified against the approved product list before being issued to workers?

Final Glove Disposition

Selection/condition decision for the assessed task; not product certification.

Record glove disposition

Training and Program Verification

Applicable PPE training plus site-policy reporting/selection controls; not glove-condition scoring.

Site selection practice: has wearer dexterity/comfort feedback been considered?
Site policy: is the applicable glove selection matrix/approved list available?
Do workers understand the task-specific entanglement assessment and safe method?
Are workers able to identify when their gloves need to be replaced and do they know the reporting procedure for defective gloves?
Do workers inspect at the manufacturer/site-defined pre-use frequency?
Site program: is the damage-reporting/replacement process documented where required?
Have workers received required PPE training on necessity, selection/use, limitations, care, useful life and disposal?
Site policy: are chosen PPE training records available with employee, date and topics where the site requires them?
Is retraining provided when workplace/PPE changes make prior training obsolete or knowledge/use is inadequate?
Do workers understand assigned protection, limitations and rating information needed for correct selection/use?
...and 2 more items

Retained Rating, Condition and Training References

Site policy: legacy responses preserved as cross-references; do not score duplicate checks independently.

Legacy rating reference: is the ANSI rating verification consistent with cut_2_2?
Legacy condition reference: is palm/fingertip wear included in the primary integrity decision?
Legacy condition reference: is seam/hole damage included in the primary integrity decision?
Legacy training reference: where relevant, is EN rating information covered by the protection/limitations check?
Legacy training reference: is product cut-rating understanding covered by cut_6_4?

Program Review and Incident Trends

Site policy: broader incident-management and worker-feedback controls, separate from glove condition.

Site program review: have hand injuries involving glove users occurred since the last review?
Has a root cause analysis been completed for any hand injuries, and have corrective actions been implemented to prevent recurrence?
Site policy: are incident trends reviewed at the schedule defined in the program?
Has glove selection been reassessed after task, tool, material, process or incident information changed?
Are workers encouraged to report near-misses and incidents involving cuts or glove failures through a non-punitive reporting system?
Have near-miss events involving glove failure or inadequate protection been reported and investigated?
Is glove performance feedback from workers collected systematically and used to inform product selection?

Documentation and Corrective Actions

Site policy: evidence, inventory logs and audit closeout, not product-performance criteria.

Is a photo of the current palm and finger condition, including any damage, recorded?
Capture a photo of the current glove inventory storage area.
Site policy: is a replacement log maintained where the procedure requires it?
Please document any deficiencies identified, corrective actions required, and responsible parties for follow-up.

Related Ppe Checklists

Related Hand Protection Checklists

Why Use This Cut-Resistant Glove Assessment Checklist?

Record the hazard assessment, selected cut rating, glove condition, fit, worker use, training, inventory and corrective actions across 60 section fields in 10 sections. Select hand protection for the actual task using the site's hazard assessment and manufacturer's information. This form records observations; it does not certify gloves or establish regulatory compliance.

Frequently Asked Questions

What does this inspection or audit aid cover?

What do the standards references mean?

OSHA 1910.138 bases selection on task, conditions, duration and hazards. ANSI/ISEA 105 and EN 388 are different classification/test systems, not interchangeable cut levels or proof of task suitability. EN 388 applies only where relevant to the product, market or site specification.

Does a pass certify equipment or OSHA compliance?

This is an inspection or audit aid. A remain-in-service decision records the inspected conditions under manufacturer guidance and site criteria; it does not certify equipment, reproduce ANSI/ASTM laboratory testing or guarantee regulatory compliance.

When should the checklist be used?

Before use and at manufacturer/site-defined intervals; apply any task-specific regulatory frequency. Follow the applicable manufacturer instructions, site procedure and task-specific requirements.

Are documentation and legacy reference fields equipment-performance checks?

No. They preserve useful evidence and existing answers, but site-policy controls, duplicate references and derived summaries are not independent equipment-performance criteria. A field score is not a certification or a legal determination.

Can I download the PDF?

Yes. The first free PDF download requires an email address and basic contact details. Further downloads may require a phone number or account signup. Reviewer verification of the corrected version is pending.