Anyone signing off PPE purchases for a team eventually runs into a spec sheet full of standard codes and doesn’t have time to look each one up. EN 388, EN 407, EN 374. Here’s what they actually mean, and which ones matter for which job.
EN 388: mechanical risks
EN 388 is the standard most people mean when they talk about a glove’s protection level. It covers abrasion, cut, tear and puncture resistance, and results in a rating made up of numbers and letters, something like “4X42D.” Each character corresponds to a specific test result, so a higher first number means better abrasion resistance, and so on down the code.
The cut resistance figure gets the most attention, and it’s worth knowing that EN 388 uses two different cut tests depending on the material. The older Coupe test doesn’t work well on very hard or coated materials, so gloves using those materials are tested under the newer TDM (straight blade) method instead, giving a letter rating from A to F. If you’re comparing two gloves and one has a number and the other a letter for cut resistance, they were tested differently, so a straight numeric comparison isn’t reliable. Our cut protection range is organised by cut level rather than by product line, which makes this comparison easier when you’re speccing against a specific risk.
EN 407: heat and thermal risks
EN 407 applies to gloves designed for heat exposure, most relevantly welding gloves and gauntlets. It covers flammability, contact heat, convective heat, radiant heat, and resistance to small splashes of molten metal, each rated on its own scale. A welding glove doesn’t need a high score across every category. What matters is which categories are relevant to the actual job. A TIG welder working with lower heat, precise contact needs different performance to someone doing overhead MIG welding with heavy spatter, which is the distinction we walk through in our welding gloves guide.
EN 374: chemical and microorganism protection
Less commonly needed outside specific industries, EN 374 covers protection against chemicals and biological hazards. It’s relevant for agriculture, cleaning, and any role involving contact with liquids or chemicals rather than mechanical or heat risks, and it’s a different test altogether from EN 388 or EN 407. If your team’s main exposure is wet or outdoor conditions rather than chemicals specifically, our waterproof work gloves guide covers the more common EN 374 use case for trade buyers.
What this means for procurement
The temptation when signing off PPE is to buy the highest-rated glove available “to be safe,” but that usually just means paying for protection your team doesn’t need and getting worse dexterity in return, which often means the glove gets taken off rather than worn properly. The better approach is starting from the actual task and the actual risk, then matching the standard to it, not the other way round.
This complements our wider guide to choosing safety gloves, which covers sizing and fit alongside the standards above. If you’re not sure which rating applies to a specific role on your site, get in touch and we can help you work through the spec before you commit to an order.