Three literacy points buyers routinely miss:

Position 2 can read “X” — and that’s not a red flag. The coup test spins a blade across the material under light load. On high-performance liner materials, the blade can dull before the test finishes, which makes the result unreliable rather than genuinely

high. When that happens, the standard marks position 2 as X (“not applicable”) and defers to position 5 — the TDM letter — as the real cut number. X does not mean untested-and-unsafe. It means the more rigorous test governs instead.

X and 0 are opposites, not siblings. X means the test wasn’t applicable to this material. 0 means the test was run and the

glove didn’t clear the minimum for Level 1. Reading a 0 as “not tested” is the second-most common misread on this label — it’s the opposite: 0 is a documented failure to meet the threshold, not an absence of data.

Position 6 is opt-in, not implied. Impact protection borrows the EN 13594 motorcycle-glove method — a 2.5 kg striker

delivering 5 joules to the knuckle/back-of-hand area, passing at a mean transmitted force at or below 7.0 kilonewtons (kN). A glove earns P only if it was submitted for that specific test. No P doesn’t mean a glove fails impact — it means impact wasn’t claimed. Cut and impact are unrelated tests; a high cut letter says nothing about knuckle protection.

What changed in 2016+A1:2018

The 2003 edition tested four things — abrasion, cut, tear, puncture — as a four-digit code (a legacy marking like 4544 belongs to that era). Two additions define the current standard: the TDM cut test (position 5, A–F), added because the coup test alone couldn’t reliably rank the highest-performance materials without dulling its own blade, and an optional impact test (position 6, P), added for gloves marketed with back-of-hand protection. The 2018 amendment (+A1:2018) tightened the abrasion-test documentation without changing its 1–4 scale. A modern six-character code and a legacy four-digit code aren’t directly comparable — the newer one measures more, and measures the hardest hazard (cut) more rigorously.

Reading a real glove: ST-9080

STEGO’s SHELL Series ST-9080 is a useful literacy example because its public marking carries three of the points above at once. Its Article Data Sheet lists EN 388:2016+A1:2018 — 4X44FP: 4 abrasion — top of the 1–4 band

X coup test — not applicable; consistent with a liner built from high-performance fiber (the ADS names HPPE and glass fiber in the public materials line), which is exactly the material class this test struggles to rate reliably 4 tear, 4 puncture — top of their respective 1–4 bands F TDM cut — top of the A–F band, the number that actually governs this glove’s cut claim P impact — passed the optional EN 13594 test

Read as “4544,” this code looks unremarkable. Read correctly, it’s a glove that cleared the top band on four independent hazards plus the impact test — the X simply confirms the coup method wasn’t the right tool for this material class.

Practical takeaways for an EHS selection review
1. Ignore the first two digits as your headline number. For any glove with a performance liner, the letter at position 5 (TDM) is the reliable cut figure — check it before comparing gloves on “cut level.”

2. Never compare a four-digit legacy code to a six-character current one. They’re measuring different things; a side-by- side “level” comparison across editions is not valid.

3. Match every position to the actual task hazard, not just the highest number on the shield. A glove with a top cut letter can still carry a low puncture score — verify the position that maps to your specific exposure.

4. Treat “P” as a separate purchasing requirement. If knuckle or back-of-hand impact is part of the job, confirm P is present — don’t assume a high cut rating implies impact coverage.

Where STEGO fits

STEGO publishes the full six-character EN 388:2016+A1:2018 marking on every hand-protection Article Data Sheet — no position hidden, no digit rounded up. That’s downstream of how the gloves get built: STEGO calls its development process

“Decomposition of Risk” — starting from the hazard, not the marketing claim — and every SHELL Series and TEGX glove is engineered against the specific exposures it’s rated for. Reading the shield correctly is step one. What’s underneath a shield that reads well is worth asking any supplier about.

[VISUAL DIRECTION: Full-width line-art diagram of the EN 388 pictogram shield with all six positions numbered and labeled (1–6, matching the decode table), rendered in Flowtronix broadsheet ink-optimized style — navy/accent line work on white, no photographic elements. Second supporting graphic: a small side-by-side comparison card showing the legacy 4-digit code “4544” next to the modern 6-character code “4X44FP” with the two added positions (5, 6) highlighted in accent color, to visually anchor the “what changed” section. For the worked-example callout, use an existing STEGO ST-9080 SHELL Series product photo from the brand visual-reference library — no new photography required.]**

SOURCES

1. SATRA — “EN 388 – assessing mechanical risks” — notified-body (ISO 17025-accredited test house) technical explainer covering the coupe/TDM relationship, the six-position marking structure, the “X” marking, and the impact test.

2. EN 388:2016+A1:2018, Protective gloves against mechanical risks (CEN harmonised standard) — the primary normative text: six-position code structure, performance-level scales (including the “0” below-Level-1 result and the “X” not-performed convention), coupe/tear/puncture/abrasion methods, and the +A1:2018 abrasion-test amendment.

3. ISO 13997:1999, Protective clothing — Mechanical properties — Determination of resistance to cutting by sharp objects (normative reference for EN 388 position 5) — the TDM straight-blade cut test (A–F letter scale).

4. EN 13594:2015, Protective gloves for motorcycle riders (normative reference for EN 388 position 6) — the impact test method (2.5 kg striker, 5 J, Level 1 pass at mean transmitted force ≤ 7.0 kN).

5. EN 388:2003, Protective gloves against mechanical risks (superseded edition) — the legacy four-digit marking, for the 2003 → 2016 edition comparison.

6. STEGO Article Data Sheet, ST-9080 (SHELL Series) — public-facing document, ADS ST IM 6-058 2.3, www.stegosafety.com— worked-example marking (4X44FP) and public materials line (HPPE + Glass Fiber liner).

Confidentiality check: No PTF-only data used. Worked example limited to the EN 388 code and materials line exactly as printed on ST-9080’s public ADS (verified via direct extraction of the ADS PDF, 2026-07-15). No fiber blend ratios, deniers, coating formulations, or internal test values referenced. ST-9080 is ACTIVE and carries no content-block or hold.