Bare Knuckle Pickups Forum
At The Back => The Dressing Room => Topic started by: tomjackson on September 25, 2009, 09:52:49 AM
-
I work in a job where H&S is very important but some people seem to be taking things to a new level, examples are:-
Having to access something 12ft high, with a cherrypicker
Stopping a job because some lifting equipment was not certified, even though it was not being used
Having to use a ladder to access a load bed (the 4 foot high back of a wagon)
Not being able to access the above loadbed because the ladder did not have a certificate
Not being able to use a climbing harness becuase it did not have a certificate, even though it was new
I've tried to argue common sense with the H&S 'police' on issues like this but worringly there is a smart arse answer to everything, rather like some religions have to common sense things like evolution.
Is H&S the new religion in the workplace?
-
Its about appearance and arse covering.
Appearance - companies want to say 'look, we have an amazing safety record'
Arse covering - companies want to say 'well, we told you so and told you things to avoid that' when the one in a million of falling 4 feet and breaking a limb or slipping on the stairs or whatever happen because someone is clumsy or not paying good common sense attention to what they're doing so they cant be sued
And yes, its hammered into us. I find it incredibly condescending. It makes companies treat perfectly sensible and capable adults like 4 year olds and I have nothing but unremmiting contempt for it.
Which doesnt mean to say I think people shouldnt pay attention to safety measures - but those that are required are common sense and those that are getting thrown around now are going WAY too far because of the shear statistics of it - its a numbers game: enough people do something often enough and the extremely stupid and the extremely unlikely will start to happen, so everyone has to behave as though they're extremely stupid or extremely unlucky.
-
And yes, its become another kind of unsubstantiated irrational dogma, just like religion. Stick "Because of safety" on ANYTHING and it will be bowed down to whether justified or not.
-
Can't stand next to a reversing JCB without ear protection :?
Yes, new religeon, IMO it comes from the USA's view upon lawsuits
-
Can't stand next to a reversing JCB without ear protection :?
Yes, new religeon, IMO it comes from the USA's view upon lawsuits
Theres a bridge across some steam pipes with steam valves venting a short distance from my building. The valves give off about 85db peak, tops. I'd be surprised if it was even that, actually: you can talk over it without difficulty. That means that even very pessimistically you can hang round them for about 2 hours (really more like 8, but it depends what study you look at) without any permanent hearing damage, and yet theres a sign saying "Noise Hazard: Do Not Loiter"
-
Good points guys, I'm glad it's not just me thinking it!
In addition to the well put Appearance and Arse covering I would like to add Empire Building and Personal Agendas.
So rather than lookng at it from a company wide thing I see it from the perspective of the Health and Safety departent / persons point of view. Due to them having clout with company directors for the first 2 points they can:-
a) increase their own feeling of self importance
b) further their careers
d) If they are senior they can build an empire
e) If they are an external consultancy, they justify their existance by making new 'unsafe' things up
Company Directors almost always listen to them for the Arse Covering point
Don't get me wrong, I have met some good H&S guys and they are definitely required (I work in construction and I myself take site safety seriously and have seen some pretty dangerous practises).
It's just the idiots that take it too far that annoy me. The problem is they seem to be becoming the norm and the policy makers :?
-
[irony]
These are healthy measures to reduce productivity as the total output capacity of our economy by far exceeds the world demand for products and services. Measures to reduce productivity and means to enforce them ensure a reinstitution of the balance of supply and demand and full employment.
[/irony]
-
Oh, theres no doubt that gutless maggot tiny dicked little deskjob-despots use the safety rule book, and any other, to uncomprehendingly beat people over the head with to make themselves feel like big men.
And theres no doubt that these people advance their carreers by making other people look bad, rather than making themselves look good (which they cant, because they're only intelligent and capable enough to read a rule book and throw it at someone, not enough to understand the rule book and intelligently apply it)
-
[irony]
These are healthy measures to reduce productivity as the total output capacity of our economy by far exceeds the world demand for products and services. Measures to reduce productivity and means to enforce them ensure a reinstitution of the balance of supply and demand and full employment.
[/irony]
:lol:
Never had you down as conspiracy-theorist! (Even if you're not, the act of posting this on the interweb has started/furthered one - excellent :D)
To answer the question though, no, it's not a new religion, it's getting on 20-odd years old at least - that's quite old now...
-
[irony]
These are healthy measures to reduce productivity as the total output capacity of our economy by far exceeds the world demand for products and services. Measures to reduce productivity and means to enforce them ensure a reinstitution of the balance of supply and demand and full employment.
[/irony]
:lol:
Never had you down as conspiracy-theorist! (Even if you're not, the act of posting this on the interweb has started/furthered one - excellent :D)
To answer the question though, no, it's not a new religion, it's getting on 20-odd years old at least - that's quite old now...
Yeah well ... I studied political economics once ... sometimes it still shows :O)
-
Having been a health and safety bod in a lab, no less, I can pretty much guarantee most of it has dick all to do with H&S law or the HSE, and rather more to do with litigious types getting a claim in every time they crack a fingernail.
It's a little wearing being the bogeyman all the time, especially when the crimes being committed are someone else's. If one considers the kind of reduction in frequency and seriousness in workplace accidents the HSE has brought about since it's inception, it's pretty hard to fault it.
(TL;DR version: Don't like "too many" Safety Rules? Stop bloody suing, then)
-
Here on south (downstairs??) it's much more "speech" than something really done... Lets say that people tend to follow when the things are easy, but when happen something that the boss want it to be done quick, it's pretty much forgot...
-
Though I too find many of the points of contact ridiculous...
I see no alternative since the introduction of "ambulance chasers" into the UK.
Every NHS information leaflet I got from casualty last weekend offered my the services of a "no win -no fee" claims company.
What choice does a company/govt dept have if everybody looks for financial redress when they have an "accident"?
They are called accidents for a f**king reason...
As is often the case We Get The Society We Deserve :(
-
i work in a school as some of you know. I occasionally take projects into school to do the jobs i just cant do in my workshop at home... usually its to use the pillar drill which is much bigger than i have at the moment and its much easier drilling string through holes on theirs than it is mine!
i always make a point of asking a technician before doing it, just out of politeness, and they are always happy for me to do it.
Last time i went in and a technician wasnt there - so i asked another member of the department.
I was told that i could only use a drill if a member of the D&T department stood and kept an eye on me!! They let students use these machines all the time, admittedly with an adult in the room, but often on the other side of the room. the funny thing is i have more experience and skill with tools than all the D&T staff put together ... and most of them know that!!!
but whatever, if thats what needs to happen i dont mind showing the staff how to use the tools properly :)
-
Though I too find many of the points of contact ridiculous...
I see no alternative since the introduction of "ambulance chasers" into the UK.
Every NHS information leaflet I got from casualty last weekend offered my the services of a "no win -no fee" claims company.
What choice does a company/govt dept have if everybody looks for financial redress when they have an "accident"?
They are called accidents for a f**king reason...
As is often the case We Get The Society We Deserve :(
No, we all get the society a few of us deserve.
In this case.
At work the other week I visited another building that has a footpath across some grass thats the easiest way to get to the front door. There were barriers at either end of it this particular time, but the path was the same, there was no work being done anywhere nearby, the whole place was identical to usual save the barriers. Perfectly good footpath. So I ignored the barriers and walked across it.
When I get inside some little tw@t (see replies 5 and 7 for more information) comes up to me and says "why did you cross the barriers? Youre supposed to obey the barriers and the signs on them" I told him that there was nothing different about the place apart from the barriers, and it posed no hazard whatsoever to cross them. He carried on berating me for a bit, which I ignored, and finally said that "It is a bit trivial actually; someone tripped on the edge of the path"
SOOO some clumsy git falls off a 2 inch high footpath and they cordon off the area like its a $%&#ing deathtrap and have a go at anyone with the sense to ignore it and without the ineptitude to fall off a 2 inch drop.
Makes perfect sense.
-
I work in a warehouse where you have to report ANY accident, no matter how small.
I found a list of the recent ones on a board which some were:
*Pain in finger
*Hit head on racking
*Pain in Knee
and more like that. I can't help but laugh because some people are so petty that they have to report anything.
I've bashed my head plenty of times and pulled muscles but only ever reported them if I've really had to (manager made me report pulling a back muscle after requesting to do something that required less lifting to avoid going home early, which cost me and him time and effort).
There are some stupid people out there that need to 'man up'
-
Well I work with electric (the type that makes craters when it goes wrong) and construction (including street works) and I have a raft of H&S qualifications in all sorts of stuff. It's also my job to do safety audits on my sites as well as act as a H&S Co-ordinator on all projects notifiable to the HSE (which is all of them).
The work I do (not personally, but the work I look after) is very dangerous and elentric scares the shite out of me. I'm glad of all the H&S that we have to do, 'cause I really don't want to die at work. Anywhere else is fine, but I don't want my last ever memeory being of work.
Most of the problems with all the H&S arsery though is people interpritations of the rules. The rules are put out there and different people read different things into it. We have arguements all the time on site as to different people responsabilities, purely because we all read them differently.
Saying that though, some peoplel go well over the top........ but all the accidnets should still be reported (even the little ones and the near misses) as if your work is doing their job right, they should be looking at those periodically and seeing what they can do. If enough people reported banging their head on the racking at work (which I used to do all the time) then they really should move the bottom bar and take out a bay.
-
I found out today that apparently businesses should have an accident book!
I sliced my first finger quite badly* today and my Brother made a sarcy comment about whether I wanted to make a note of it ;)
*My old man even recommended stitches, and he is an unsympathetic git
-
No, we all get the society a few of us deserve.
In this case.
At work the other week I visited another building that has a footpath across some grass thats the easiest way to get to the front door. There were barriers at either end of it this particular time, but the path was the same, there was no work being done anywhere nearby, the whole place was identical to usual save the barriers. Perfectly good footpath. So I ignored the barriers and walked across it.
When I get inside some little tw@t (see replies 5 and 7 for more information) comes up to me and says "why did you cross the barriers? Youre supposed to obey the barriers and the signs on them" I told him that there was nothing different about the place apart from the barriers, and it posed no hazard whatsoever to cross them. He carried on berating me for a bit, which I ignored, and finally said that "It is a bit trivial actually; someone tripped on the edge of the path"
SOOO some clumsy git falls off a 2 inch high footpath and they cordon off the area like its a $%&#ing deathtrap and have a go at anyone with the sense to ignore it and without the ineptitude to fall off a 2 inch drop.
Makes perfect sense.
So you ignored the warnings and made an assumption that " it posed no hazard whatsoever to cross them".
Is that a maxim you would like to be adopted universally?
I think you would feel differently if you were the one who could have been sued for liability. Even if the action just wastes time it still negatively impacts on the company.
-
I made no assumption. I made an assessment, and a correct one at that.
-
some kid died in a grave yard once because a grave stone fell on them... parents sue and get a million or so
so what does the council do... spent 6 million ish sticking up sign posts on every grave to say it could be unstable
how daft can you get, better off pumping that money into the NHS
-
About time... Graveyards are chock-a-block with fatalities :lol:
-
I deal all day with claims against employers. I can understand the arse covering. If you saw the trivial and ludicrous claims I see you'd understand why. Conversely there are companies that have an almost criminal disregard for the wellbeing of their employees. I think the thing that irritates me the most is where the employee has done something stupid and yet the employee gets caught out because they are apparently at fault for not supervising someone who is an experienced worker. I have one right now where a sheet metal worked, for quickness, didn't bother to secure the job he was working on and was injured and is now pursuing a claim against his employers. This is a guy with over 25 years experience.
I wonder how many businesses close down because of the H & S pressure.
-
'Ambulance chasers' only came about because the government wanted to abolish more and more areas where civil legal aid was available. The trade off was that lawyers and insurance companies (as most ambulance chasers are) were allowed to work on no win, no fee agreements (which was previously forbidden). Insurers make money out of these claims because they sell 'After the Event' Insurance to cover the chance of the litigant losing and having to pay the otherside's costs.
No win no fee doesn't encourage pointless litigation - what lawyer (who, lets face it, is a money driven animal - why would you want to spend years at University and then deal with other people's misery without a big pay off? - if you want that become a nurse!) would fight a case, spending the many hours of work it takes to litigate, without an almost near to damnit chance of winning the case and getting the 35% up lift in fees from the otherside that no win no fee creates?
As I said, No Win, No Fee normally means that an insurer is backing the case - Only cases advised by Counsel at 70% (which is a very high ratio) get through the net, so statistically the quantity of personal injury litigation has gone down dramatically since the introduction of NW,NF and the abolition of legal aid for PI claims - its just now its been farmed out to commercial entities you hear about it more.
Its the perception of legal action that drives silly H&S officers (and probably company insurers) not the reality. But in my view, its better to be over cautious with people's health and safety than slap dash.
-
Thanks Elliot. The voice of reason and experience. I learnt a lot.
-
Very interesting post, elliot, I didnt know that, thanks.
-
[irony]
These are healthy measures to reduce productivity as the total output capacity of our economy by far exceeds the world demand for products and services. Measures to reduce productivity and means to enforce them ensure a reinstitution of the balance of supply and demand and full employment.
[/irony]
I like this point and I think there is some truth in it. I have had thoughts like this before but never had it put into words. Much of the UK and Europe is mainly service industries and many of them industries are servicing each other in pointless tasks.
My own electrical engineers have to get their equipment PAT tested from an external party that have done a 2 day course for god sake!!!
-
Again, I'm not having ago at many of the good people and procedures that are within the H&S industry.
Accident reporting, training and sfe practises save lives, it is serious stuff we should all take note of.
It's this kind of thing that get's my goat. The over-the-top-common-sense-out-the-window-brigade. the 10% OTT ers that use it for their means
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/foodanddrink/foodanddrinknews/5436151/Strawberry-farms-ends-PYO-over-health-and-safety-rules.html
Trouble is when you speak up it looks like your advocating slack dangourus or apathetic practises when really your just speaking
COMMON SENSE!!!
-
I make my staff fill out a risk assessment form before putting the kettle on for a cuppa (NOT)
-
This is slightly off topic, but refers to Elliot's point about how likely the no 'win no fee' solicitors to proceed with an unlikely case.
Someone I work with got driven into at a petrol station when in Liverpool, sideways collision etc. Uninsured van, not taxed, driver from a travelling community.
Claim against our business insurance for loss of earnings, whiplash, damage, with the argument that our driver was driving dangerously :?
They also won... (not relevant that they hadn't worked before and had been claiming benefits)
I would just like to know how that worked, as surely their argument is a little bit flawed?
-
Trouble is when you speak up it looks like your advocating slack dangourus or apathetic practises when really your just speaking
COMMON SENSE!!!
I've had a safety manager (strictly speaking a nuclear safety case manager, which has $%&# all to do with trivial cr@p like this) have a go at me for "not caring about safety" because he thought paper on my desk was a fire hazard. Paper next to someone welding is a fire hazard. I told him that my phone and PC arent ignition sources and to go and do some real work. He hasnt bugged me since.
-
Will, the answer might be that your Insurers dealt with the claim under the MIB ( Motor Insurance Bureau)rules where the other responsible driver is uninsured. Without knowing the full facts I can't say. The intention was to compensate the victims of uninsured drivers-quite rightly so but it does throw up some oddities from time to time.