To say, or not to say, that is the question

[^woody^]

Last year there, as a result of falling from height (HSE definition) there were:

29 Deaths
2,950 Specified injuries
3,117 '7-day' injuries

Still think this H&S stuff is just a paperwork exercise?

Yes.

Those statistics have no context. Falling off a milk crate is a fall from height, as is falling in a trench, so is falling off my chair.

How many of those were falls whilst doing roof work on a similar roof to the OP?

 

[^woody^]

The fact that they came back with one suggests they didn't think they could justify not using it.

Or they used it just to satisfy the nosey parkers.

 

[Newboy]

Those statistics have no context. Falling off a milk crate is a fall from height, as is falling in a trench, so is falling off my chair.

How many of those were falls whilst doing roof work on a similar roof to the OP?

I agree that they don't have context and, without spending the next few days analysing the HSE reports for last year, I can't tell you how many were roof falls. That said with fall injuries running into the thousands I'd suggest that implementing rules to reduce the number and severity of injuries would seem like a good idea.

 

[^woody^]

IIRC, construction injuries including falls have remained more or less the same for many years, despite things like CDM and other initiatives.

Irrespective of that, the issue is who's job is it to police H&S in construction (and elsewhere)?

 

[PBC_1966]

He said the kit we were using would cut our blood supply before anyone could help us. Those harnesses were thrown in the van and have not seen the late of day since..

Nice how some "safety" devices can actually prove harmful rather than beneficial. Then we sometimes get the government actually mandating the use of something which could prove fatal.

No thank you. I'll assess the potential risks of a situation, decide what benefits (or what harm) some protective apparatus might bring, and come to my own conclusion about what, if any, such apparatus I use. It's my safety, and my right to decide for myself.

A suggestion from somebody who is aware of the danger of some particular device, or a suggestion that something else might, in his experience, be better, is welcome. It may make me look into the pros and cons with new information and re-assess. Interference in the form of somebody blabbing to some bureaucrat because I might choose not to use something is most certainly not welcome.

 

[PBC_1966]

That said with fall injuries running into the thousands I'd suggest that implementing rules to reduce the number and severity of injuries would seem like a good idea.

So long as it isn't a case of "Something needs to be done, this is something, therefore we should do it." That's how the country has ended up with so many rules and regulations which (a) have no place in what's supposed to be a free society, (b) are ineffective at reducing the statistics, or (c) both.

 

[Newboy]

HSE has it's place - sadly the H&S brigade (clipboard, Hi-vis vest and tick-box form) give a lot of sensible rules a stupid twist.

In the real world the reduction in the number of deaths & casualties seems to me like a worthy objective.

Free society?

Do you wear your seatbelt?
Do you have a couple of pints before you drive?
Do you drive up the motorway as fast as your vehicle will go?
Do you have it MOT'd each year?
Do you insure your car?
Have you got a license to drive your vehicle?

All rules - which one's do you disagree with as impinging on your 'freedom', which one's are ineffective at reducing injuries?



Deaths building the Forth Rail Bridge - 78
Deaths building the Forth road bridge - 7
Deaths building the second road bridge - 0

Did construction workers become
a) More careful
b) Less unlucky
c) Have to work to a tighter H&S regime?

 

[^woody^]

Did construction workers become
a) More careful
b) Less unlucky
c) Have to work to a tighter H&S regime?

d) Get reported by nosey members of the public?

 

[catlad]

I have to say woody you are out of touch!!! you cannot go round asda car park these days and check peoples tax disks anymore because you don't get one anymore!!!
( I only know because I recently renewed mine )

 

[PBC_1966]

HSE has it's place - sadly the H&S brigade (clipboard, Hi-vis vest and tick-box form) give a lot of sensible rules a stupid twist.

That's undoubtedly true. Part of the problem - in all areas in which these sorts of people become involved - is that when certain rules are somewhat vague and open to interpretation some of them take that as an invitation to try and impose their own overblown ideas of how something should be done. It gets worse when they have absolutely no idea of the practicalities of the job at hand and demand things which just aren't workable in practice.

In the real world the reduction in the number of deaths & casualties seems to me like a worthy objective.

It is, but not at the expense of the freedom of the individual to take a risk if he feels it acceptable. If you accept the principle that a person should be banned from doing something or required to do something "because it's for his own good," there's almost no end to where that could lead.

It is fair that the law prevents a person from doing something which directly endangers another person without his knowledge and consent. But it is not the law's place to try and stop a person from doing something which poses a risk only to himself, or only to himself and any others who are willing to accept the risk.

 

[^woody^]

I have to say woody you are out of touch!!! you cannot go round asda car park these days and check peoples tax disks anymore because you don't get one anymore!!!
( I only know because I recently renewed mine )

Au contraire sir. You just check the reg's online.

 

[SimonH2]

Part of the problem - in all areas in which these sorts of people become involved - is that when certain rules are somewhat vague and open to interpretation some of them take that as an invitation to try and impose their own overblown ideas of how something should be done.

As worse asp[ect is that many are required by law to implement stuff they don't really have a grasp on - and the result is either a nice little earner for the "consultants" who spring up as soon as the rules change, or people err on the side of caution.
Yes we've all heard stupid things.

One that comes to mind was airfields imposing a "hi vis when airside" rule - and I don't mean big airports, with lots of traffic (both ground and air), night operations, etc, but small airfields. Something changed, and IIRC every airfield suddenly had to have a safety plan or some such.
A lot is simply "others require hi-vis so we'll put hi-vis in our 'safety book', job done". I recall one tale where someone is checking out his small aircraft and a phone is held out the clubhouse window "it's the control tower". He takes the phone, and the voice on the other end asks "why aren't you wearing hi-vis ?". He replies "how do you know I'm not wearing hi vis ?". "We can see you".

His response ? "Well if you can see me from half a mile away, then I obviously don't need hi-vis" and puts the phone down. As an indication of how many saw it, Flyer magazine did a competition for slogans to put on the back of hi-vis vests.
One of the winners was "I'm wearing this to cover someone else's a@@@e !"

 

[bernardgreen]

Another incident where H&S rules created a hazard.

A railway junction was being re-built. several hundred yards of track were being re-placed and there is no possibilty of trains getting anywhere near the work area. The ends of tracks were blocked by stationary work trains. Had there been a run away train heading to the site it would have crumpled into the back of a work train and not affected the workforce. And if it had rammed a work train into the work area Hi Vz would not have protected the workers. A lot of workers were manually shifting ballast into the new track bed using shovels and barrows. It is a scorching hot summers day and all the workers are in full orange Hi Viz, jackets and trousers and some are obviously suffering from heat.. It was said that at least two workers had to be treated for heat exhaustion / severe dehydration. It was quite late in the day that pallet loads of bottled water were delivered to the site.

 

[RonnyRaygun]

When I was working for a fabricator I had to go to Portsmouth to survey a site for manufacture / installation of steel staircases.

Upon arriving I was ushered into the site office building and given a full H&S briefing and then issued with rigger boots, hi-vis vest, and hard hat. After donning all of the gear I was taken across the car park, and through a door in the hoarding...to a completely untouched green field. I never did find out what the PPE was actually protecting me from...

Later on, once the site was actually in a position that we could install our stairs, a colleague went to site. He was ordered off site because he didn't have anyone with him to hold his ladder for him. This despite the fact that it would have taken minutes of one person's time holding the ladder while it was tied off.

 

[footprints]

Safety is about thinking before you take a risk, like leaning too far off a ladder.
My suggestion is a length of piano wire around your nuts that is secured to the building, it's pretty much guaranteed you will not take any risk then!