HSE jobsworths

[chriswright03]

I can believe this. Now why would bus drivers in some companies wear high viz vests. Right, its so we know they are at the front of the bus. Buses running all day with headlights on too. Mmmm, must be Volvo's...

 

 

 

Our company have just disciplined and sacked a driver for wearing his Hi Vis whilst driving as it against Company policy. Not the first time he was warned about it but nonetheless.......As regards the headlights it is also Company Policy that we run with dipped headlights in the bus station and depot to make us more visible. Err it is a bloody great big bus with a noisy diesel engine. So what happens is most of us turn them on in the morning and leave them on as it stops you having to remember to turn them on and off all day. We also have to wear our Hi Vis whilst walking in the depot area INCLUDING the footpath that is protected by a metal barrier. If the driver hits you through that it is because he has lost control not because he hasn't seen you Hi Vis or not.

 

A number of IAM observers I've met actually recommend the use of headlights during the day.

 

 

Being an Ex Police Trained Advanced driver of cars and motor bikes and an Ex Instructor and Examiner to Advanced level on motorbikes for the British Motorcycle Federation my personal opinion is that all that does is make some riders 'think' they are safe and transfer the responsibility to the other motorist. I have commented on this before in threads that a common comment made when motorcyclists have been knocked off by another driver is "Sorry mate I didn't see you". In fact there is a whole web site on this. In actual fact very often the motor cyclist would have had a clear view of the vehicle that knocked him off and with a bit of self preservation and observation could have done something about it rather than just ride into trouble.

 

A lot of motorcyclists do not. (But this takes us into the grumpies thread territory.)

 

Many ride on full beam as they think it makes them more visible and just don't care that they are dazzling other motorists. In fact you see some riding with red headlight covers (other colours as well) which it totally illegal but little is done about it. My motorbike when I got it was three years old and the headlight was pointing skywards and illuminating tree tops having never been adjusted since new. It is now.

 

As others have said common sense is what is required but sad as it may be that is lacking now in most walks of life so we are in a situation where others have to think for a minority and that affects all of us. Another good example from work is that we have to sound the horn on our vehicles before going through a depot door or gate. So what happens is the driver sounds his horn and to him that means he has done his bit and if you haven't heard it or took no notice then it is your own fault. At the gate on the entrance to the main road the sign says sound your horn when it should say stop and look both ways.

 

As regards Volvo drivers....well I do drive one and no I cannot turn the lights off. My motorcycle is new enough to be one that you cannot turn the lights off and as I said the buses I turn them on and leave them on as it is easier. None of these remove my requirement or ability as a driver/rider to use my own common sense and drive in a manner that protects me and other road users.

 

Chris

[Arthur]

A number of IAM observers I've met actually recommend the use of headlights during the day.

 

There has been talk, the legislation may already have been passed, on making this mandatory across the EU and having new cars rigged to do so from new, as with Volvo's and Saab's. It's long been a legal requirement in Sweden.

 

 

 

 

, shown a film about a steelworks in the 70's, where men were manhandling giant ladles of molten steel and doing other, similar activites, was appalled by the scene he had witnessed. 'No-one was wearing high vis. vests or hard-hats'

 

 

Having worked for the British Steel Corporation, at two sites, in the early seventies, I can vouch for that, safety wear was minimal and only that which was absolutely essential for the job in hand was worn. Never saw a high viz vest and hard hats could be counted on one hand.

 

Of course the most dangerous thing in the work environment is the human being, who through various combinations of haste, complacency and over familiarity, can do the most stupid things. As an example, at Irlam in 1973, at the end of one Friday morning shift, a young guy, keen to clock off and get out of there, dashed out of one of the personnel doors in the rod & bar mill, vaulted the safety rail (there precisely to check such hasty exits) and went right under the wheels of a passing works shunter, losing both legs in the process. A very high price to pay for a moments haste.

[DavidH]

On the subject of helmets, where I live is a popular spot for universities to bring their new geology students as they can obtain nearly all the rock samples they need for their courses. Every Easter we get groups of students wearing their obligatory hard hats as they walk along the beach, among the holidaymakers, looking for their rocks. Quite what they are supposed to protect them from I have yet to work out, unless it's seagul droppings.

 

I guess it's to protect their heads from banging against rocks if they slip on or near one? I've slipped backwards whilst climbing very low rocks near water and clouted the back of my head on one of them. Thankfully no damage done, but it could have been nasty. The other hazard could be if they look for rocks at the base of a cliff (I just know you're going to say that there aren't any cliffs...!). The university has a duty of care (well, I assume it does), and if a preventable head injury should befall one of their students, then they are going to get hauled over the coals for not taking steps to prevent it.

 

I reckon that health and safety that gets out of hand or is misunderstood by people who aren't properly trained or briefed is a far greater hazard that the sensible application of precautions such as this.

[leopardml2341]

But but, how many people would be strong enough to stand up - especially to their boss - and say "this practice is dangerous, we shouldn't be doing this."

 

David

 

I think you'll find that most employment contracts require you to act in such a way as to not endanger others - so if you know a practice is dangerous and do not mention it, it is possible that you could be considered to be negligent yourself - and don't expect that same boss to be sympathetic to that either.

 

As ever it's the people who are meant to implement, and oversee same, these guidelines who are the ones that are most likely to ignore them becuase it suits their budget.

[meil]

I think you'll find that most employment contracts require you to act in such a way as to not endanger others - so if you know a practice is dangerous and do not mention it, it is possible that you could be considered to be negligent yourself - and don't expect that same boss to be sympathetic to that either.

 

As ever it's the people who are meant to implement, and oversee same, these guidelines who are the ones that are most likely to ignore them becuase it suits their budget.

 

 

It's not just any employment contract, the Health and Safety at Work Act specificaly requires you to abide by safety measures provided by your employer and to conduct yourself in a safe manner.

[leopardml2341]

It's not just any employment contract, the Health and Safety at Work Act specificaly requires you to abide by safety measures provided by your employer and to conduct yourself in a safe manner.

 

 

Yeah I know - but I wonder how many others do, especially those who invoke a bullying style of management ?

 

Which I think is what David (quoted in my post) may have been alluding to ?

[JeremyC]

But but, how many people would be strong enough to stand up - especially to their boss - and say "this practice is dangerous, we shouldn't be doing this."

 

 

Before going to Uni in 1970 I worked for a while in ships' engine rooms. We had no hard hats nor safety shoes despite a lot of overhead work, no hearing protection despite noise levels of about 110dB in some areas and the electrical distribution panel had open bus bars with just a single wooden railing as a barrier (think ship, pitching around in heavy seas, water, exposed terminals ..shudder) and just as a bonus we had machine tools in the workshop powered by open belts.

 

David

I've been at sea since 1974 and I've never seen an open front switchboard, I thought they were illegal even then. I have to admit we still don't normally wear safety hats in the engine room unless we have people working overhead [generally in drydock]. I've banged my head more often wearing one than not, they make you just a little taller so you hit the pipes you normally miss! [i've always worn safety shoes, hearing protection and proper boiler suits though. ]

 

.......It's always amused me when they announce on the cross channel ferry that "this vessel meets all the latest safety standards". .........

 

Yes and, in its day, so did the Titanic

 

Jeremy

[Colin_McLeod]

Never saw a high viz vest and hard hats could be counted on one hand.

 

 

Odd place to wear a hard hat

[Horsetan]

....Monday I'll be back trying to educate people how to actually do their jobs free from Persecution, listening to people say "can I actually do that? - yes you can".....

 

Part of the problem is that the interpretation by others of what you teach them is very very different from what you had intended. It may well be because the progressive fall in education standards over the last 20-25 years makes successive generations less and less able to understand.

[Re6/6]

..................... It may well be because the progressive fall in education standards over the last 20-25 years makes successive generations less and less able to understand.

 

Right on the money there!

[leopardml2341]

.............. It may well be because the progressive fall in education standards over the last 20-25 years makes successive generations less and less able to understand.

 

 

Education in its widest sense ?

 

Including parental guidance and responsibilities as well as learning by experience ?

 

Seems like a reminder that a good dose of common sense helps, surely this is the missing underpinning.

 

The thing that really 'gets my goat' is 'Caution: Contents may be hot' on drinks cups. I do hope so, because that's why I bought it.

 

I once took a drink back for a refund because it wasn't, only to be given very short shrift by the buffet (sorry - on board shop) attendant.

[Xerces Fobe2]

At my previous employer we had one manager tell us that our 'target' across the business was 1.2 deaths a year!

 

He was quickly reminded our target was zero!

 

 

At a former employers "Team Day" we had the usual spiel about targets and Health & Safety - 3 accidents was the target for the year, In the afternoon we played baseball and one of my colleagues twisted his angle and he was taken to hospital which meant we were only one accident away from meeting the target! - no "Team Day" the following year though. The department then had a target to come up with 1500 Safety Kaizens the next year as well which achieved nothing more than a spreadsheet and a tick in the box. I along with a couple of colleagues volunteered to be a First Aiders but they could not find anyone to run the course so it never happened. Meanwhile people were being made redundant at a steady rate - You couldn't make this up ......................

 

Xerces Fobe

[Horsetan]

Education in its widest sense ?

 

Including parental guidance and responsibilities as well as learning by experience ?

 

Seems like a reminder that a good dose of common sense helps, surely this is the missing underpinning......

 

All of that.

 

We are approaching the stage where the teacher might well be regarded by those being taught as speaking an alien tongue. Then again, maybe we're already there.

 

...."Team Day"....targets.....Health & Safety.....Safety Kaizens .....spreadsheet......tick in the box......

 

A lethal combination of buzzwords.

[Peter Kazmierczak]

Well I'm going to a management thing tomorrow where the agenda includes:

 

Table exercise

Speed update

Transformation Update

Transformation Discussion

Quiz

 

At least I understand the last one.....

 

Regards,

Peter

[KevinWalsh]

 

Table exercise

.....

 

 

 

Isn't this something that occurs in lap-dancing clubs (so I have been told, never knowingly participated )

[Xerces Fobe2]

Well I'm going to a management thing tomorrow where the agenda includes:

 

Table exercise

Speed update

Transformation Update

Transformation Discussion

Quiz

 

At least I understand the last one.....

 

Regards,

Peter

 

Do you work in IT Peter as this looks so pointless and sadly familiar?

 

PS. I have yet to see a successful transformation programme as the goal posts (sic) keep moving!

 

Xerces Fobe

[kevinlms]

It's not just any employment contract, the Health and Safety at Work Act specificaly requires you to abide by safety measures provided by your employer and to conduct yourself in a safe manner.

 

 

Then there is the straight out stupidity cases. In Australia there has been some cases where people have been sacked instantly for 'Planking'. It includes some in major supermarket chains & subsideries, where they have been photographed on top of shelving units & the like. Also big mining companies where the employees are on very large contracts.

At least one manager was sacked for instead of discouraging planking, merely took photos of the others. Some were just on the lunch room table, but rightly so, the rule has to be consistently applied.

 

Kevin Martin

[Xerces Fobe2]

Then there is the straight out stupidity cases. In Australia there has been some cases where people have been sacked instantly for 'Planking'. It includes some in major supermarket chains & subsideries, where they have been photographed on top of shelving units & the like. Also big mining companies where the employees are on very large contracts.

At least one manager was sacked for instead of discouraging planking, merely took photos of the others. Some were just on the lunch room table, but rightly so, the rule has to be consistently applied.

 

Kevin Martin

 

Just looked up "Planking" seems pretty harmless fun, however have you ever met an H&E person with a sense of humour - a rare beast as everything is a potential risk to them!

 

Xerces Fobe

[RedgateModels]

seems pretty harmless fun, however have you ever met an H&E person with a sense of humour

 

hmmmm, I hope that I don't fall in to your category there

 

In this particular case I think it's more of the Manangement using H&S as an excuse to stop the lower orders having fun at work - an all too common mindset IMHO. Another common reason cited is "cost saving" - used to get the workforce to conform to some corporate identity which actually costs more

 

Anyway, I digress .......

[Re6/6]

Just looked up "Planking" seems pretty harmless fun, however have you ever met an H&E person with a sense of humour - a rare beast as everything is a potential risk to them!

 

Xerces Fobe

 

Unfortunately not quite so harmless for this stupid boy.

[Xerces Fobe2]

Unfortunately not quite so harmless for this stupid boy.

 

Agreed - Stupid people like this fuel the HSE oppressive culture and everyone gets "punished" for one persons actions - Reminds me of school when the whole class was punished for the actions of one!

 

Xerces Fobe

[Arthur]

That's the problem, whereas in the past people were presumed to demonstrate common sense, and if you didn't, well, tough.

Today we try to prevent the stupid fulfilling their potential and the rest of us are stifled in the process.

[Calnefoxile]

I'm sure I'm not alone in receiving phishing cold calls from these sharks who start off with 'I understand you've had an accident recently' when there has been nothing of the kind

 

On this issue I kept gettng text messages to my Compnay Mobile from one of these Claims Management Company's, after an accident involving my COMPANY car. Basically my car was reversed into by an Ambulance, whilst parked outside the main entrance to a Hospital. No-one was hurt, apart from the pride of the Ambulance staff who was driving, I know no-one was hurt because I wasn't even in the flaming car when it was hit!!!!! But I still got texts from a Claims Management Company asking why I hadn't tried to claim upto £3000 for injuries. I'll tell you why 'cos I wasn't bl00dy injured thats why!!!!!!!!

 

Regards

 

Neal.

[Adrian Wintle]

Re. Headlights

 

There has been talk, the legislation may already have been passed, on making this mandatory across the EU and having new cars rigged to do so from new, as with Volvo's and Saab's. It's long been a legal requirement in Sweden.

 

Daytime running lights (DRLs) have been required on cars in Canada since 1990. These can be low-beam headlights, half-power high beam headlights, or separate marker lights. The various schemes tend not to turn on any other lighting (like tail lights). The idea is that you can see an oncoming car at a greater distance, particularly in misty, hazy, gloomy, or hot (heat distortion) conditions. While the DRLs do have that positive effect, there is a small proportion of the driving population that fail to turn on their headlights at night because their DRLs are on - this means that they have no tail lights.

 

I run with headlights on at all times (dipped, of course) so that the tail lights are also on. The Subarus that I've owned are nice in that the headlight system is switched on the ignition, so when you turn off/leave the car, the headlights go out and there is no chance of having them drain the battery. The Toyota I had before that implemented the DRL requirements by turning on the lighting system (including tail lights), so it had the same effect - the only time I had to turn on the light switch is if I wanted high beams.

 

Adrian

[coachmann]

If people cannot see a car or a 8ft wide 36ft long bus whever they step off the kerb into the cartroad, then it is they that need their lights seeing to. Roads were built for road vehicles and pavements for padestrians. But by putting the onus on drivers to avoid padestrians, the latter have attempted to abrogate or abolish the arrangment so that they can jay-walking wherever they please and it is the motorists fault for not having lights on, not avoiding them or not having a crystal ball if the two collide.