Background to the HSE decision on two rope working

[mtt.tr]

am i covered if i use my safetec duck much like i would when irata abseiling? cant see it being inconvenient personally  

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

10 hours ago, AA Teccie (Paul) said:

14 hours ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

 

Do bridges fail? (I don't know but haven't heard of it commonly.)

That’s a fair observation Paul - probably not but maybe on a rare occasion?

 

Could we also say the same about ropes and anchor points also?  
 

Does anybody even know how many times a trained and experienced UK climber has had a cut / failed rope or a failed TiP?

 

Rhetorical obv’s. 

 

 

 

 

 

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

6 minutes ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

That’s a fair observation Paul - probably not but maybe on a rare occasion?

 

Could we also say the same about ropes and anchor points also?  
 

Does anybody even know how many times a trained and experienced UK climber has had a cut / failed rope or a failed TiP?

 

Rhetorical obv’s. 

 

 

 

 

 

HSE have data to indicate it does happen, including with Approved Contractors (“no comment” ?), and that’s only available from RIDDOR reports...suggestion being not all are reported.

Plus of course inexperienced climbers are more at risk n hopefully additional measures safeguard all...time will tell.

Thanks Kevin

Paul...”signing off”

 

 

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

4 minutes ago, AA Teccie (Paul) said:

HSE have data to indicate it does happen, including with Approved Contractors (“no comment” ?), and that’s only available from RIDDOR reports...suggestion being not all are reported.

Plus of course inexperienced climbers are more at risk n hopefully additional measures safeguard all...time will tell.

Thanks Kevin

Paul...”signing off”

 

 

It might be easier to swallow if the “HSE eyes only” supporting data (and associated assumption of figures higher than those reported) was actually laid open in support of the justification case. 
 

I’m desperate to want to believe there’s a genuine and logical justification but still coming up short for the time being....

 

Kev.... “staying tuned” ?

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

15 minutes ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

It might be easier to swallow if the “HSE eyes only” supporting data (and associated assumption of figures higher than those reported) was actually laid open in support of the justification case. 
 

I’m desperate to want to believe there’s a genuine and logical justification but still coming up short for the time being....

 

Kev.... “staying tuned” ?

They did supply some data for industry consumption...will supply tomorrow ?

[Alexthetreesurgeon]

There’s this. some basic numbers about arb/chainsaw without much detail.

Arboriculture statistics

WWW.HSE.GOV.UK

---

Statistics show that the vast majority of fatal and major injuries in tree work are associated with chainsaw...

 

[Alexthetreesurgeon]

     I remember they did also post a table with more details during the “consultation” period which went into slightly more detail about falls from a rope and harness. And I remember thinking the majority of incidents “may” have still occurred even with 2 ropes. I.e bowline tied wrong. There was also no mention in the Injury table of competency levels either.
 
   Personally I feel 2 rope working is a decision based on really unscientific  analysis of data. Classic WYSIATI. “What you see is all there is.” If one person died cos they cut their rope then 2 ropes would have saved em.???       Are Hse really confident enough about that to enforce a serious practical change to the way most arbs operate? Affecting safety, fatigue and wellbeing. Using HSE’s science I could suggest that Khriss’ example proves that 2 rope working is more dangerous.
 

     Might have been better to have a proper consultation with the arb industry first about what we thought might be causing the majority of incidents??    For instance, a lot of people on here seem to feel the training system could improve...etc etc etc  
 

   One last thing Paul. “ Plus of course inexperienced climbers are more at risk.” Any stat evidence to back this up Paul? Because it may actually be the case that more experienced climbers face more risk because they may do bigger stuff with less supervision. Maybe.?? But I’m not gonna presume things without doing research first.  
 

 Sorry to be a “nob head” Khriss and give Paul more “flak.” I’m more than happy to share it around if anyone from HSE fancies chatting to anyone from the industry. Alex.

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

8 hours ago, AA Teccie (Paul) said:

They did supply some data for industry consumption...will supply tomorrow ?

This is what I was referring to. 

 

Not 'data' in a statistical sense but some supporting evidence for HSE to pressure the industry to change / improve safety

Arboricultural Association - HSE Fall from Height Incidents involving arborists

WWW.TREES.ORG.UK

---

<p class= lead bold mb10 >This article contains brief examples of the falls from height reported to HSE under...

Also, from an earlier article:

However, in 2018, HSE analysed RIDDOR reports for the period April 2017–March 2018 by searching for key words. Although heavily caveated as not being a comprehensive record, the findings were published in an open paper (AFAG 33/02) which was presented at the November 2018 AFAG meeting. According to the analysis, there were 117 recorded RIDDOR-reportable incidents in arboriculture during that period. Of these, 23 were falls from height, of which one was fatal, 6 resulted in fractured vertebrae, 3 multiple fractures, 5 lower limb fractures and fracture to ankle, ribs and wrist.

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

29 minutes ago, Alexthetreesurgeon said:

     I remember they did also post a table with more details during the “consultation” period which went into slightly more detail about falls from a rope and harness. And I remember thinking the majority of incidents “may” have still occurred even with 2 ropes. I.e bowline tied wrong. There was also no mention in the Injury table of competency levels either.
 
   Personally I feel 2 rope working is a decision based on really unscientific  analysis of data. Classic WYSIATI. “What you see is all there is.” If one person died cos they cut their rope then 2 ropes would have saved em.???       Are Hse really confident enough about that to enforce a serious practical change to the way most arbs operate? Affecting safety, fatigue and wellbeing. Using HSE’s science I could suggest that Khriss’ example proves that 2 rope working is more dangerous.
 

     Might have been better to have a proper consultation with the arb industry first about what we thought might be causing the majority of incidents??    For instance, a lot of people on here seem to feel the training system could improve...etc etc etc  
 

   One last thing Paul. “ Plus of course inexperienced climbers are more at risk.” Any stat evidence to back this up Paul? Because it may actually be the case that more experienced climbers face more risk because they may do bigger stuff with less supervision. Maybe.?? But I’m not gonna presume things without doing research first.  
 

 Sorry to be a “nob head” Khriss and give Paul more “flak.” I’m more than happy to share it around if anyone from HSE fancies chatting to anyone from the industry. Alex.

Morning Alex, my comment about inexperienced climbers was an assertion, albeit based on a general principle of such, and a response to Kevin's post.

 

The opportunity to "chat with HSE" has effectively passed now the industry guidance is completed (after several rounds of consultations.) Going forward training and assessment has/will change to reflect the change (ICOP2 / TG1 etc.) and we will endeavor to ensure non-Lantra registered training providers / colleges are also made aware.

 

Happy to take the "flak", as always , but "we are where we are" and, respectfully, need to look forward with an open mind...please.

 

Thanks all, keep safe..

Paul

 

   

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

Thanks Paul. 
 

Trouble is, doesn’t really add cred  

 

23 fall fro height incidents - so that’s everything from 4th rung on the hedge cutting ladder to falling off the tailgate of the PU. 
 

The question is, how many rope failure / cut or TiP incidents are there that would justify such a change. 
 

It still ‘looks’ like the answer is being made to fit the question. 
 

It’s not meant as giving you stick, you are a much valued and respected info source.