Site Safety Zones

[valderama]

Hi Everyone, 

 

Recently one of our grounds maintenance teams managed to cut another operatives finger with 261 whilst snedding and stacking some small hedging material. Ultimately the operatives were working outside of agreed SSOW by being so close to one another. There's investigation ongoing with any resulting actions likely to effect our arbs teams also. Our SSOW align to industry best practice, in that operatives are briefed to maintain a minimum of 5m (I accept in the real world this can be challenging) and we generally note this on our point of work risk assessment. We also create a physical barrier between the working area and members of the public (highways contract). A question will be asked by our director as to why we don't place a physical barrier in between the operative cutting material on the ground and the operative dragging brash to the chipper. My question is, does anyone else have a requirement to do this in their industry? I personally can't see how this can work on a low speed highway site with limited space, I can only see the barriers getting in the way and the ops removing them once the supervisor leaves site. Are the safety devices out there than can help with this, I'm aware there are sensors on rail and high speed highways designed to detect plant or vehicle incursion but I'm not aware of anything that prevents human incursion into a safety zone.

 

I feel that our SSOW are robust and fairly standard across the industry and that in case its operative behaviour at fault for not following procedure  but for the purpose of the investigation I need to look for alternatives. Any help or suggestions would be most welcome.

 

Thanks 

[Ledburyjosh]

Why waste your time looking for alternatives which will never be Implemented or adhered to and just explain that the operatives, one or both were at error which can and will happen even though you have a robust stanard?

 

More paper pushing won't fix all the accidents. It sounds like you would have a decent system in place that just needs re clarifying to the team.

But TBH if your saying they shouldn't be within 5m of each other, all that's achieving is setting a rule that will be ignored as it not practical so the onsite standard just becomes to do whatever. Unrealistic systems create poor working practices. Realistic systems create good working practices.

Barriers between team members is Unrealistic and will soon be abandoned in place of standing next to each other...

Keeping a distance of more that a person can reach with a saw is realistic and will form efficient safe practices...

 

 

 

[Mick Dempsey]

Cut or cut off?

 

 

[AHPP]

Were they talking on helmet comms?

[GarethM]

You could argue why they weren't talking via coms or atleast visually looking at each other as presumably only one had a saw.

 

Plus you could also ask was the saw too big for the task, maybe limit snedding to battery for improved safety.

 

 

[Mark Bolam]

33 minutes ago, Mick Dempsey said:

Cut or cut off?

 

 

Cut I presume.

It was a 261.

[Mark Bolam]

Operator error, pure and simple.

[doobin]

59 minutes ago, Mark Bolam said:

Operator error, pure and simple.

Or the other op reached in front when he shouldn’t have. 
 

OP mentioned directors. This is what happens when firms get too big, they are forced to employ retards and the rely upon certificates and totally impractical things like demanding a physical barrier between the guy with the saw and the brash draggers.

 

Its simply because you’ve hired idiots with no common sense to make a quick buck.