when is it OK to physically restrain a member of the public

[LGP Eddie]

The text in bold is the issue - what is 'totally secure'? The same applies be it a firework display or tree works, basically anything which happens on an occasional basis, rather than being the dedicated purpose of the site.

 

It's quite possible that the company your wife worked for has used the company that I work for. A theme park with a dedicated site for displays can take steps which, for example, the local authority organising a display in a park cannot, however nothing is ever completely secure - if someone has the objective of going through/breaking in then they can usually manage it (see all the theft threads on here). I would imagine that, if you asked your wife whether someone who was determined to get into the firework firing area during the display could do so, there would be a way. As you state, you need a physical barrier such that it is clear to anyone passing that they are crossing a line. You then need this to be challenging enough to act as a deterrent to those who are reasonable. However, manning the barrier at all points is not always practical (and becomes less so, the longer it gets) and, if you are not going to use physical contact, to a point becomes irrelevant once the density of people is sufficient to see what is happening.

 

Perhaps the wrong impression has been given. This is not a case of 'fire regardless'. Displays are delayed until the site is clear. The challenge is maintaining the site clear during the firing window, against people who are determined to breach it (why I have no idea). During the time I have been doing this (20+ yrs) we have not had anyone get more than 10ft within the boundary, which lies outside the minimum drop zone, so the method works. Coincidentally we have had no injuries to the public or to personnel. Fortunately this has been achieved by verbal means and running in their general direction

 

The original point I was making is that, if someone is determined to head towards the fireworks, you are faced with the choice of stopping the display or using physical contact methods. The impact of stopping is significant, as outlined in my first post, hence I'm not sure what would happen in the hypothetical event of someone seeking to access the fireworks.

 

Alec

 

Possibly your first post didn't come across clearly, but the point really was surely the onus is on the organisers to provide you with a safe area to work?

If it gets breached and someone is at risk, it shouldn't even be a concern of yours that 20,000 people may go home disappointed?

Surely the plug gets puled until it's safe?

 

You should have all your costs covered in this instance as its not down to you to make the area secure.

 

Eddie.

[felixthelogchopper]

Any unwarranted laying on of hands is a battery, contrary to The Offences Against The Person Act 1861(section (ii0, IIRC). If you or another person is in danger from an ongoing attack, or you perceive them to be in danger, then you are allowed to use a permissible degree of force to prevent the danger. You could not legally retaliate if their part of the assault had finished. In the event of the person themself being in danger, there is the defence of necessity where your actions, although illegal per se, are necessary to prevent something worse happening. This is precedent from F v West Berkshire Health Authority where it was held that the sterilisation of a woman in a mental health institution without her permission (she was deemed unable to grant or deny permission on the grounds of mental age) was justified as she had begun a sexual relationship with another inmate and she would have suffered mental harm had she become pregnant. You would have to be able to argue that you had laid hands on the person as the consequences of you not doing so would have been worse for them.

[AlexB]

Having had mops on my sites walk up behind an operating harvester on a signed site with interp posters all over the place to ask the operator what he was doing I can only sympathise with folks trying to do this on a road. I'd say herace fencing is cheap and easy to move and erect and more possible in a single tree situation. Though then its down to added cost for time. For what it's worth, once signage is up and all other sop's in place. It's down to Darwin.

[Kenty]

I would physically restrain a member of public if it meant they were going to get injured or killed entering a work area or put a member of staff at risk. Its my insurance that will have to pay & get investigated by HSE, police etc all because someone thinks they can do what they like. I would like to think that common sense would prevail if I were to be prosecuted but willing to take that risk. Not every work site can be ring fenced to prevent the ignorant general public entering. If you are working for a company then they will have their own guidelines to deal with these situations which employees should be versed in & adhere to at all times.

[White Noise]

I would push , shove any physical able bodied member of the public if they entered any area I have taped off during a removal .Obviously I would ask them nicely at first .

[Old Mill Tree Care]

shouting at the top of my voice at people works 99.9% of the time tho:thumbup:

 

I've done the same using the word:

TIMBER!!

Or

FALLING!!

 

 

Sent with my iPhone from me, to you!

[Dan Earp]

Lol yep or below (in the tree) head ups on the ground or just point and shout at the first one that goes over the line and the rest then understand.

 

But around here for some reason it only happens when working in heavily asian or Somalian populated areas?? God knows why?

[woody3]

I would push , shove any physical able bodied member of the public if they entered any area I have taped off during a removal .Obviously

 

16 weeks in prison for 1st offense:001_rolleyes:

[Goaty]

If restraining hadn't taken place here what would of happened? I doubt someone said "Lets go for a walk and you can tell me all about it" Without getting physical.

1000 people could be dead potentially!

BBC News - North Sea passenger ferry hit by fire

[treequip]

If restraining hadn't taken place here what would of happened? I doubt someone said "Lets go for a walk and you can tell me all about it" Without getting physical.

1000 people could be dead potentially!

BBC News - North Sea passenger ferry hit by fire

 

Please,,,,,,,,,,,Not even vaguely similar though is it??

 

How can you offer that as an example? Its an entirely different situation.

 

In tree work its a situation you set up, you cause the situation to be thus and have a duty of care both general and under the HSAW act to manage it properly. That means not creating a situation where you have to lay hands on someone to keep your work running.

 

The situation on the boat was an arsonist, (allegedly) a criminal act. There are all sorts of powers a ships captain (and his agents) has, including restraining someone endangering the vessel.

 

On dry land you would have the right to restrain someone in the same circumstances.