Has the world gone crazy?!

[Agi-Smash]

One of my customers has been bought out by the yanks, and they have a fert spreader. You know big hopper, belt and two spinning discs on the back. There hse have strongly recommended that the spinning discs be guarded as when the material comes off the discs it could hurt you. No But then it does make the machine unuseable.

Point 1. If you are stupid enough to walk into a barrage of fertiliser coming off a spreader at god knows what speed, you deserve to be hurt.

Point 2. Hse and guarding and stuff is all fine but if it doesnt do its job after, its pretty useless.

Point 3. Most hse advisors have no practical experience on anything they are trying to advise on.

Point 4. Hse seems to be replacing common sense and thought.

Main point. Everyone seems to forget the last sentence of the first paragraph of the hse at work act. "As far as practically possible"

I accept hse is an ever increasing part of everybodys daily life, but when it takes you three quarters of an hour to fill in work permits, hot work permits, have a "toolbox talk" etc etc. it is getting enough now.

Edited July 27, 2014 by Stephen Blair

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

One of my customers has been bought out by the yanks, and they have a fert spreader. You know big hopper, belt and two spinning discs on the back. There hse have strongly recommended that the spinning discs be guarded as when the material comes off the discs it could hurt you. No But then it does make the machine unuseable.

 

Point 1. If you are stupid enough to walk into a barrage of fertiliser coming off a spreader at god knows what speed, you deserve to be hurt.

 

Point 2. Hse and guarding and stuff is all fine but if it doesnt do its job after, its pretty useless.

 

Point 3. Most hse advisors have no practical experience on anything they are trying to advise on.

 

Point 4. Hse seems to be replacing common sense and thought.

 

Main point. Everyone seems to forget the last sentence of the first paragraph of the hse at work act. "As far as practically possible"

 

I accept hse is an ever increasing part of everybodys daily life, but when it takes you three quarters of an hour to fill in work permits, hot work permits, have a "toolbox talk" etc etc. it is getting enough now.

 

 

Isn't it "reasonably practicable" rather than "practically possible???" There's quite a difference in meaning between the 2.

Edited July 27, 2014 by Stephen Blair

[Agi-Smash]

You are right "reasonably practical" is what is stated in the hse at work 1974.

So by guarding spinning discs that are discs designed to spin and throw fertiliser is this "reasonably practical"?

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

You are right "reasonably practical" is what is stated in the hse at work 1974.

 

So by guarding spinning discs that are discs designed to spin and throw fertiliser is this "reasonably practical"?

 

 

I guess you could say it would be practical to guard the sector of the spinning disk which isn't within the distribution arc. Anymore and it makes the unit wholly unpractical/pointless!!

[cornish wood burner]

You think?

 

You're right Mat that sounded a bit harsh.

Not how I intended it to read. SORRY Kev

 

Does "You would think" sound better?

[Mat]

One of my customers has been bought out by the yanks, and they have a fert spreader. You know big hopper, belt and two spinning discs on the back. There hse have strongly recommended that the spinning discs be guarded as when the material comes off the discs it could hurt you. No sh*t! But then it does make the machine unuseable.

Point 1. If you are stupid enough to walk into a barrage of fertiliser coming off a spreader at god knows what speed, you deserve to be hurt.

Point 2. Hse and guarding and stuff is all fine but if it doesnt do its job after, its pretty useless.

Point 3. Most hse advisors have no practical experience on anything they are trying to advise on.

Point 4. Hse seems to be replacing common sense and thought.

Main point. Everyone seems to forget the last sentence of the first paragraph of the hse at work act. "As far as practically possible"

I accept hse is an ever increasing part of everybodys daily life, but when it takes you three quarters of an hour to fill in work permits, hot work permits, have a "toolbox talk" etc etc. it is getting enough now.

 

Isn't it "reasonably practicable" rather than "practically possible???" There's quite a difference in meaning between the 2.

 

I don't think either is "the last sentence of the of the first paragraph".

 

 

The Heath and Safety at work etc act has three levels of duty.

 

"Shall", which basically means must - it's an absolute duty.

 

"As far as reasonably practicable" which basically means a balance must be stuck between the how much the level of risk is reduced as opposed to the amount of expense made (Time / Money / effort) in order to reduce the risk.

 

"So far as is Practicable" which basically means that if it is possible (in the light of current technology, knowledge or invention), then it must be done (cost is irreverent).

 

All three appear in the act in different areas.

[Mat]

One of my customers has been bought out by the yanks, and they have a fert spreader. You know big hopper, belt and two spinning discs on the back. There hse have strongly recommended that the spinning discs be guarded as when the material comes off the discs it could hurt you. No sh*t! But then it does make the machine unuseable.

Point 1. If you are stupid enough to walk into a barrage of fertiliser coming off a spreader at god knows what speed, you deserve to be hurt.

Point 2. Hse and guarding and stuff is all fine but if it doesnt do its job after, its pretty useless.

Point 3. Most hse advisors have no practical experience on anything they are trying to advise on.

Point 4. Hse seems to be replacing common sense and thought.

Main point. Everyone seems to forget the last sentence of the first paragraph of the hse at work act. "As far as practically possible"

I accept hse is an ever increasing part of everybodys daily life, but when it takes you three quarters of an hour to fill in work permits, hot work permits, have a "toolbox talk" etc etc. it is getting enough now.

 

If this was recent, and is as you have stated, I am surprised that the HSE man made such a "day 1, week 1 error".

 

Exactly this state of affairs ( a machine being made pointless due to excessive guarding) was thrashed out in 1955.

 

Even the most greenhorn hse officer should be aware of:

 

John Summers & sons ltd v Frost (1955)

 

as this is where (ironically) the term "as far as reasonably practicable" heralded.

 

The background is some chap called frost was using an abrasive wheel (bench grinder) and messed up his hand.

 

He sued (civil claim) his employer (John Summers and son) as he claimed they had not fulfilled their duty under the Factories Act (predecessor to the Health and Safety at work act) which said adequate guarding shall (absolute duty) be used.

 

If he had damaged himself, the the guarding could not have been suitable, he (successfully) argued.

 

This basically made all Bench Grinders illegal.

 

The response to this was the writing of the (Abrasive wheels regulations 1970, which allowed a lower tier of duty (as far as reasonably practicable).

 

 

 

 

I feel it is highly unlikely exactly the same mistake has been made with regard to all granular fertiliser spreaders.

 

Was an improvement notice served? PM the details to me and I will look it up

 

There may well have been a guarding issue related to the machine in question (belts, shafts etc), but there is no way a "fixed guard" was required as described.

Edited July 27, 2014 by Mat

[Mat]

 

My own brush with H&S was when we had an inspection on the farm and the inspector saw a ladder leaning up against one of the 50 ton corn bins. The bin has a semi horizontal ladder on top to reach the centre but I had tied the top of the ladder to this top ladder so that it did not slide from side to side.

 

" Oh no, we can't have that. It is now a fixed ladder and the steps must be of a certain width and angle and there must be handrails."

 

So I went up and untied the rope and came down (with the ladder slipping from side to side) and that was all right with him.

 

This is interesting, because, if it is as described, it is in direct conflict with the guidance issued by the HSE themselves.

 

Here is the guidance:

 

http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg455.pdf

 

Here is a screen shot from page 5:

 

 

It clearly recommends the tying off of ladders, with no mention of the requirements for "fixed structures".

 

The Work at height Regs (2005) do require a hierarchy of control to be followed.

 

Maybe there was some confusion?

 

If the corn bin is only accessed occasionally, the ladder is probably fine.

 

If there is regular access, what is the access for?

Could life not be made easier (and more efficient) by not going up there at all. If it's is visual, would not CCTC or level indicators be better?

If it is to operate equipment, could it not be operated from the ground.

 

If you have to go up there on a regular basis, why not do what industry does and use loop ladders.

 

If you Google images of loop ladders, you will notice that they generally don't have hand rails..

 

Now, isn't that strange...

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

You think?

 

You're right Mat that sounded a bit harsh.

Not how I intended it to read. SORRY Kev

 

Does "You would think" sound better?

 

No worries! I didn't read it as any way harsh....

[cornish wood burner]

 

No worries! I didn't read it as any way harsh....

 

Cheer mate