Our own worst enemy?

[Gary Prentice]

A site not "correctly "set up as per all the rules and regs are of no interest to the general public , as they neither know or care unless something did go wrong , ( very rare ) then it would be down to experts ... ... it only seems to bother officious H&S types and other contractors !!!..... not saying that this how it should be just the reality of life .... a great deal of effort time and expense is expended to comply but in reality it is only marginally safer than the bare minimum , most is done just to avoid the possibility of being sued rather than genuine concern . for example ... have you ever come across a set of traffic lights out of order ? yet everyone seems to sort them selves out without much trouble ....

 

Having received some further information about this company, I think I'm correct in assuming that this isn't the way they normally work. The owner or manager can't be on every site every minute. I'd want to be informed if my staff were running a job like that.

 

The repercussion (putting aside the increased risk of accidents to the public etc) are a stop notice from the HSE - investigations are charged at I think £150.00 an hour, probably involving some unwanted scrutiny of the company. I don't know what powers the police have nor the Highways Authority nor what sanctions could be imposed by them. If anyone knows please post.

 

I'm not an officious H & S type by any means, but I do endeavour to instil a safety culture at work, we work in an industry with a fairly high potential for injury or death, so a little common sense is necessary. Also as we're reminded on every site induction, it is every employees responsibility to safeguard the H&S of him/herself as well as those around him. I saw something that was putting the public at risk, so shouldn't I report it to the company concerned for them to attempt to rectify?

[Tom D]

On what grounds do you say that???

 

Given that councils go for the cheapest price, they are going to get people who cut corners, IMO and IME.

 

Depends on the council Dave, for us borders council go cheapest, if they bother to get quotes at all, there's been some shocking work done recently. Edinburgh have a framework which took into account quality as well as price so the standard there is high (because we are doing it). Procurement rules are changing and It would be worth contacting your LA's procurement teams and asking why they don't use a "best value" approach which takes into account training, qualifications, and experience. It is depressing when they only look at price though.

[aspenarb]

Having received some further information about this company, I think I'm correct in assuming that this isn't the way they normally work. The owner or manager can't be on every site every minute. I'd want to be informed if my staff were running a job like that.

 

The repercussion (putting aside the increased risk of accidents to the public etc) are a stop notice from the HSE - investigations are charged at I think £150.00 an hour, probably involving some unwanted scrutiny of the company. I don't know what powers the police have nor the Highways Authority nor what sanctions could be imposed by them. If anyone knows please post.

 

I'm not an officious H & S type by any means, but I do endeavour to instil a safety culture at work, we work in an industry with a fairly high potential for injury or death, so a little common sense is necessary. Also as we're reminded on every site induction, it is every employees responsibility to safeguard the H&S of him/herself as well as those around him. I saw something that was putting the public at risk, so shouldn't I report it to the company concerned for them to attempt to rectify?

 

Yes and that would be a job well done Gary. I dont think I would take it any further.

 

Bob

[Gary Prentice]

Yes and that would be a job well done Gary. I dont think I would take it any further.

 

Bob

 

I don't intend to, I'm reliably informed the owner's going to be unhappy because this isn't the standard they expect. So I'll have a quiet word next week and leave them with it.

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

 

The repercussion (putting aside the increased risk of accidents to the public etc) are a stop notice from the HSE - investigations are charged at I think £150.00 an hour, probably involving some unwanted scrutiny of the company. I don't know what powers the police have nor the Highways Authority nor what sanctions could be imposed by them. If anyone knows please post.

 

Hi Gary, I'm not sure what, if any, interest the Police would have unless an accident actually occurred involving a MoP. The HA clearly have an interest, not least as anybody working on the highway, including having a van and chipper set up roadside, must be qualified in signing, lighting and guarding and they can, and have, prosecuted for this under the New Roads n Street Works Act.

The HSE "Fees for Intervention", for investigating a material breach of H&S regs etc., is £124 ph.

 

Bottom line I believe you have both a professional, and moral, duty to bring this to the attention of the company to hopefully avoid any future similar situations that may develop into an incident / accident.

 

Cheers..

Paul

[stihlmadasever]

Apologies, missed this last night... I was so taken aback by Skyhuck's kind words.

 

Appreciate your considered opinion!

 

May I assume you condone / encourage the use of industrial machinery as an appropriate and suitable seating facility for yourself and your employees and that it's written into your staff welfare facilities policy statement?

 

Do you provide a high density foam comfy cushion or is it bare metal and Hawthorn debris? (If no cushion, that could be considered as a slight potential oversight there if you don't mind me saying - best to avoid such perils if poss!!)

 

Perhaps if more (of a certain type of dumb, slack jawed, moronic, dribbling redneck) were to treat the hazardous work environment with contempt, there'd be less demand upon the precious oxygen the more advanced human race depends upon....

 

Happy chipping, sounds like you'd give George Cadbury a run for his money in compassion, provision of workforce social facilities and ethical conscience.

 

����

 

 

I do not condone irresponsible or as you put it moronic behaviour,neither do i-like you -stereotype a person simply because they appear in your eyes to be doing something dangerous when in reality its not.

How can sitting on the edge of the hopper when the machine is switched off be dangerous.

I sharpen chainsaws everyday by sitting over them.on a log...the chainsaw is switched off...is this to be considered dangerous too..my job is dangerous,my work environment is dangerous,im well aware of the dangers and i dont need a condescending pratt to explain to me the perils of tree work

Edited February 20, 2016 by David Humphries
Language

[David Humphries]

Watch the petty swearing fellas, or I'll close the thread.

 

 

 

.

[Stubby]

I do not condone irresponsible or as you put it moronic behaviour,neither do i-like you -stereotype a person simply because they appear in your eyes to be doing something dangerous when in reality its not.

How can sitting on the edge of the hopper when the machine is switched off be dangerous.

I sharpen chainsaws everyday by sitting over them.on a log...the chainsaw is switched off...is this to be considered dangerous too..my job is dangerous,my work environment is dangerous,im well aware of the dangers and i dont need a condescending pratt to explain to me the perils of tree work

 

I too sometimes sit on the chipper to eat a sarnie and sharpen my saws how you describe and I'm 63 and its not killed me yet . I would just ignore a condescending pratt .

[stihlmadasever]

I too sometimes sit on the chipper to eat a sarnie and sharpen my saws how you describe and I'm 63 and its not killed me yet . I would just ignore a condescending pratt .

 

My goodness stubby...you've survived all these years while blatantly ignoring the condescending pratts advice....

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

I do not condone irresponsible or as you put it moronic behaviour,neither do i-like you -stereotype a person simply because they appear in your eyes to be doing something dangerous when in reality its not.

How can sitting on the edge of the hopper when the machine is switched off be dangerous.

I sharpen chainsaws everyday by sitting over them.on a log...the chainsaw is switched off...is this to be considered dangerous too..my job is dangerous,my work environment is dangerous,im well aware of the dangers and i dont need a condescending pratt to explain to me the perils of tree work

 

Whoops, touched a nerve?

 

Ummm, your final sentence appears to be in conflict with the one marked in red above?

 

I could explain why it's inappropriate but it'd likely fall on deaf ears so I won't bother. If you can find it in the user manual though, and you think it's a design feature, appreciate if you could just link that up so that the wider world can benefit....

 

What you do, and perhaps more importantly the example you set, is most unlikely to ever impact upon myself so crack on as you see fit - don't take it personally fella, I couldn't give a monkeys how you behave at work.

 

 

Oh, go on then......

 

scenario:

 

New young apprentice on site regularly sees experienced crew member eating sandwiches and yarning-on whilst sat in the chipper at lunchtime quite reasonably considers this to be normal and acceptable practice.....

 

One hot busy day whilst the supervisor is distracted talking to the client or sorting a rigging scenario, the apprentice, having gained some confidence and starting to feel like "one of the guys" thinks I'll have a break and catch a cold drink whilst it's quiet for a minute.

 

He sits in the hopper, sweat shirt tied around his waist reaches down and takes a well deserved cool gatorade from the iggy.....

 

Meanwhile, senior groundy who's in a bit of a rage because he's been wrestling a particularly troublesome piece of brash back to the chipper from the direction of the tow hitch, stops briefly to fire the bad boy up and crank the revs on so as to destroy his brash pile - doesn't see matey who's reaching in the iggy.....

 

The rest is pretty self explanatory and is dissected in detail at the coroner's hearing.....

 

And it could all have been avoided if those that should have known better had set an appropriate example.

 

Plenty of "what ifs" and "assumptions" there but I'd be surprised if you thought the scenario was too outlandish to have a hint of the possible reality to it? And assuming you did see the potential, would you still advocate sitting in the hopper as an acceptable example?

 

Just asking that's all, nothing personal, despite your initial and subsequent personal insults.....