T.M.H.N.E.T
Rainbows aren't just for world champions
- Location
- Northern Ireland
The H&S department on site and my own employers H&S dept
Hi-viz H&S gone mad(der)?
- Thread starter I like Skol
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Roadhump
Time you enjoyed wasting was not wasted
- Location
- The flatlands of South West Lancs
Nothing of the sort, I am saying that automatic application of control measures, whatever the risk, can lead to a reduction of the quality of risk assessment, which becomes nothing more than a tick box exercise, leading to an unthinking approach which undermines the quality of H&S. Why have a risk assessment process if you are going to have a blanket application of control measures regardless? By such an approach we may universally maximise workplace safety, but it will lead to a lot of unnecessary safety measures being applied and be very expensive.
Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
Well indeed, so do turbans provide decent crash protection or not? That's then only thing of interest to me. After all, they're not allowed to carry their ceremonial knives in public, there's no exemption for Sikhs there (they carry plastic bladed replicas) yet how many murders were committed with ceremonial Sikh daggers? The applications of safety related laws and exemptions on religious grounds is inconsistent. Something either helps ensure safety, or it does not, and should be legislated for accordingly. Failing to legislate or to make exemptions because 'only a few people do it' is just that - a failure.
T.M.H.N.E.T
Rainbows aren't just for world champions
- Location
- Northern Ireland
My job is slightly different, yet the rules I work to are totally different for other people in the same areas, where the risks are identical.
The same site has green walkways that require no ppe to use, but signage specifically stating that safety eyewear(at minimum) must be worn on yellow walkways.
There are no yellow walkways
EnPassant
Remember Remember some date in November Member
- Location
- Gloucester
This poster gets 'het up' about a law that applies to one but not another. Wear a turban by all means, don't ride motorcycles then (or work on a building site).
Profpointy
Legendary Member
Well "measures" cost money, whether necessary or not. ergo unecessary measures are a waste of money.
More a logic thing than evidence surely? Are you arguing for the sake of it, or is there a point?
EnPassant
Remember Remember some date in November Member
- Location
- Gloucester
Pretty much
ETA: The comparison to a certain V.Meldrew esq has been made by a number of my friends.
Roadhump
Time you enjoyed wasting was not wasted
- Location
- The flatlands of South West Lancs
Have a look through the thread for some examples. The point of the thread is about such blanket applications of control / safety measures, with some examples given.
Profpointy
Legendary Member
But what's not logical about the point that pointless measures are a waste of money?
Also surely there's a "crying wolf" point there too - by coming out with silly H&S - which is often done, it undermines solid, but maybe silly-sounding points as H&S as a whole loses crediblity. I used to be really strict about trip hazzard cables for instance but a serious (for an office) points was undermined in the noise of all sorts of nonsensical things.
Posts are not numbered in my screen, and I confess I lost count starting from the top so may have missed 31
OP
OP
I like Skol
A Minging Manc...
- Location
- Sunny Ashton-under-Lyne
Making all employees wear hi-viz, regardless of actual activity is pointless and counter-productive. The mindset created is 'I have to wear this vest for safety. I am wearing my safety vest so I am therefore safe!'. This is possibly worse than no hi-viz at all and actually retards any active and conscious risk assessment of activities conducted during the working day.
The situation I highlighted in my OP may be due to workers having to cross the loading area to get to the canteen, where it has been deemed beneficial for hi-viz to be worn so people can be easily spotted by the operators of heavy moving machinery and vehicles. Issue HV to all workers to be worn all the time and nobody thinks twice about crossing the danger area. Make them don a vest/jacket from a hook by the entrance to the area and suddenly it is rammed home to the wearer that they are entering a potential danger area and they need to pay attention. Which scenario is more effective? (obviously providing a route that avoids the area altogether is the best option but in the real world this is not always possible/practical).
A similar situation exists at my place of work. Some processes are carried out using open baths of acid. People working in that area obviously have to wear appropriate PPE but others who may visit the area for other reasons only need to wear eye protection. To be blunt, the risk of getting splashed in your eyes when not actually processing work is so small that it is almost irrelevant but the very act of making someone stop and put on a piece of PPE as they enter the area makes them think 'This is serious shlt, I had better pay attention, not touch anything and not mess about!'. It works really well.
The situation I highlighted in my OP may be due to workers having to cross the loading area to get to the canteen, where it has been deemed beneficial for hi-viz to be worn so people can be easily spotted by the operators of heavy moving machinery and vehicles. Issue HV to all workers to be worn all the time and nobody thinks twice about crossing the danger area. Make them don a vest/jacket from a hook by the entrance to the area and suddenly it is rammed home to the wearer that they are entering a potential danger area and they need to pay attention. Which scenario is more effective? (obviously providing a route that avoids the area altogether is the best option but in the real world this is not always possible/practical).
A similar situation exists at my place of work. Some processes are carried out using open baths of acid. People working in that area obviously have to wear appropriate PPE but others who may visit the area for other reasons only need to wear eye protection. To be blunt, the risk of getting splashed in your eyes when not actually processing work is so small that it is almost irrelevant but the very act of making someone stop and put on a piece of PPE as they enter the area makes them think 'This is serious shlt, I had better pay attention, not touch anything and not mess about!'. It works really well.
I believe a lot of people that work in Elf and safety put these rules and procedures in place just to justify and strengthen their positions. Same can be said for IT . I've witnessed some restrictions in place at a lot of my customers needlessly strangling productivity.
potsy
Rambler
- Location
- My Armchair
Unless of course you bend over and drop your phone in there
OP
OP
I like Skol
A Minging Manc...
- Location
- Sunny Ashton-under-Lyne
Yeh but, that wasn't me!Unless of course you bend over and drop your phone in there
shouldbeinbed
Rollin' along
- Location
- Manchester way
As a union rep at organisation level, taking the edge of the first draft of idiocy, and to be fair people divorced from the shop floor for far too long making assumptions of how it was back in their day, I see and trying to engage it to current reality I may beg to differ somewhat.
I think you'll also find if you read properly what I wrote rather than engaging less than usual polite mode for the 28th time (give you the benefit of the doubt 1st time up). I did not advocate breaking or ignoring them, simply challenging those that appear idiotic.
If your attitude in your workplace is as you provide here, shut up and get on with what I tell you without daring to question it because I clearly know best and I have spoken, then I'm very pleased I work with more open-minded and consultative people than you
