http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11454241

 

10 years too late but thank fuck someone has the bollocks to try and do something about it.

"Supporters of existing rules say they are proportionate and discourage risk."

 

Exactly; go live in 70s USSR where you belong.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11454241

 

10 years too late but thank fuck someone has the bollocks to try and do something about it.

 

spot on.i know its been mentioned a million times on here the degrees blokes on sites have to go to for health and aftety etc....which may i add applies only when it suits! hence yesterday i was balanced on 600mm wide piece of chipboard places accross timber joists 9 meters in the in gods...all because the site agent had forgot the building needed fire stopping!,but thats just building sites,in everyday life....

stopping kids playing conkers for fucks sake! and that cheeserolling event has been going on for hundreds of years,its up to the mon if he wants to chuck himself down a hill or not...

hope this just isnt spin and kids can swing on monkey bars at the local park without filing a bastard method statement out!....

ha ha this is the first i've heard of kids having to wear goggles to play conkers.

fuckin hell the worlds gone soft.

ha ha this is the first i've heard of kids having to wear goggles to play conkers.

fuckin hell the worlds gone soft.

 

they don't, some soft arsed headteacher decided that if someone got a bit of conker in their eye after playing conkers the school could be sued so announced that in order t play conkers they had to wear goggles. it's one of many H&S myths out there

 

the problem with health and safety doesn't lie with the HSE and the laws but with money grabbing lawyers and the no win no fee claims system creating an army of over fussy H&S 'experts'

Edited October 2, 201015 yr by frank_spencer

The H&S people get a lot of unwarranted stick in my mind. It's the interpretation of the rules that's the problem, particularly in the public sector. Hopefully good old common sense will make a reappearance.

 

the problem with health and safety doesn't lie with the HSE and the laws but with money grabbing lawyers and the no win no fee claims system creating an army of over fussy H&S 'experts'

 

Half agree with the first bit, totally agree with the last bit. Fucking parasites.

 

One trouble with H&S law is the onus placed on bosses and directors - no problem with them carrying the can for creating an unsafe workplace filled with inexperienced kids and untrained halfwits at the expense of cost (because cowboy wankers like this can and do undercut folk like me), its when they bring in stupid rules and proceedures to simply cover their arses if it goes tits up.

 

For example, how can some cunt in a suit who has never driven an item of plant or machinery insist on the operator wearing safety goggles in the fuckin rain? If he's breaking concrete out with a jackhammer, fine, but do you want a man driving a dumper with 9 tonne of shit around your workplace when he cannot see? Imagine the accident report...'the dumper ran over the joiner but the driver had his goggles on. Weather Conditions - heavy rain'.

 

I have no issue with an experienced person telling me what we are doing could be dangerous, it's some inexperienced office dweller who shits himself every time he sees a big dirty hole, a big digger driven by a grizzly Irishman, and a big concrete wagon telling me the pipelayer has the wrong type of gloves on that pisses me off, when the most dangerous thing he has ever done is change the toner in the fuckin photocopier.*

 

*mental note and one to keep in the memory bank - I wonder if he has ever carried out a COSHH assesment for this task

I recently did NEBOSH for part of my job, as more and more companies are insisting on using accreditied schemes such as CHAS, I quoted for a job recently to do a 5 minute job, it took me an a couple of hours paper work and emails between relevant people getting authorised etc etc before I could send the lads to do the work.

hope this just isnt spin and kids can swing on monkey bars at the local park without filing a bastard method statement out!....

Spin is exactly what it is. Read through the article and it's full of holes.

 

Mr Cameron cited cases of children being told to wear goggles to play conkers, restaurants being banned from handing out toothpicks and trainee hairdressers being banned from using scissors as examples of silly practice.

We've already established that those are myths.

 

In his report, to be unveiled after next week's Conservative Party conference, Lord Young will say the public should be able to challenge local authorities that ban events on health and safety grounds.

So that?s more work for councils already facing severe cut backs.

 

But the Young report says local authorities, in future, should explain their decisions to ban events on health and safety grounds in writing.

Don't they already do that?

 

He said that the public should be able to refer decisions to halt events to an ombudsman and, if deemed to be unfair, they should be reversed within two weeks.

If an event cannot be staged as a result, the organiser could be awarded damages

Who's going to be paying for the damages then? That'll be the Council, or to put it another way, me and you.

 

Governments, both Conservative and Labour, have a lousy record of curtailing the activities that make law firms shit loads of money. My guess is that precisely fuck all will happen as the result of this report.

The myths are not proven to be incorrect at all, the HSE simply points out the common sense approach and confirms there is no law against handing out tooth picks (or whatever).

 

There is a big difference between that and some halfwit who's done a half day course on risk assessments suddenly thinking he's God and has to make up some stupid rules within their company because 1. it might prevent a million to one occurance and 2. it might prevent them being sued.

 

Council employees are right up there in the idiot stakes because despite being unsackable very few of them have the backbone to make a decision that might even have a million to one chance of injury.

 

There used to be an approach called BATNEEC - 'best available technology not exceeding excessive cost' - thats gone out of the window now with these halfwits because they don't care how much H&S costs, especially if you are a subcontractor for them. You cannot put a price on a life, but you can weigh up what the risk is and work around it sensibly. Converlsy, spunking ???'s away so a joiner doesn't bang his thumb with a hammer is bollocks but thats the environment we now live in.

 

There isnt one law the HSE implement that I disagree with and working in construction we encounter most of them. It's the fuckwits who interpret them incorrectly and are terrifed of their own shadows that piss me off.

I recently did NEBOSH for part of my job, as more and more companies are insisting on using accreditied schemes such as CHAS, I quoted for a job recently to do a 5 minute job, it took me an a couple of hours paper work and emails between relevant people getting authorised etc etc before I could send the lads to do the work.

how did you find it? interesting but hard going, or mind numbingly boring or a combination of both?

 

on the point, it is the interpretation of a perfectly sensible rule by a halfwit that causes the HSE a bad rep, the rules/recommendation the HSE apply are always for the safe well being of all, and usually as a result of a previous accident pattern to prevent happening again, and the HSE is often lumped in the same bracket as a company's H&S dept, which isnt the same, it's the halfwits in the H&S depts (in some places) that make the stupid company policies based on their interpretation of the HSE, a good example of this is the goggles one by smiffs which i have also experienced and its f?ckin stupidity at it's best, and ironically, is more likely to breach health and safety law than comply with it.

how did you find it? interesting but hard going, or mind numbingly boring or a combination of both?

 

 

 

A combination of both, but liked it they ways it makes you think while planning a job, I enjoyed it and passed so all was good,

A combination of both, but liked it they ways it makes you think while planning a job, I enjoyed it and passed so all was good,

good, that's it's exact purpose, rather than to make you blindly follow "rules" .

well done on passing too, as it's not one of these courses you can just turn up to and everybody passes

i got a distinction....oooooooooo

 

enjoyed NEBOSH but I did it as a 2 week block which was nice, much better than working

 

as THunter, I'm dismissing this as bullshit

 

the events aren't cancelled cos its dangerous, its that the councils can't get insurance

 

burn the parasitic ambulance chasers

COSHH Assement: COSHH Assemsnt

Half agree with the first bit, totally agree with the last bit. Fucking parasites.

 

One trouble with H&S law is the onus placed on bosses and directors - no problem with them carrying the can for creating an unsafe workplace filled with inexperienced kids and untrained halfwits at the expense of cost (because cowboy wankers like this can and do undercut folk like me), its when they bring in stupid rules and proceedures to simply cover their arses if it goes tits up.

 

For example, how can some cunt in a suit who has never driven an item of plant or machinery insist on the operator wearing safety goggles in the fuckin rain? If he's breaking concrete out with a jackhammer, fine, but do you want a man driving a dumper with 9 tonne of shit around your workplace when he cannot see? Imagine the accident report...'the dumper ran over the joiner but the driver had his goggles on. Weather Conditions - heavy rain'.

 

I have no issue with an experienced person telling me what we are doing could be dangerous, it's some inexperienced office dweller who shits himself every time he sees a big dirty hole, a big digger driven by a grizzly Irishman, and a big concrete wagon telling me the pipelayer has the wrong type of gloves on that pisses me off, when the most dangerous thing he has ever done is change the toner in the fuckin photocopier.*

 

*mental note and one to keep in the memory bank - I wonder if he has ever carried out a COSHH assesment for this task

similar to the goggles one, my dad was doing some subbying work in a water treatment works for a contractor (one of them management contracts where a bunch of suits get subbies in to do everything) working for UU fitting piping to the water treatment tanks.

 

They'd laid the pipes in the bottom of the beds and those at ground level and just needed to connect the 2 which involved connecting 2 bits of pipe about 7ft off the floor with 2 bolts. My dad gets the ladder with his mate footing it.

 

As they finish the 1st one of about 30. yon H&S bod from the main contractor comes running over spouting about how the HSE won't allow people to use ladders and if the HSE inspector caught my dad and his mate using a ladder the site would be shut down, despite my dads protesting about the bollocks H&S man was talking he was told he had to use a cherry picker or construct a scaffolding tower for each connection.

 

Luckily my dad was quite pally with the site's head Engineer and explained what the H&S guy had said. The engineer got the H&S guy to produce 3 method statements.

 

Later that day a sheepish h&S mon comes and tells my dad he can continue using the ladders.

 

when my dad produced these method statements to the H&S mon he quickly changed his mind and

Thats a common example Frank, ladders (including stepladders) on site are becoming a big no-no. What a load of hairy chuff.

 

40 foot long ladders with a man at the top balancing a 10' steel lintel on his shoulders above Bradshawgate is silly. No arguement.

 

A man up a 10' secured ladder armed a screwdriver poses very little danger. Yes, he might fall. He might also get cancer from the fags in his pocket or diabetes from the bacon butty he's going to eat at brew time.

 

However, there is more risk in erecting/dismantling a mobile scaffold or operating a scissor lift. But no, some fuckwit had decided ladders are one step away from playing chicken on the motorway.

 

I am not frightened of going up a secured ladder or working in an excavation which is shored up. What I don't need is some bedwetter telling me not to go there in the first fucking place 'just in case'....just in case fucking what?

Used to get my lad down the pit help me get tackle in the cage in 92.

good, that's it's exact purpose, rather than to make you blindly follow "rules" .

well done on passing too, as it's not one of these courses you can just turn up to and everybody passes

 

cheers

Used to get my lad down the pit help me get tackle in the cage in 92.

 

Our apprentice hodcarriers are coming on a treat too

 

Our apprentice hodcarriers are coming on a treat too

 

Not seen a pouch like that since watching Cameo singing "Word Up" in 86.

Edited October 3, 201015 yr by leigh white

Thats a common example Frank, ladders (including stepladders) on site are becoming a big no-no. What a load of hairy chuff.

 

40 foot long ladders with a man at the top balancing a 10' steel lintel on his shoulders above Bradshawgate is silly. No arguement.

 

A man up a 10' secured ladder armed a screwdriver poses very little danger. Yes, he might fall. He might also get cancer from the fags in his pocket or diabetes from the bacon butty he's going to eat at brew time.

 

However, there is more risk in erecting/dismantling a mobile scaffold or operating a scissor lift. But no, some fuckwit had decided ladders are one step away from playing chicken on the motorway.

 

I am not frightened of going up a secured ladder or working in an excavation which is shored up. What I don't need is some bedwetter telling me not to go there in the first fucking place 'just in case'....just in case fucking what?

the main problem with the cherry picker/scissor lift was getting the fucker in amongst all the pipe work.

 

Also after years of using stepladders to fix traffic lights without any incidents of people falling off into running traffic Peek were told by some new H&S bod they had to use either a cherry picker or a scissor lift to change bulbs etc as there was a risk of some one falling off a ladder into the road. luckily someone showed some sense and suggested they tie a bit of rope to the ladder that they would then tie round the traffic light pole. so what H&S numpty wanted was an entire new fleet of vans fitted with cherry pickers which would then have to be parked up next to the lights blocking up the junction then requiring all the associated traffic management all for the task of changing a bulb.

And then they'll wonder why it costs ?200 to replace a blub rather than ?20.

Yes but cherry picker and tower scaffold manufacturers/hirers are lapping it up.

There's another problem.

 

Salesfolk put a lot of pressure on the elf n' safety bods by over-exaggurating risks and instances of accidents about a minute before presenting them with the solution to all the worlds problems. If you lobby these 'proffesionals' long enough at various trades fairs and H&S Seminars you could probably convince them that breathing air is bad for you.

 

Next thing you know, there is a wonderful 'I don't care what it costs because someone else is paying' solution to a problem that never really existed in the first place.