Health & Safety, has it gone to far?

[Rhyolith]

In modern Britain health and satefty is a really big deal and I get why, no one wants to loose an arm, be blinded or die... but does it go too far?

In my quest to learn practical skills I find the attitude in nearly all intuitions of education is increasing set around " never do anything dangerous", presenting a huge barrier to the practical arts... I my mind it's so obvious that we should Learn to to dangerous things safely, not not do the at all... am I missing something?

It has got to the point where I am almost more afraid of getting in trouble becasue of health and safety rules, than the things they are meant to protect us from. And I know I am not the only one, so many times a craftsman has wanted to teach me something on a grinder or table saw, but can't because ot the H&S rules... even though I have been trained on 40hp industrail table saw and used grinders for years.

I am getting sick of it, the time and money it wastes... for something that should be common sense.

 

[novocaine]

blaming the wrong thing. H&S doesn't want to stop you doing anything, they want to make sure you do it safely.

insurance wants to stop you doing things, because if you get it wrong, they might have to pay out. Unfortunately, this is normally seen as HSE sticking there beaks in instead of the money grubbing insurance firms putting limitations on their provided policies.

the UK HSE isn't especially prescriptive, they rarely say how you have to do something (mainly because they are aware that they don't know), but they will put certain requirements on you to do it safely, like asking for guards on equipment or stipulating stop times of rotating machinery or working at height regulations (ok that one got a bit daft, but it's better now). they have a process, it's called the hierarchy of risk control, google it.

 

[Adam9453]

Novocaine have you ever been inspected by the HSE?
All the people I know that have been inspected, paint a very different picture!

 

[novocaine]

yes. I also work along side them very very closely in the oil and gas world, if you think it is bad over here, try working in Norway, where they are very prescriptive, to the point that they will tell you which machines you have to use.

I will say that the inspectors can be a bit hard to get on with at times but think of it this way, they have been in to hundreds of workshops and seen genuinely unsafe acts being done by people, they have also been to post incidents inspections where someone has done something stupid and lost a limb or worse, they don't want that to happen again, so if they can provide you with guidance they will.

 

[pcb1962]

In modern Britain health and satefty is a really big deal and I get why, no one wants to loose an arm, be blinded or die... but does it go too far?

In my quest to learn practical skills I find the attitude in nearly all intuitions of education is increasing set around " never do anything dangerous", presenting a huge barrier to the practical arts... I my mind it's so obvious that we should Learn to to dangerous things safely, not not do the at all... am I missing something?

I think that in many cases the concept of 'acceptable risk' has been lost. Many seem to believe that the result of a Risk Assessment must be 'no risk' in order for the activity to go ahead.

 

[custard]

The HSE are saving limbs and lives, you might find it irksome (hey, I find it irksome too) but we can't argue with the facts. Twenty years ago every year saw more than one work related fatality for each 100,000 workers, now it's less than half that rate.

http://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/pdf/fatalinjuries.pdf

You might argue that the nature of work itself is changing, and dangerous occupations like coal mining have dropped out of the statistics, but even when you control for that and look within individual industries you see the same picture.

The truth is those nagging, irksome rules protect us from ourselves, left to our own devices we all get tempted to cut corners and take risks. Sure, we all think we're smarter than the next man and can take care of ourselves, but we can't. Human nature means we kick against all those regulations, but because of them there are hundreds or even thousands of people today who are alive and whole who otherwise would be dead or maimed.

 

[novocaine]

In modern Britain health and satefty is a really big deal and I get why, no one wants to loose an arm, be blinded or die... but does it go too far?

In my quest to learn practical skills I find the attitude in nearly all intuitions of education is increasing set around " never do anything dangerous", presenting a huge barrier to the practical arts... I my mind it's so obvious that we should Learn to to dangerous things safely, not not do the at all... am I missing something?

I think that in many cases the concept of 'acceptable risk' has been lost. Many seem to believe that the result of a Risk Assessment must be 'no risk' in order for the activity to go ahead.

ahhhh, now we get into the tolerability of risk or acceptance of risk argument, the UK HSE use a few tools for this, the primary being that risk must be considered as low as is reasonably practicable (ALARP) but also the toleribility of risk framework, again both available with a quick search. basically have we done enough (met legislation and industry best practice normally), can you do anything more to make it save and is the cost (time, effort and money) grossly disproportionate to the reduction in risk. basically how much does it cost to put a guard on it and will the guard impinged the work.

the UK HSE gives guidelines on this but they tend to get misconstrued by many and used as a rod to beat others.

oh and what custard said.

edited to add, google search for "reducing risk protecting people". this is the starter for almost all HSE guidelines. not an amazing read, but worth it if you want to understand why things are done a certain way.

 

[Rhossydd]

the time and money it wastes...

The saying goes in our industry; Health and Safety costs, accidents cost a lot more.

I've been on courses run by the HSE and it's clear all they want is people to work in a way that doesn't put them OR others at risk.

 

[Rhyolith]

You might argue that the nature of work itself is changing, and dangerous occupations like coal mining have dropped out of the statistics, but even when you control for that and look within individual industries you see the same picture. .

When you start taking into account automation, less manufacturing industry (i terms of numbers employed) and as you said the fact certain very hazardous industries are not longer in the picture I think this is fairly meaningless... indeed can you actually prove that this is a direct result of HSE rules?

My main issue with the "Irksome" (like that ) rules is when being trained/educated or more over the lack of it because there are too many health and safety forms that have to be completed to be allowed near just 1 tool as a student. I am pretty sure most people on here think people should be trained to use tools properly (and thus safely). Personally I don't think things like risk assessments and similar paperwork (which his the kind of HSE I generally have to deal with) makes working with tools or machines significantly safer.

I don't actually have any significant experience in practical workplace HSE, it sounds a lot more reasonable from what people are saying. Mostly it actually lets you get on with it :?

 

[novocaine]

the first thing that risk assessment does is make you think about the job, it doesn't have to be a long drawn out process and it's something we all do, all the time, it's just that you have to document it and prove that you understand the risk. As a student you simply don't understand the risk, so you need the experience of the person teaching you to give you that understanding. All the job safety risk assessments I've ever done (which is to many to count) have been based on this premise, if I haven't done the job before, someone else will have, use that experience to gain understanding, you may even find they've done the risk assessment before, and you can use it as a basis for your own.

read what those forms you are signing are for. most of the time it's about liability in the event of an accident.

Take a look at industries that still involve people (building is a good one) and look at the reduction in accidents over the years. yes, health and safety has had a genuine impact of the number of accidents in the past 30 years.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

There is a difference between saying don't use that saw without a guard and saying to a twelve year old don't climb that tree, you might fall out. There is also a big difference between being responsible for yourself and being responsible for others. I had an acquaintance who was a safety officer for one of the big builders - we had a conversation along these lines once in the pub and someone said H &S was a load of tosh. He brought in a folder of photos of the most awful deaths and accidents I've ever seen ... and as he pointed out, every one of them was preventable.

 

[Zeddedhed]

As an ex main contractor I have mixed feelings. H&S compliance cost my company a fortune and in some cases was in my view a case of creating a papertrail for the sake of it.

On the other hand as the company Director I was ultimately liable for the safety of over three hundred blokes - some of them total *******.
So when an ***** labourer fell from a scaffold and broke his pelvis, both legs, collarbone and four ribs I was glad the paper trail was there.

The ***** in question had received proper NIBOSH training in Working at Height, scaffold awareness etc. He was walking along the scaffold and found it blocked by some materials (tiles being bumped out onto a roof) so rather than go back around the scaffold to reach his destination he climbed over the rail and tried to swing round the scaffold standard.

Slipped, screamed, fell, thuded, screamed some more, passed out.

H&S notified in accordance with RIDDOR.

Investigator carried out investigation and found that we'd done everything required of us to minimise risk. Accident due 'victim being a f*@kwit' (his off the record verdict).

Could have gone seriously badly for me if he hadn't received the correct training and everything was documented.

 

[Cheshirechappie]

You might argue that the nature of work itself is changing, and dangerous occupations like coal mining have dropped out of the statistics, but even when you control for that and look within individual industries you see the same picture. .

When you start taking into account automation, less manufacturing industry (i terms of numbers employed) and as you said the fact certain very hazardous industries are not longer in the picture I think this is fairly meaningless... indeed can you actually prove that this is a direct result of HSE rules?

My main issue with the "Irksome" (like that ) rules is when being trained/educated or more over the lack of it because there are too many health and safety forms that have to be completed to be allowed near just 1 tool as a student. I am pretty sure most people on here think people should be trained to use tools properly (and thus safely). Personally I don't think things like risk assessments and similar paperwork (which his the kind of HSE I generally have to deal with) makes working with tools or machines significantly safer.

I don't actually have any significant experience in practical workplace HSE, it sounds a lot more reasonable from what people are saying. Mostly it actually lets you get on with it :?

I can understand why you find it irksome (we all do at times), but the tutors of a training establishment have to assume that new students know nothing, an thus have to be informed of the risks and how to mitigate them. In the event of an accident, they also have to demonstrate that the risks were explained, otherwise they are legally liable for running an unsafe establishment. Sure, there's an element of backside-covering to all the paperwork, but the main reason is to see that everybody knows the risks and can work safely, and to demonstrate that passing on that knowledge has been done thoroughly and properly.

By the way, the writ of the HSE does not run in the privacy of your own shed. If you want to run a sawbench with no riving knife, crownguard or electrical brake, that's entirely your right. If you have a kickback and end up with a chunk of wood buried in your head, that's your lookout. Do that at work, and somebody's in court - and rightly.

 

[Adam9453]

unfortunately, as many have said, I think the claims culture doesn't help with perception of HSE.
Considering as a director of a company you are essentially liable for any accident someone has (whether it was their fault, your fault, the stray dogs fault) it just creates an air of hatred for it.
We were told by the insurance company that if we gave someone a hammer, showed them how to use it safely, documented the training and got them to sign to agree they had been trained to use the hammer safely, then they took the hammer and promptly smashed their finger to pieces, that we would still be liable!!
If there wasn't this culture of "where there is blame there's a claim" and ambulance chasing solicitors then I think we would all have a different view on it.
Darwinism used to get rid of people who had stupid accidents, thereby cleansing the gene pool.

 

[mind_the_goat]

blaming the wrong thing. H&S doesn't want to stop you doing anything, they want to make sure you do it safely.
insurance wants to stop you doing things, because if you get it wrong, they might have to pay out.

I think you nailed it with this comment, but I'd add laywers to the mix The increase in parasite legal companies looking to cream off payouts from insurance companies has a lot to do with it. Also the increasing cost of lawyers to defend a case.

It seems that often an insurer will pay out before a claim goes to court, not because it's a valid claim but simply because they think it's a cheaper option. This just encourages more spurious claims. the insurers try to reduce this by refusing to cover any vaguely risky activity, or by charging huge premiums. Companies and organisations that can't pay these premiums then have to stop people doing these activities.

As an occasional home use ladder user, I do find the 'safety' features a real pain. Only this week I nearly injured my self when the safety strap got caught on something when I was carrying it, then crushed my fingers trying to operate the excessive numbers of difficult to use catches. It's a two man job just to get it out of the garage.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

In 1973 I worked on a 100' bridge. When the final column shutters were being fixed there was only one crane that could reach, so once the crane was committed (which could be for several hours or even overnight), the only way down was to stand on the "safety" rail ... and jump for the jib of the crane, then climb down inside it. This was mid winter, sometimes in quite heavy wind, and with frozen hands. I did it quite often. :shock:
Nothing on this earth would persuade me to do that again.

 

[Rhossydd]

Darwinism used to get rid of people who had stupid accidents, thereby cleansing the gene pool.

They also took innocent bystanders with them though.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Thinking about that bridge - it was a good job they didn't shutter on Sat. or Sun. afternoons. We'd have spent the lunchtime on the beer ... :roll:

 

[n0legs]

I'll give you a quote that I heard first hand, it is from Windsor Coles OBE of the HSE :-
"We're not here to make your lives any harder, we're here to make sure you go home at the end of the shift. No one should come to work to die, we come to work to make a living".

I'm from a culture that deems anyone who does not see or understand the need for health and safety, as someone who is not a suitable candidate for the job/work at hand.
I've mentioned before on this forum I've lost three personal friends/workmates at work. I was one of the party who had to notify a wife when one of those had got killed. I've refused that duty ever since.

People see H&S as a roadblock or a hindrance, it is not. Cause and effect has been proven time and time again as evidence of the need for H&S.

Pressure applied by employers or customers to "just get on with it" and abandon H&S should be noted but also ignored, they are not the sort of people you want to be working for.
Workmates and colleagues who share that attitude are not people you want to be working with.
Employees, apprentices, new starters, improvers and even "old hands" with that attitude need educating or firing.

That's from me, someone who's had his fair share of accidents and injuries and seen more than I ever should have, but wised up pretty bloody quickly :wink:

 

[jakethebuilder]

It's the common sense that's missing. It's not really "common" any more. Instead of learning to do things from people who know how, everyone thinks they can become experts, simply by going on line, and watching a few videos. (Oops. I may resemble that remark myself, at times). The point is, an entire generation of young people are missing out on learning fundamental skills first-hand, from a master (or even their fathers and grandfathers). The biggest problem I see with power tool videos, is the disclaimer "guards have been removed for clarity". Well, how about some clarity regarding the proper use of the guards and other safety equipment?