+- BAJR Federation Archaeology (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk)
+-- Forum: BAJR Federation Forums (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: The Site Hut (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: Hardy Breed (/showthread.php?tid=4228)
Hardy Breed - chiz - 3rd January 2012
trowelfodder Wrote:But things will only change if people are willing to stand up for themselves. Both BAJR and Diggers Forum are doing all they can, and offering anonymity so what more do you want!!!
Cheers TF,
I agree its difficult to get the wording right, we've just written a load of draft recommendations on travel pay, and its very hard to get it realistic for use in the real world without using phrases like 'except in an emergency' -which are potential loopholes. I think actually the HSE guidance is pretty clear, they say that basically unless you are ONE person in a field with a digger, you need adequate welfare. Yes its all couched in 'may's and 'suitables' but the spirit of it is pretty clear.
But as you say, there are two sides to this, for every employer that is not providing welfare, there are Diggers who are not complaining to that employer. That is their responsibility to themselves and each other.
HSE guidance:
What if staff work in remote workplaces without suitable
plumbing and a water supply?
You may need to provide chemical toilets and washing facilities, such as water
containers.
What if my employees are working at temporary worksites?
‘So far as is reasonably practicable’ you need to provide flushing toilets and
running water. Portable cabins converted into toilet facilities are available from hire
companies. If this is not possible, consider alternatives such as chemical toilets
and water containers.
Use of public toilets and washing facilities should be a last resort and not
used just because they are the cheaper option. This would not be acceptable
where the provision of better facilities would be reasonably practicable.
http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg293.pdf
For transient jobs (less than a week) the HSE says:
Use of alternative facilities for transient construction sites
For the purpose of this information sheet, a transient construction site is either where short duration work
(up to a week) is carried out at one or many locations, or is of a longer duration carried out while moving over
a continuous geographical area, eg major roadworks, cable laying contracts etc.
In such cases, it may be appropriate to make arrangements to use facilities provided by the owner of existing premises, in which the work is being done, local public facilities or the facilities of local businesses. Clear agreement should be made with the provider of the facilities; it should not be assumed that local commercial premises can be used without their agreement.
In all cases the standards above must be provided or made available. Facilities must be readily accessible to the worksite, open at all relevant times, be at no cost to the workers, be of an acceptable standard in terms of cleanliness and have handwashingfacilities.
Workers need to be made aware of the arrangements to use them and be informed of
their location.
https://www.aps.org.uk/cis59.pdf
Hardy Breed - angi - 3rd January 2012
Does anyone know where we stand with emptying camping-style toilets? I contacted the HSE about it a while ago but their reply just consisted of several copy-and-pasted paragraphs about blood borne diseases. This is the solution offered when we are on short term work, but surprisingly enough no-one is happy to handle their colleagues' 'waste'.
Hardy Breed - Ken Denham - 4th January 2012
P Prentice Wrote:there is no excuse for inadequate welfare facilities -As far as I know, the situation was factual at the time of my first posting. Other than a "watching brief" where I could observe whether this was factual I don't know what else I could do than trust my sources of information.
name and shame - but get your facts right
satire may well help ken but you should get some and try
I would love to name and shame. Unfortunately I'm constrained by 2 restrictions in this matter;
1. The folk who informed me of the situation (and others who didn't but are aware of my statements) are concerned that their future employment may be at risk because they will be blamed for informing me.
2. Unless I can back up my statements legally I can't name the outfit concerned, it would compromise myself and BAJR.
I stated that satire could be the way, I really think that it helped in this case, albeit only for the short time the site had left to run. I suppose that it's not a long term answer to an endemic problem but in the short term it's a useful tool and a way to encourage people within the profession to "tell what's happening".
Hardy Breed - P Prentice - 4th January 2012
angi Wrote:Does anyone know where we stand with emptying camping-style toilets? I contacted the HSE about it a while ago but their reply just consisted of several copy-and-pasted paragraphs about blood borne diseases. This is the solution offered when we are on short term work, but surprisingly enough no-one is happy to handle their colleagues' 'waste'.
if you think it is reasinable to use them, it must be reasonable to dispose of them
i wouldn't
Hardy Breed - kevin wooldridge - 4th January 2012
My suspicion is that the safe and legal disposal of a chemical toilet is as complex and possibly more expensive than the hiring of a portaloo...
Hardy Breed - Dinosaur - 4th January 2012
Caravaners manage it (except the ones who just use the nearest ditch - check out the perimeter of any lay-by on a major holiday trunk route.....)
Hardy Breed - Ken Denham - 4th January 2012
I agree wholeheartedly with P Prentice.
In fact, why don't we dispense with all this mamby-pamby concern about welfare facilities altogether? After all diggers are skilled in digging aint they? A pre-requisite of any mid/long term excavation should be that the team should build their own latrine pit and make up a roster posted to inform people who's turn it was on s**t- house duty for that day. The only concern I have is that an evaluation would have to be done on the latrine pit area prior to excavation and before that evaluation a latrine pit would have to be dug for the evaluation team.....(ad nauseam).
But hey, maybe it's a way forward, more work for us digging s**t-pits?
Hardy Breed - angi - 4th January 2012
I have genuinely considered digging a hole rather than try to avoid showing my bum to passers-by! 'Scuse the vernacular!
Strangely enough, the office bound managers who think that the camping loos are perfectly suitable for site aren't so enthusiastic when you suggest that they empty it................ :face-smart:
Hardy Breed - Ken Denham - 4th January 2012
Or even try it!
Hardy Breed - Dinosaur - 5th January 2012
Ken Denham Wrote:The only concern I have is that an evaluation would have to be done on the latrine pit area prior to excavation and before that evaluation a latrine pit would have to be dug for the evaluation team.....
Twas never a problem, always had the archaeology in the s**t pit dealt with before the bucket was full :face-approve: