25th May 2009, 11:14 PM
Greetings all.
The death of an individual at work is not just tragic. Its totally avoidable. I am still incredulous that HS is not an integral component of undergraduate study. I`m also gobsmacked that the majority of HS briefings are generic and not archaeology specific. I`m even more shocked that most risk assessments are generic and in some cases are not even site/task specific. The one that really bursts my melon is this... site directors in archaeology are not required to be qualified in risk assessment.
Just to throw my penny`s worth in on the issue of discussing this specific case here on BAJR....
I totally understand that Peter is trying to ensure that BAJR as an entity does not stray into dodgy legal ground. It has to be said that details have already been published and as such, discussing published material is entirely within legal frames of reference. As long as the AUP is adhered to, I feel that it is healthy to discuss something as profoundly important as this case. I also have to add (without malice or ill-will) that one of my pet hates in this modern life is that we are all expected to be silent whenever anything potentially damaging to an individuals/organisations professional reputation is apparent. A man died. I think any reputation is in tatters already. Any competent court will try a defendent on the facts through due process regardless of any public discussion on the matters in hand.
Having said that, Peter is acting as a moderator in the absence of the site host so I will refrain from mentioning names of individuals or organisations in this case and respect his decision. I don`t agree with him but thats how it is.
An average of one person a month dies in the UK in construction-related industries. Thats one too many in my view. A major issue in field archaeology is that our risk assessments are not integrated with those of the construction teams on site. We are often at the mercy of construction industry idiocy simply because we don`t communicate across disciplines even though we all occupy the same space at work.:face-huh:
Perhaps the space on this thread could be used as a timely wake-up call to our industry and prompt discussion on how we should move forward towards a health and safety culture we can be proud of?
..knowledge without action is insanity and action without knowledge is vanity..(imam ghazali,ayyuhal-walad)
The death of an individual at work is not just tragic. Its totally avoidable. I am still incredulous that HS is not an integral component of undergraduate study. I`m also gobsmacked that the majority of HS briefings are generic and not archaeology specific. I`m even more shocked that most risk assessments are generic and in some cases are not even site/task specific. The one that really bursts my melon is this... site directors in archaeology are not required to be qualified in risk assessment.
Just to throw my penny`s worth in on the issue of discussing this specific case here on BAJR....
I totally understand that Peter is trying to ensure that BAJR as an entity does not stray into dodgy legal ground. It has to be said that details have already been published and as such, discussing published material is entirely within legal frames of reference. As long as the AUP is adhered to, I feel that it is healthy to discuss something as profoundly important as this case. I also have to add (without malice or ill-will) that one of my pet hates in this modern life is that we are all expected to be silent whenever anything potentially damaging to an individuals/organisations professional reputation is apparent. A man died. I think any reputation is in tatters already. Any competent court will try a defendent on the facts through due process regardless of any public discussion on the matters in hand.
Having said that, Peter is acting as a moderator in the absence of the site host so I will refrain from mentioning names of individuals or organisations in this case and respect his decision. I don`t agree with him but thats how it is.
An average of one person a month dies in the UK in construction-related industries. Thats one too many in my view. A major issue in field archaeology is that our risk assessments are not integrated with those of the construction teams on site. We are often at the mercy of construction industry idiocy simply because we don`t communicate across disciplines even though we all occupy the same space at work.:face-huh:
Perhaps the space on this thread could be used as a timely wake-up call to our industry and prompt discussion on how we should move forward towards a health and safety culture we can be proud of?
..knowledge without action is insanity and action without knowledge is vanity..(imam ghazali,ayyuhal-walad)