20th July 2005, 01:24 AM
Thanks for that Mercenary,
I have no problem with people ranting about the unsafe situations they have been in or demanding basic adherence to H&S.
My experience over the last 10 years is very different for the record -
1 serious incident with a serious injury - I was uninjured but nearly killed. Us archaeologists were in the clear. A prosecution was brought by the police, not H&S who investigated the situation, and thrown out in court.
1 minor incident - operative sprayed with fluid from JCB - was he standing too close to the machine?
No reports of H&S issues reported to me by all the diggers on site.
One complaint by an operative - test pits being dug to depth which displayed there outdated understanding of H&S law and how to handle the situation.
H&S kit used by contractors - basic not sophisticated in general but some contractors like BUFAU stand out. (I assume I am allowed to make positive comments).
In comparison the previous ten years in some respects were better. When I worked for OAU - the safety officer stopped me starting work on a project, a key one, on an H&S issue, I raised the issue - he took action - the line managers were p***d off - the funding bodies were annoyed about the delay ....but that hazard was eliminated for a trivial cost to the overall project. (The work had to be done anyway and it had the advantage that the tree huggers didnot know what was happening).
Having worked at circa 10m depth with heavy metal contaminants with a near miss which could have resulted in a fatality things were not perfect in the bad old days of PPG 16.
What is needed is clear demonstrable statistics so that the relevant bodies can take strategic action if neccessary what is not needed is a witch hunt on things that are in fact standard practice. Over to you David BAJR and Peter IFA.
Peter
(BTW - I will be running a tender competition in the near future where H&S if a key factor. Some of us take take these things seriously!)
I have no problem with people ranting about the unsafe situations they have been in or demanding basic adherence to H&S.
My experience over the last 10 years is very different for the record -
1 serious incident with a serious injury - I was uninjured but nearly killed. Us archaeologists were in the clear. A prosecution was brought by the police, not H&S who investigated the situation, and thrown out in court.
1 minor incident - operative sprayed with fluid from JCB - was he standing too close to the machine?
No reports of H&S issues reported to me by all the diggers on site.
One complaint by an operative - test pits being dug to depth which displayed there outdated understanding of H&S law and how to handle the situation.
H&S kit used by contractors - basic not sophisticated in general but some contractors like BUFAU stand out. (I assume I am allowed to make positive comments).
In comparison the previous ten years in some respects were better. When I worked for OAU - the safety officer stopped me starting work on a project, a key one, on an H&S issue, I raised the issue - he took action - the line managers were p***d off - the funding bodies were annoyed about the delay ....but that hazard was eliminated for a trivial cost to the overall project. (The work had to be done anyway and it had the advantage that the tree huggers didnot know what was happening).
Having worked at circa 10m depth with heavy metal contaminants with a near miss which could have resulted in a fatality things were not perfect in the bad old days of PPG 16.
What is needed is clear demonstrable statistics so that the relevant bodies can take strategic action if neccessary what is not needed is a witch hunt on things that are in fact standard practice. Over to you David BAJR and Peter IFA.
Peter
(BTW - I will be running a tender competition in the near future where H&S if a key factor. Some of us take take these things seriously!)