do I have muppet written on my forehead?

[troll]

Greetings.Although the poll was a clear indication of the seriousness with which this thread was taken, I really don`t feel that it`s the way to go. Quite apart from it`s statistical downfalls-I also feel, that it would not be wise to compare collated data with those of the construction industry. Quite how an industry-wide census could be undertaken is a bit of an unknown. The important issue for me is one of communication. Assessing trends based on fatalities seems a bit ham-fisted to me and, has the nasty habit of ignoring the near-misses that seem to be ubiquitous. From what I am hearing from the boylies and girlies the length and breadth of the country is, that risk assessments are rarer than finding a tardis in context. On some occasions when for example, large quantities of flaking asbestos are uncovered, the teams are simply told that it will be dealt with and are issued with simple paper dust masks.By all accounts, the team worked next to the stuff for nearly a week-HS is simply side-stepped. It will continue to be side-stepped until we`re all willing to talk about it. I`m still of the opinion that the field staff should expect to at least see (and preferably, sign) a new risk assessment for every site they set foot on. There is no good reason why field staff should not have on-site access to written HS materials like the newly completed managers handbook. I feel that HS on sites in general would be greatly enhanced if courses were made available not just to a token member of staff but, to field-workers. As it stands, field-workers have to rely on someone else to prepare an assessment and design mitigative strategy.It`s often been said that HS starts with the individual-then lets train some individuals, in the office, and the field staff.I`m not talking about a day`s course where we all have tea and watch videos about ladders, I mean the real deal. If we are to have any impact on the standards of HS in commercial archaeology (don`t get me started with the academic lot) we need dedicated staff in the same way as we do first aiders. First aiders-God bless em`, are for when the mitigation fails. Have a safety-type on site too.Prevention is the key and I just don`t see that level of commitment on even the most basic of HS on some sites. According to some of my colleagues out there in circuit-land, field staff give up discussing HS after a few years of being ignored. Not a healthy environment.