30th December 2005, 02:40 PM
Thanx all. Good points all round. I worked on a 20 hectare site some years ago where chemical testing was carried out under the auspices of a watching brief so the conflict of interest was largely mitigated against.In terms of HS, I am simply attempting to point out that although (allegedly) there have been no deaths in British archaeology from "immediate" threat/risk-the chemical contamination of any site could result in long-term illness and even deaths that would not be instantly recognised as such in the future. I do feel that employers should have an obligation to assess ALL risk prior to intrusive works and place appropriate mitigative measures where they are needed most.