17th March 2010, 02:28 PM
troll Wrote:I have to agree that the employer has not been given the legal remit to police citizens behaviour and frankly-the private consumption of materials outside of work hours is none of their business-morally or legally. That said, I would agree in principal to the testing of those in control of vehicles or machinery as a part of their working day. I have to say that the majority of accidents and near-misses I have witnessed were undoubtedly the result of:
1. The behaviour of morons
2. The behaviour of incompetents
3. Companies and senior managers attempting to trim budgets
4. Pathetic risk-assessments
5. Lip-service paid to HSE Law.
6. A culture of cover-up and the assassination of "whistle-blowers".
As a footnote and to echo a post I made recently- I`m really heartened to see a major improvement in the HS culture on construction projects and in archaeology. I`m lucky enough to work for an employer who takes the safety of its employees seriously and, for a client that operates an open channel of communication in a strictly monitored workplace. Good stuff all round. On the subject of drug and alcohol testing at work, I expect that employers act within the law and hope that they in turn should expect an equally lawful response from employees when they cross the lines.
good points would like to trump them all with one other
To me everyone has it backwards.. there is the notion that HS culture on major building projects has improved which is true yet by the same token the working conditions for archaeologist have become more dangerous irrespective of how many new hoops are placed in all contractors way to improve safety.....
how can this be true?... the simple answer is that contractors are increasingly forced to work around each other in budget cutting project timetables
... this single change in practice places archaeologist in more danger irrespective of what steps are taken to mitigate the risk.. WhyTF do we have to wear ear protectors because someone is using a massive abrasive wheel 5m from our trench... the safe option is not to create work schedules that expose non related workers to risks unnecessarily
tight sites and clashing contractors leads to absurdities in litigation avoidance measures for dangers WE WERE NEVER PREVIOUSLY EXPOSED TOO
even if we concede that sites back in the day were lax on HS I think on reflection it was in the main (with a few notable exceptions) safer because you didn't have to negotiate a load of guys demolishing the building above your head...
what are the stats for archaeology... I have seen more accidents in the last 3 years than 20 years ago am i wrong and just viewing this through rose tinted glasses?
I suspect stats across the entire construction industry have improved dramatically while the conditions for archaeologists have deteriorated.
prediction... 20 years from now tight contract scheduling will be seen as dangerous