Health & Safety re loneworker

saintjammyswine

The main reason for all of this is that something has happened in the past and so it was put into law to protect employees.

Also, if you climbed that ladder, fell off and hurt yourself, BT would be prosecuted under the Health & Safety at Work Act 1974 and could receive an unlimited fine. You could also sue them for negligence.

If common sense really did prevail in employees not doing stupid & dangerous things and employers having a safe workplace then there would be no need for any of the H&S rules. Unfortunately, employers will try to get away with whatever is cheaper and employees will still try to staple their heads to the wall etc. One example, person has an itchy nose and cant get deep enough to reach the offending area. He gets the electric drill he has been working with and sticks it up his nose. He took half of his face off. Not made up, 100% real and demonstrates why there is training, risk assessments & H&S rules!!!

scheming_gypsy

you work in health and safety don't you?

saintjammyswine

Nope, sorry.

I do have training in risk assessment & H&S though.

Gettingtherequickly

saintjammyswine wrote: »

The main reason for all of this is that something has happened in the past and so it was put into law to protect employees.

Also, if you climbed that ladder, fell off and hurt yourself, BT would be prosecuted under the Health & Safety at Work Act 1974 and could receive an unlimited fine. You could also sue them for negligence.

If common sense really did prevail in employees not doing stupid & dangerous things and employers having a safe workplace then there would be no need for any of the H&S rules. Unfortunately, employers will try to get away with whatever is cheaper and employees will still try to staple their heads to the wall etc. One example, person has an itchy nose and cant get deep enough to reach the offending area. He gets the electric drill he has been working with and sticks it up his nose. He took half of his face off. Not made up, 100% real and demonstrates why there is training, risk assessments & H&S rules!!!

I understand that completely, however in my case I would simply be knocking at the door, and then sitting down for an hour (on a seat nearest the door!).

SueC_2

Gettingtherequickly wrote: »

Now we

1. Make initial contact with client
2. Advise local office (office 1) of details of visit arranged
3. Advise office 2 of details at least 24 hours ahead of visit
4. Advise office 2 of arrival at visit
5. Advise office 2 of completion of visit

That doesn't sound hugely onerous to me.

I thought you were going to say there is now endless form-filling and written assessments involved, in which case I could have understood your irritation.

But to be honest, advising someone where you're going, when you're going there, and when you've left again, particularly in light of the fact that the 'where' is an unknown quantity and involves being in a confined non-public place with a complete stranger - well really, it is pretty common sense isn't it?

If I were in your role, and my workplace weren't asking for that information, I think I'd be voluntarily providing it to my partner / a friend / anyone, just so's someone knew where to start looking should I disappear. And yes, I really mean that.

In my dating days I did exactly the same when I was arranging to meet any man I didn't know particularly well. It was nothing to do with not trusting them, it was just taking the view of "better safe than sorry"!

In fact, thinking it through, it really is little different to the 'Let me know when you're home safely" that many of us hear from friends and relatives as we leave their houses.

baybeebug

These measure are there to keep both you and your service users safe.
Trust me anything can happen when you go to see someone and people can act very out of charater from having a very simple infection. I've had a lady lock me in her flat because her UTI had made her paranoid and she was seeing things.

Alot of domicilliary companies do these security check electronically now and it can result in a disciplinary action if not abided to.


Also can I say that Manual Handling course are vital in care situations as I have seen what poor moving and handling of people can do for example from dislocated shoulders to one of my ladies never walking till the day she died because someone dropped her!!

saintjammyswine

Gettingtherequickly wrote: »

I understand that completely, however in my case I would simply be knocking at the door, and then sitting down for an hour (on a seat nearest the door!).

But there are so many examples of people who have done exactly that and have never been seen since. To have a sytem of checking in/out etc is excellent practice. I know people who work in/own & run domiciliary care companies and they are forever trying to get their staff to check in/out. Not for timekeeping, snooping etc but because they want to know they are ok. I would feel thankful the employer cares enough.

baybeebug

saintjammyswine wrote: »

But there are so many examples of people who have done exactly that and have never been seen since. To have a sytem of checking in/out etc is excellent practice. I know people who work in/own & run domiciliary care companies and they are forever trying to get their staff to check in/out. Not for timekeeping, snooping etc but because they want to know they are ok. I would feel thankful the employer cares enough.

I agree it's nice to know you are being safeguarded as much as your service users.
As you say there are unfortunately to many reports of deaths and people going missing and not just in this industry.

dickydonkin

saintjammyswine wrote: »

The main reason for all of this is that something has happened in the past and so it was put into law to protect employees.

Also, if you climbed that ladder, fell off and hurt yourself, BT would be prosecuted under the Health & Safety at Work Act 1974 and could receive an unlimited fine. You could also sue them for negligence.

If common sense really did prevail in employees not doing stupid & dangerous things and employers having a safe workplace then there would be no need for any of the H&S rules. Unfortunately, employers will try to get away with whatever is cheaper and employees will still try to staple their heads to the wall etc. One example, person has an itchy nose and cant get deep enough to reach the offending area. He gets the electric drill he has been working with and sticks it up his nose. He took half of his face off. Not made up, 100% real and demonstrates why there is training, risk assessments & H&S rules!!!

Just to clarify your first point, any prosecution resulting from a ladder fall would likely be based on a breach of the Working at Height Regulations 2005 although HASWA and other regulations may come into the equation as well depending on the breach(es).

It is not Health & Safety Regulations that is the problem - it is the myriad of no win no fee 'solicitors' (I use that term very loosely) that has resulted in a compensation culture - resulting in increased insurance premiums.

The reality is that companies/organisations are using H&S as an excuse not to let people enjoy their lives.

Cancelled kids school adventure trips, sports days etc. citing H&s are topical examples.

The Daily Mail and other similar rags always blame H&S, but the real issue is fear of litigation following an injury and increased insurance premiums.

As for those on here being critical of H&S 'red tape' and in particularly training - how would you feel if an untrained scaffolder was allowed to construct scaffolding that subsequently collapsed on a family member.

What would their feelings be when it came to light that the underlying cause of the accident was lack of training on behalf of the scaffolder.

H&S training is there for a reason - particularly ladder/working at height training - one of the biggest causes of serious injury and death at work.

saintjammyswine

dickydonkin wrote: »

Just to clarify your first point, any prosecution resulting from a ladder fall would likely be based on a breach of the Working at Height Regulations 2005.

It is not Health & Safety Regulations that is the problem - it is the myriad of no win no fee 'solicitors' (I use that term very loosely) that has resulted in a compensation culture.

The reality is that companies/organisations are using H&S as an excuse not to let people enjoy their lives. Kids school adventure trips, sports days etc. are topical examples where the likes of the Daily Mail and other similar rags always blame H&S, but the real issue is fear of litigation following an injury and increased insurance premiums.

As for those on here being critical of H&S 'red tape' and in particularly training - how would you feel if an untrained scaffolder was allowed to construct scaffolding that subsequently collapsed on a family member.

What would their feelings be when it came to light that the underlying cause of the accident was lack of training on behalf of the scaffolder.

H&S training is there for a reason - particularly ladder/working at height training - one of the biggest causes of serious injury and death at work.

Agree with everything in this post although a breach of the Working at Height regs yes but the ability to prosecute and possible outcomes of the prosecution are set out in the HASAW Act 1974.