Health & Safety re loneworker

baybeebug

dickydonkin wrote: »

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.

Or don't put the barriers around or the cap end on and someone walks into the ends and scalping themselves, I've seen that happen it's not nice.

Sambucus_Nigra

Gettingtherequickly wrote: »

It is emotional support and occasionally form filling, so not exactly lifethreatening. Previously, we contacted client initially to make appointment for visit and then, if it was felt necessary at the time, arrange for regular session, same time, same place. Details were then given to local office.

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

And of we have not called within 1hr & 10 mins of arrival to confirm leaving, we will be called and if no response, it will be a 999 call.

Like I say, appreciate the need for Health & Safety, but feel it is unfair that the client is expected to trust us, but we not trust them.

Halle-fec-king-lulia. After years and years of trying to get employers to do this someone actually is.

Sambucus_Nigra

scheming_gypsy wrote: »

it's true... anything health and safety makes me lose the will to live. Manual handling courses and everything needs to be PAT tested before you can plug it in. What happened to common sense and not being a complete tool? if a drawer is open, don't walk into it and watch where you're going.
Years ago i was working at BT and building services wouldn't let anybody borrow a ladder unless they'd been on the ladder climbing course.

I used to visit construction employers for a living; and you would be surprised the number that were cripped for life just through accidents that were not caused by a lack of common sense but just a lack of H&S on site. I asked a guy once to sign a form and only then noticed he had no fingers [on either hand]...and another fell in between scaffold planks and the building and broke his back...twice. Proper H&S is there for a reason. H&S such as Sainsbury's not putting cardboard boxes at the end of their aisles because it's a fire risk [and yes, I've been told that only recently] is not proper H&S.

baybeebug

Sambucus_Nigra wrote: »

Halle-fec-king-lulia. After years and years of trying to get employers to do this someone actually is.

There's actually quite a few do this or do it electronically with pda's most dom care companies are doing it.
I agree though it needs to be done.
Strange that this should be coming up on the 25th anniversary of Suzy Lamplugh disappearance.

dickydonkin

saintjammyswine wrote: »

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.

The HAWA being an act of parliament of course the backbone of all H&S legislation, but the poster did refer to falling off ladders which potentially would be a specific breach of the WAH regs.

What we have now though is a hybrid of EU directives as well as our own legislation which in some cases overlap - it is bad enought getting your head around UK legislation without having EU directives complicating things - chemicals/substances being a prime example.

Hopefully Lord Young's proposals will simplify things - although I have my doubt because legislation will simply not allow it!

Savvy_Sue

Gettingtherequickly wrote: »

It is emotional support and occasionally form filling, so not exactly lifethreatening. Previously, we contacted client initially to make appointment for visit and then, if it was felt necessary at the time, arrange for regular session, same time, same place. Details were then given to local office.

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

And of we have not called within 1hr & 10 mins of arrival to confirm leaving, we will be called and if no response, it will be a 999 call.

Like I say, appreciate the need for Health & Safety, but feel it is unfair that the client is expected to trust us, but we not trust them.

It sounds eminently reasonable to me.

Gettingtherequickly wrote: »

We have no problem with the actions, and yes, there is always a risk, but common sense needs to prevail. What is the situation if all the necessary calls are made (and for drivers, it would probably be from safety of vehicle) and then the volunteer using public transport is injured, because someone has seen them with a phone?

The difference would be that on your way home, on public transport, you wouldn't be 'working' / 'volunteering'. It's not about your overall risk levels, it's about your risk levels while with the client.

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!).

And if the client manipulates you away from the door, eg only has the chair furthest into the room clear when you arrive and steers you into that, or moves a chair into the doorway after you've sat down etc.

You may feel it's all completely OTT, but you won't feel that when something goes wrong. You rely on common sense, gut instinct etc: what if one day that lets you or one of your fellow volunteers down? What if one day a 'warning' about a change in a client's state of mind isn't passed on to you, and you arrive to see someone in a very different frame of mind to what you were expecting?

I'd say this is just best practice.

SarEl

Volunteers should be professionals - not amateurs. If having due regard for their own safety and the safety of others "isn't what they want to do" , then it is the volunteers that have their priorities wrong, not the charity. I work with many, many fine volunteers who are utter professionals - and I cannot think of one who whinges about their "employer" looking out for them and their safety. Of course you will find people who think that health and safety isn't as important as doing whatever you want to do. You will also find people who think child labour is ok as long as it means their new dress costs less; or that it is ok to exploit migrant labour by paying less than the minimum wage, becasue they're "illegal". Some people can justify just about anything and then scream at employers for being unfair if they do something they don't happen to agree with, even though it is perfectly lawful. You are doing an important and vital role - you deserve the protections that paid staff would get. And you are getting them. It would seem that your new employers value you somewhat. Why knock it?

dickydonkin

SarEl wrote: »

Volunteers should be professionals - not amateurs. If having due regard for their own safety and the safety of others "isn't what they want to do" , then it is the volunteers that have their priorities wrong, not the charity. I work with many, many fine volunteers who are utter professionals - and I cannot think of one who whinges about their "employer" looking out for them and their safety. Of course you will find people who think that health and safety isn't as important as doing whatever you want to do. You will also find people who think child labour is ok as long as it means their new dress costs less; or that it is ok to exploit migrant labour by paying less than the minimum wage, becasue they're "illegal". Some people can justify just about anything and then scream at employers for being unfair if they do something they don't happen to agree with, even though it is perfectly lawful. You are doing an important and vital role - you deserve the protections that paid staff would get. And you are getting them. It would seem that your new employers value you somewhat. Why knock it?

Spot on.

Lord Robens brought about a brilliant piece of legislation that is as relevant today as when it was introduced in the seventies.

Whether a workplace is an oil refinery or a corner shop - 1000 employees or 5 - section 2 of the act in particular, places the onus on the employer to ensure his employees (and volunteers which would be covered in section 3)are not placed at unacceptable risk during working activities.

Other regulations and EU directives were subsequently developed for higher risk working activities such as working at height, control of noise, asbestos etc, however, my opinion for what it's worth is that it would have been so much simpler to have implemented ACOP's and guidance rather than introduce additional regulations for higher risk activities.

But we are where we are and people who attempt to conform with the myriad of safety regulations get hammered for doing so.

OP - You should be pleased that your employer is ensuring that your safety is paramount and it is hardly an inconvenience being in constant communication with someone who is monitoring your lone working activities.

It would be a very similar procedure if you were working alone in a fixed location - don't knock it - it isn't ridiculous!

DVardysShadow

Bigmoney2 wrote: »

Once initial assessments are done its quite easy to use the same template for all.

I would go one further. Do a base assessment for all locations to be kept on file once and itemise the assumptions.

Individual assessments can then be completed on a simple form with a tick list that all assumptions are met and space to address any variances.

Tracey1973

Hi just wanting to knowthe rights and wrongs for my husband please.He works as a hgv shunter driver on continental shifts,starting as of next week(he will be on nights)
when on the night shift they will be expected to go to there usual factory where they are usually unloaded,but from next week they will after to go into the factory on there own as all staff will have gone and they will have to unload themselves in a fridgeration which they are not used to doing.

They have been told they will be provided with a mobile phone(providing they get signal)and must phone another factory that they have arrived ok,then when they have unloaded phone again to confirm.Bear in mind these factorys are a few miles apart,if they dont recieve a call from the driver after 2hours!!! to say unloaded they will raise the alarm.surley this is a health and safety issue??? what happens if they fall before the 1st call....or in the fridge without correct clothing i might add.

My husband does not want to refuse because he cant afford to lose his job,but cant afford to lose his life either! to top it all theyw ill not get extra money for doing the extra job! HELP PLEASE