Health & Safety re loneworker

dickydonkin

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.

Blame the litigious culture we now live in and the plethora of no win no fee lawyers - I use the term lawyers very loosely.

I do agree though that some companies take H&S to the extreme. I am currently completing a project that involves taking the complicating elements and over zealousness out of H&S - which complies with the law, reduces documentation and is user friendly.

If a system is user friendly - then people will - use it!

A very simple H&S management system is so easy to implement. I also agree with SG in respect of manual handling courses.

I have seen people falling asleep out of boredom during a protracted course - where the person delivering the course will inevitably have an empty cardboard box and show the bored audience how to lift it 'correctly'.

Which is fine if you carry empty cardboard boxes all day - but not much use if you carry heavy sacks of cement or unwieldy items as the main part of your work.

It doesn't have to be that way.

The PAT testing is also another money making scheme for the many companies who provide this service. Some companies actually PAT test their electrical equipment annually! I accept that equipment that gets banged about like vacuum cleaners/hand tools may need checking more frequently, but a computer or printer that is never moved does not require PAT testing annually.

There is no legislation that defines how often equipment should be PAT tested.

All that said, the law is to protect workers and the guy Chris Grayling commissioned to have a look at our health and safety legislation (Professor Ragnar Löfstedt) has come to the conclusion that it is fine. There will be some minor legislation changes and removal of obscure regulations, but there will be no major changes to our core safety legislation.

Perhaps that is why the UK has one of the best workplace safety records in the world - despite ambulance chasing lawyers discrediting it and the likes of the Daily Mail mocking it with inaccurate and embellished reporting.

Rant over!

pug_in_a_bed

"lone working protection
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.'



has you oh been trained for the extra job he will be doing? In terms of the lone working issue their plan for phoning in sounds reasonable to me. The company should be putting lone worker risk assessments in place and making sure any extra training is also available.

pug_in_a_bed

dickydonkin wrote: »

Blame the litigious culture we now live in and the plethora of no win no fee lawyers - I use the term lawyers very loosely.

Absolutely agree with this, I manage the insurance claims in my job and the kind of spurious claims you get are unbelievable; a simple unavoidable accident like falling from a bike becomes a claim worth 1000's unless everything can be backed up with risk assessments, checks and so on.

It always interested me the way different injuries had a different cost - apparently chipped teeth are worth a fortune!

Weirdly, we've had only a single claim from our scottish colleagues in 5 years.

I do a lot of health and safety stuff now and its just about safeguarding everyone, yes it be excrucatingly boring but if you have the right systems in place then it can be simple.

dickydonkin

A lone worker should be no more at risk than someone who isn't working alone.

That is fine in theory - but is it really achievable?

There are many factors to consider with a lone worker. For example, do they have a pre-existing condition that may place them more at risk? Diabetes, heart conditions, pregnancy are examples.

Communication with and regular monitoring of the lone worker also need to be established and the task that will be undertaking while working alone.

Has the L/W been trained? Is he competent? Has s/he been told not to deviate from the task they will be undertaking such as attempting to repair a machine or using a ladder? Remember there are tasks that should not be carried out while working alone.

In the case of the driver, is he aware of the fire alarm system and evacuation process in the factory he will be delivering?

Each situation and person is different and should be assessed accordingly with precise details provided of what do to when entering the factory until leaving it.

Unfortunately as many organisations are cutting back on staff, this issue will become more frequent.

Just to add - a lot of people believe that it is illegal to work alone - it isn't - but precations must be put in place before L/W commences.

dandelionclock30

There was no lone working risk assessment done here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3R3-YwDZrzg

pug_in_a_bed

i bet there wasn't a working at height assessment either:rotfl: