Posted By steviezenga Yes Struan, it's increasingly a problem. My Clients are in construction, I think they are becoming increasingly aware that they are ill-equipped to fulfil their duties and, feeling vulnerable, thrash around with "safety initiatives" which they consider gives them an audit trail of tick boxes to show they've "done something about health and safety". It's wasteful of people's time and resources, largely ineffective and sometimes counter-productive, but as you indicate, because of commercial pressure, most people seem to go along with it.

Posted By Calum R Cameron I agree whole-heartedly. Wouldn't it be nice if the HSE targeted more clients instead of PC's. This is especially a problem in the refurbishment of retail outlets such as the large supermarkets we are involved in. They put us, the PC under enormous pressure in terms of not allowing space and time etc and not assisting the PC in its duty to look after joe public by closing the store for certain works. Its an immpossible situation where the best site managers can be compromised on matters of safety. Nice thread by the way-some good subject matter for a change. Cheers!!!

Posted By Mike Miller I have vetted contractors for many years who have in fairness provided very good RAMS and health & safety policies. Problem is that when they turn up on site which is a total permit to work, I ask the operatives questions on what it is they are here to do before issuing the permit. Many cannot tell you what is in the method statement or the explanation is way off line. I find that very disturbing because it is obvious that they have had no input into its making. On the other hand I agree that there is an arguement for bullying in some cases. cheers mike

Posted By Raymond Rapp The problem appears to be that too many people do not really health and safety principles and therefore they become essentially reactive. This in turn leads to the projection of blame, denial, mistrust and other pathogenic factors. I agree with the comment that the HSE need to become aware of what is happening within some industries. The prescriptive nature of health and safety has lead to 'paper safety' initiatives, where some people think because they are ticking boxes everything is ok. Good health and safety should be as much about working and co-operating with one another as it is presenting method statements, risk assessments and so on. Regards Ray

Posted By John Murgatroyd There are going to be three sides to this (primarily). The client, the contractor and the operative. The client will want to see that the contractor is H&S aware, with proof of training and their H&S policy (etc). The contractor will have had the operatives trained, usually at considerable expense in terms of both time and money, and will have had to produce various risk assessments and then the "method statement" for the particular job. The operative/s will have had the training, they will have sat through the lectures, seen the videos and then had various practical tests. They will then be driving about with the vehicle stuffed to the gills with various items of safety gear as well as tools for the job. Eye protection. Ear protection. Head protection. If at height, they will have restraints to wear as well.... Some clients will not allow workers onto a site wearing clothes that leave body parts uncovered (ie: shorts and T shirt), some will not allow workers without head protection. Most don't state these restrictions until the day of work, although they're coming around to prior notification. The operative/s show-up on site and look at the job...they see that for the work to proceed safely they will have to restrict access to the area for a while (lifting or dropping risk etc) so they ask for those restricions, to be refused because it would slow production. So, the guys leave site. They then get it in the neck from both sides. My sympathy is with the guys doing the job. The risk assessments are vanilla, the method statements frequently ridiculous. The guy doing the actual work gets it in the neck from both sides and gets no credit from either side. I think that both client and the firm contracted to do the work need to do a lot more to co-ordinate their H&S policies, especially as they have differing primary needs. They BOTH need to agree that H&S takes preference over production and convenience, then they need to convince the guy/s doing the job of that (uphill route number 1)