Posted By Ron Young Oh the joys of working in such a rewarding profession....

Posted By AlB I am 100% behind the articles - we have to be sure, as a profession, that we do not degenerate into complete lack of common sense - Safety profession is not about controlling the smaller, tolerable risks (such as using a chair for goodness sake!!!), but address the real issues such as the working at height, exposure to hazardous substances etc. Do I need a risk assessment and method statement before I eat my lunch at the office - eating a hot pastie may burn my mouth and lead to severe burns, be careful when drinking water - danger of drowning!!!??

Posted By Mike Draper In the case of the second article posted by Martin I would question the competence of the inspector in question to conclude that the "probable severity" of an accident at a stile was a fatality. It may be a "possible" outcome, but is certainly not the probable outcome.

Posted By AlB Quite possibly I am being short sighted in my views, but I really don't see the need to ban firemen (who are amongst the best natural risk assessors we have in the UK - they assess risks at every call out they attend)from sitting on a reclining chair until thet have recieved a step by step instruction on how to use it. In my view that's going overboard on safety. The HSE are pushing for using common sense in safety and not to put bundles of red tape around very low hazard issues. What next? Risk Assessment and Mathod statements on how to use a ball point pen??

Posted By Dave Wilson Jonathan, Easy, you can't go to jail for having no common dog!

Posted By Lorraine Shuker I admit that on the surface the chair story seems lucicrous but apparantly this was prompted by a claim from a firefighter for whiplash when the chair came to its upright position too fast. So what is the employer to do? Ignore it and have a spate of ludicrous copy cat claims becuase they are disgruntled about their beds being taken away?

Posted By Lorraine Shuker Thats the trouble with the press AlB ~ they rarely give the full story.

Posted By Frank Hallett Sorry for the addendum folks, but I can't not do this one. I joined the FS in 1972 and there was "disgruntlement" then about the possibility of losing the beds! It resurfaced big time in Jan 1778 when we all went back to work after the worst 9 weeks that I can remember. There are valid reasons for keeping the beds and valid reasons for not keeping them. Trouble is, most of those reasons are not aired in an impartial way, and never have been. It's a classic case of mutually well-earned and perpetuated industrial mis-trust that is aggravated by facile comments that aren't relevant to the issue under discussion. If anyone wishes to start a debate about the FS systems of shift work, please do - but only if it's firmly founded in logic and impartial discussion. OK, now I'm the red dot in the middle of the target! Frank Hallett

Posted By Stupendous Man Frank, Shift systems in the FS - please, NO!!!! We will soon hear plenty more about shift change so let's keep the discussion free of it for the time being. Back to the original story, I have always worked on the basis that if it is an item I would not necessarily come across in the home (and as far as I am aware, not everyone has reclining lounge furniture!), then some form of instruction or training in its use would be appropriate. Of course this has to be proportional - a simple staff briefing may have sufficed on this occasion. Having said that, we must bear in mind that some employees, or professions are used to doing things in a certain way and I would tentatively suggest that fire fighters fall into this category. If a piece of equipment is not risk assessed, it does not go 'on the run'. We all know that attitudes are the most difficult things to change, and the most time consuming. Fire Services will not change overnight in their absolute application of risk assessment and training.

Posted By Raymond Rapp Frank - 1778 just after the Great Fire of London, were you involved in that as well? Ray

Posted By Stupendous Man Frank, I suppose I am trying to make the point that although we, as safety professionals, can see that training is proportional to the risk, there are others who are set in their ways and will expect to receive a 'full training course' whatever the subject. It is part of our job to be the voice of reason and appropriateness in order to avoid sensational media reports - but we have to apreciate that we can't change the attitudes of everyone overnight.

Posted By J Knight Hi Folks, Interesting debate really; biggest surprise is that the media rarely pays much attention to the full facts; who would have thought it? Richard makes a good point, as do other people, about training people in using equipment even if 'common-sense' suggests we shoudn't need to. Back in the nineties (this is the 1690s) I was working for an organisation which supports people with learning disabilities. The workplaces were essentially ordinary houses; so what training need is there for people whose work equipment is normal white goods, TVs, videos and so on? Well, perhaps none, but then what do you think about the day the manager came down from her office and found the member of staff poking the video with a bread knife? And of course, it was plugged in and powered up because the eject mechanism only works if the machine is turned on, dunnit? Now, if she had managed to kill herself, it could be that the beaks might have said 'that was her own fault', or they might have said 'lack of effective training'; it's a bit of a poser really. And no, I didn't recommend that we specifically instruct staff not to poke videos with breadknives; there are many creative ways to kill oneself using ordinary household gadgets, and its not our jobs to try and second-guess them all. We have to rely on electrical safety training in a general sense; she had had that but evidently didn't imagine that the insides of video recorders are full of electricity. But if I had decided that we needed to train staff specifically in using videos safely, imagine the headlines, John

Posted By J Knight Very true Lorraine; the funny thing about common-sense is that it's often so very very rare, John

Posted By J Knight I can't stop thinking about Lorraine's brief post; I thought the point of going into a shower was to get your hair wet, or am I missing something? John

Posted By Frank Hallett Glad to see that I've managed to inadvertantly provide a light-hearted line of thought [again] due to a common psycho problem - the writer should never proof-read their own stuff! And a brief history lesson too - where else could you get such quilaty? There is still a serious side to all the above, apart from the ability of irrelevant material insinuating itself into a thread. It has very little to do with "truth", "justice", "right or wrong", the concept of "reasonably practicable" and all the other terms that we believe are important. Journalists, like any other part of the "meijda" are continuously looking for ways of presenting the bland and mundane [that's me going to get fitted up then!] in a way that will generate viwers/readers/listeners etc and therefore raise the status/income of the publishing body and therefore the person who produced the item. This is why a body like IOSH has to respond to even apparently meaningless drivel with a serious message [though presented in the most appropriate way] when it is provided to such a large audience. If only the rebuttal or response got the same level of prominence as the original!! Frank Hallett

Posted By Mike Draper Even toothpicks have instructions ... what next, instructions printed on eggshells? If an arbitrary line in the sand is required, where should it be drawn? Surely not everything requires instructions for use?

Posted By Merv Newman Frank, I think your problem might have something to do with "delerium tremens". Maybe not. I see I was beaten to it on the true date of the great fire. Blast it. To RA or not to RA ? Just got home from visiting a factory in Lyons. Taking a few photos to prep a management training course. Came across a group of about six people trying to remove a shelf from warehouse racks. Started by using a forklift truck, then the shelf got stuck between the uprights so they were simultaneously lifting/pulling/banging on it with hammers. I mentioned to the safety manager that, in the UK, we would have risk assessed the operation. "Oh really ? Why ?" or, if you like : "C'est vrai ? pourquoi ?" I'll let you know if the photo is any good. Merv