Posted By Tony abc jprhdnMurphy Quite simple Steve, we allow too many amateurs into our profession. It winds me up too. I often hear comments like " here is the elf ' n safety" and everybody is terrified when I walk onto site. I then get talking to the lads and they find out I am just like everybody else. They then relate the horror stories about previous safety guys who have thrown lads off site for not wearing a high vis vest, even though it was not needed. This goes on and on and sadly the big builders with their yellow and red card system have created a fear of Health & Safety to the point where lads on site dont know whether they are coming or going. This is often repeated in low risk areas which gives rise to the theory that the world has gone mad. A case in point is the recent abandonment of the party to end all parties held every year in Mathew Street Liverpool. This often goes on without too much incident but this year Health & Safety has took the blame. I would love somebody to explain to me what is meant by that stance. Do we really want a life without risks? We would never venture out of the house. The answer lies in proper training for H & S professionals allied to real life experience. I met a safety guy last week and we got talking about different things and it transpires that he was appointed as Safety rep for his company cos he was the only one who could use a computer.He didnt have a clue. As the conversation went on it was obvious that he was an amateur in every sense of the word and he has a high profile position in my industry. I am livid but cannot change it. Until we all resolve this the world will stay a Health & Safety minefield and everybody will use it as an excuse.

Posted By Tony abc jprhdnMurphy Is it near Liverpool?

Posted By Max Bancroft How the pendulum swings: here's an interesting quote from a USA local paper in 1882: Winfield Courier: One of the coal haulers of the Caney Valley Coal Company broke his neck while hauling coal to Grenola. No coal mine can ever prosper till it has from five to seven men killed in the work.

Posted By Alan Hoskins A similar story has been in the press before. So what is this entertainer to do now? If everyone took the same view, their act would effectively be killed off... Also, Tony - not a good idea to stay at home - most accidents happen in the home! Alan

Posted By Tony abc jprhdnMurphy Which brings me to another point. Since most people die in old peoples homes how many riddors do they file? And why has the HSE failed to act?

Posted By Doug Russell I heard the piece on the Today programme on Radio 4 and agree banning balloons because of the remote risk is silly. But I'd have been more confident if either the entertainer or one of the two presenters actually showed some awareness of the potential seriousness of latex allergy. It can cause serious respiratory distress or even anaphylactic shock, not just some minor itching of the skin, as the story implied.

Posted By Steve B Doug, I totally agree with what you are saying, yes there is a serious side to any hazard. I have said it many times on here and elsewhere that when these reporters and so-called safety practitioners make statements, they should be made to quantify the risk and back it up with the relevant legislation that they are referring to. But as am sure we are all aware of "bonkers Conkers" sells papers. Regards Steve

Posted By Chris Packham The question of latex allergy was discussed at the 2nd World Congress on Work-related and Environmental Allergy in May in Weimar, Germany. The evidence is that around 90% of sensitisation occurs from respiratory uptake. This means that the latex protein molecules must become airborne and inhaled. Since these proteins are extremely "sticky" this will only happen when they are attached to some form of vehicle, e.g. powder as used in gloves. Whilst the anaphlyactic reaction can be extremely serious, the epidemiology shows it to be actually not very common, and generally causes nothing more than some discomfort. The really serious reactions are actually quite rare. Much more common is an anaphylactic reaction to peanuts (so why are they not banned from Tesco I hear you say!) To elicit an allergic reaction would also require someone to have actual contact with the latex protein molecules. It is extremely unlikely that a child at a party such as this would have sufficient contact to react. If a child was already allergic to this extent the parents would almost certainly be aware of this and take the appropriate action, just as they would were their child to be allergic to nuts. If you just look around you it is virtually impossible to avoid contact on a day-to-day basis with natural rubber latex. It is only when the proteins are in a bioavailable form (i.e. released from the rubber) and in sufficient quantity that the reaction occurs. Otherwise most latex allergic persons would have to live in a completely isolated plastic tent! I have come across "latex free" environments. It usually does not take long to find some latex that has not been identified. However, since this usually has never caused any problem, where is the concern? Chris

Posted By GARRY WIZZ It is yet another example, person has done the courses, best of intentions but they have no practical experience and are completely unable to generate a sensible risk assessment. This supermarket will have a big team working on H&S, spending considerable sums. I would sack the lot for failing to be competent. A simple piece of research would have shown that there was no need to ban a balloon. As said previous, there are lots amateurs in this profession. I do on occasions view some of the posts on this site and come to the conclusion, if you need to ask that question then you should not hold a position of responsibility within the H&S field or you should attend training. Garry

Posted By David Bannister I was part of the organising team for a family fun day yesterday: we had a clown doing balloon modelling and tight rope walking, we had small sweeties, we had some steps at the venue, we had some oldies and some young 'uns, we had muddy grass, we had a BBQ, we had wet sponge throwing, we had golf putting... and a great time was had by all. The risks were recognised and well controlled. The only intervention I made on the day was to re-route an electrical extension cable to avoid a trip hazard (yes there was a RCD). The moral? Sensible risk management allows fun to be still had. Shame on the killjoys.

Posted By Shane J I think a lot of amateurs miss the whole point. Health and safety is not about banning unsafe practises and materials. It's about identifying and controlling the hazards. Anything can be done, so long as it's done safely

Posted By Shane J I'm not sure "newcomers to the profession" are entirely to blame. I would guess that it's employers, clients and Insurance companies over reacting to previous claims and being OTT with future measures. These people with no H&S background using H&S as a "fall guy" to cover their assess.

Posted By Pugwash What a refreshing thread this is. It would be great to get to the bottom of some of these apparently "elf and safety gorn mad" stories to see what led to the decisions which were taken and if/how h+s practitioners were involved.

Posted By Chris Packham Kevin In my experience the problem is to know when you don't know. In my particular field I see many situations where action has been taken with the best of intentions but which has been counter-productive. This can happen even with a highly qualified health and safety expert, simply because they are unaware of some of the complexities of the situation. I have a slogan that I always try to keep in mind. This is: The danger arises when you don't know that you don't know! Chris

Posted By Robert K Lewis Garry Have to say that if a company has got into this position it is clearly not managing the competence of the people working for it and therefore the Management team actually need the P45 despatching asap. Bob

Posted By Naz Nathu The problem in my opinion here is not the fact that elf and safety has gone mad. It is the world that has gone mad. The sad fact nowadays is that we live in a culture where people see any injury as a cash register and firms are too scared to pay out. If a child had turned up and developed a reaction to the latex, Tesco would have been sued successfully. If you want risks to be managed correctly in the way they should, sort out the issues in our law courts first.

Posted By francis mason Folks I like you heard the Radio 4 today programme on the matter of banning balloon at Tesco's. I would disagree that it is only "amateurs" making these decisions. I was trained in managing safety by a IOSH accredited trainer in my last company. I am afraid to say that he demonstrated a complete lack of reason and judgement over what is acceptable risk. In the progress of the course, the usual tabloid stories were examined ie conkers etc and he defended the incredibly stupid actions that were going on in schools at the time over banning this traditional pastime. The chap even instigated a witch hunt over staff who had indulged in lunchtime conker games in the tearoom! We suffered a plethora of idiot assessments including looking for staff who may be sitting near AC outlets. Risk? fan blades breaking off the system? No, risk was assessed as potential stiff necks. Overall, the point of the training was missed by many of the staff, who because of this situation. Many of them laughed the whole thing off and people became dismissive of any attempt to look at risk. On this issue, I managed a team of medical engineers who faced considerable biological, electrical and travelling risk every day. I think that IOSH should make sure that their accredited trainers are singing from the same hymn sheet!

Posted By John J I'm not sure there are any stupid questions. Only ill informed answers. On the whole I would encourage people to raise questions but for others to ask themselves would they, if giving the advice face to face, be willing to back it up. These are just technical posts for advice not the ideological discussion type threads, John

Posted By Tony abc jprhdnMurphy Correct But you should know the hierarchy for finding out FACT

Posted By Mart Correct. FACT