Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By ken mosley
On 19th December 2007 the HSE issued a press release entitled "HSE warns of the danger of not segregating the public from construction sites, following death of a member of public".
At the present time,all across UK the 'Decent Homes' programme has construction works being carried out in thousands of properties with the tenants resident.
Sect.3(1) of HSWA and reg.13(6)of CDM 07 requires contractors to keep the public and unauthorised persons out of the site. 20 years ago LAs and housing assns decanted the tenants whilst the work was done, thus complying with the top of the hierarchy of risk control ie. remove the risk. Now for commercial reasons tenants remain in-situ, with the work done around them. Contractors are required to manage issues over which they cannot exercise control, for example operatives will wear dust masks and ear protection where required, but a contractor cannot make the occupier wear the same or insist they leave the premises. There is also anecdotal evidence of tenants and their visitors being injured.
Is a blind eye being turned at the behest of commercialism or am I progressively becoming more cynical with advancing years?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
Ken
I suppose this will continue until such time as the HSE investigate a serious accident/fatality of a tenant and make an issue of the situation. Like you I have seen vaste increases in inhabited major modifications and similar reductions in decantations. I would guess voids targets are at the root of this from both government target pressures and commercial imperatives.
Cynical - Maybe. Honest Assessment - Definitely.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ron Hunter
Ken,
Thanks for posting - I think this issue is long overdue for discussion.
Yes, as CDM Clients, Housing Associations and LAs are no doubt getting away with far too much.
The scope and scale of CONCURRENT works being carried out in modernisation/energy efficiency works of existing housing stocks can include replacement of: new heating, plumbing, glazing, external doors, kitchen units, bathroom suites and ventilation coring - way too much for anyone to control whilst tenants (and other visitors)are allowed access. It is entirely contrary to CDM principles for the contractor to be left to "manage" this, and it would appear that CDM-Cs are not effectively challenging this risk area either.
There are incidences of serious injury to MOPs, including serious falls (through holes in floors) but I do agree that (sadly) it will probably take a fatality to at least have this practice challenged by the enforcers.
Many Housing Associations etc. will of course say that they no longer have spare 'decant' capacity due to significant uptake in "right to buy" initiatives. In my opinion, that is not a reasonable excuse. Those creating the risks must accept responsibility.
It is hard not to be cynical.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By ken mosley
Ron,
Thanks to you and Bob for the response.
I am not convinced that a serious accident or even a fatality would necessarily change things. The likely outcome would be that the contractor would be prosecuted for the immediate cause of the incident with no action to address the root cause.
My cynicism is not a finite quality.
Ken
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ron Hunter
My own recent discussions with local HSE Inspectors suggest that they would look closely at the role and impact of all CDM Duty Holders, and whilst I reserve the right to maintain what I consider to be a healthy degree of cynicism, I do take some comfort from those discussions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.