Posted By clairel Now this is a serious question and my intention is not to cause argument - although sadly I'm sure it will. Am I the only professional who thinks things are just going too far and getting way out of hand? Background is I am an ex-enforcer and now consultant, so I have a lot of experience in ivestigating accidents and do not intend to belittle the outcome of accidents. However, my opinion is that although risks should be managed, risk inevitably remains in life and work. More and more I feel frustrated by things like contractor questionnaires that require over the top certification and documentation. Insurance claims creating a culture of no one being held responsible for their own carelessness. etc etc. Like I said I believe in managing risk but can't help feeling that it is going too far - mainly due to insurance companies placing riduculous restrictions and less experienced people misinterpreting the guidance. The result of this over zealousness is - IMO- that people will start back lashing against all health and safety. Small scale construction and maintenance jobs are coming to a standstill because of the paperwork. It feels like the system will implode one day and that the reputation of the profession can only deteriorate. I am frustrated to the point that I am now looking at side stepping into another profession. So before I leave (it will be a while, I'll have to do some retraining) I'd like to know if I am alone voice in this profession or whether others feel the same.

Posted By Saz G I agree with both posts above, it is on our hands to simplify (most of us anyway) and make H&S Management Systems more effective and less onerous. What MD is going to moan if you can A) Take up less time with unecessary paper-work and B) Implement more practical solutions that control risk more effectively.

Posted By Neil R I don't agree in the slightest, insurance companies are to blame for the fear of liability culture, but H&S in general does not go to far at all. There is a safe and risk free way of doing everything but it takes time and effort to find it, some companies can not be bothered finding it so unsafe situations, accidents and deaths occur. Schemes like CHAS are great in that accredited companies have demonstrated they have an effective management system and mechanisms exist to ensure safety hows that going to far exactly?

Posted By Edward Shyer ClaireL I would wager that there are no companies out there that do not carry out manual handling tasks on a daily basis.

Posted By Raymond Rapp Claire In short, yes. I sometimes wonder whether I am alone on this subject (apparently not thank God) because some of the posts on this forum leave me gobsmacked. I also think that too many people do not properly understand the concept of risk and the consequences of over zealous risk management. I am also seriously concerned about the way our industry is regulated, or not, as may be the case. I think the judiciary leave a lot to be desired as well. Our whole industry is becoming reactive rather than proactive. However, not sure what the answer is but I feel we slipping into an abyss. ps Claire - I hope you re-consider leaving the industry. Ray

Posted By holmezy Claire, its a common frustration that we share. There are many goods points you raise regarding the influence that insurance companies have on the amount of paperwork. I'm firmly in the camp that believes that "pieces of paper don't stop accidents" however, doing the "right and sensible thing" may do. Its a difficult balancing act, with the insurance companies (or jobsworths) demanding reams of paper, that in all honesty may not be relevant to the actual job, nor ever get further than the recipients desk weighing heavily on one side, with "sensible and practical" advice given by H+S bods desperately trying to counterbalance on the other. I'm certainly not in the job to be a paper pusher with lots of RA's that occupy file after file just in case the insurance company (or whoever) wants to see a RA for a skilled tradesman hitting a nail with a hammer. There are trivial and insignificant risks that we should be accepting "could" cause a serious accident however in 99.9% of cases won't. CHAS is an excellent example of a great idea gone wrong (ish). Why do we need so much paper and form filling to carry out minor works, when the same amount of info allows someone else to carry out a major project? (Not filled any forms in for a few years so sense may have prevailed, but I doubt it!)There is an obsession that seems to require multitudes of bits of paper to prove we are safe and proficient. Slighty off track but hey ho... I know of a builder who is extremely capable, extremly educated with degrees in construction, affiliated or a member of a plethora of guilds, societys etc. His (10 man) company built a fantastic building to a very high standard a few years ago. It needs a bit of maintaining at present, nothing major, just a few tiles replacing, bit of paint etc etc but some jobswoth wont even consider him for the job because he hasn't got an NVQ in bricklaying???? We need to get back to sensible risk management and a measured approach, however I think it will be a long time before the majority of decision makers, ie insurance companies accept that we will always have a degree of risk, I can't see the stranglehold grip weakening. There is another thread around at the moment entitled "Are we doing ourselves out of a job?" and I think a big part of the job is educating and changing people, however whilst there is a requirement to supply reams of paperwork, we will still have work to do even if its not work we should be doing! So after my little rant (feel lots better now...thanks), I agree with you! No offence meant to insurance companys or schemes like CHAS, just lighten up a bit. If it means getting the solicitors involved to decide what is a risk and whats not, then that would be a step in the right direction. I dont think it will happen though because there are too many £££££ to be lost. Holmezy

Posted By Tabs Big companies and insurers CAN be made to change though, I know because I have done it here. These requests and demands come from somewhere, and as we pragmatic people move into those jobs we can change them. I am regularly the client and rarely place anything other than reasonable requirements on contracts. Our profession must encourage pragmatism by leading by example - if you don't like a certain certification system, then don't insist on the use of it - and resist when people around you do. We still use ladders. We also have made-to-measure platforms. We don't insist everyone tailors themselves to our standards, as long as theirs are appropriate for the job they are charging for. Bad insurance advice is usually cheaper than the good - maybe it is more about price, yet again?

Posted By DJohnson Yes, and I am leaving. I don't tell any new friends that I am a H&S practitioner because it's too embarrassing, I tell them I'm an engineer, which was my original trade anyway. In my opinion the whole plot has gone wrong due to insurance companies rather than the courts (but they don't help) that are forcing the issue and they have now got employers running scared. There is little we in the industry can do to change this other than all join insurance companies. Have you noticed how we streamlined all the H&S legislation in 1974 with "The Act", but now it's got all bloated again. Time for another clear out and go back to the Act as the only piece of legislation and all the other guff is marked only as guidance. Gone now, bye.

Posted By GeoffB4 Quote: I don't agree in the slightest, insurance companies are to blame for the fear of liability culture, but H&S in general does not go to far at all. It's a fact, a given and an absolute with numerous examples to quote. However Neil R, I suspect you wouldn't want to listen. If you do I'll gladly relate a typical tale about an insurance assessor assessing a site.

Posted By Edward Shyer Clairel, After reading your humorous reply I have reread your original posting and I thus comment. I agree that you do not intend to cause argument but unfortunately i believe you are also correct that it will. As to things going too far and getting way out of hand then on this we will be in disagreement. Things are not ideal but as to being way out of hand I would say no not yet. Insurance companies cannot be held responsible for insurance claims as my belief is that people usually make an insurance claim against the insurance Company not the other way round. How can insurance companies be creating a culture of no one being held responsible for their own carelessness. I would agree that ridiculous restrictions placed by insurance companies do have an impact on our profession. However the back lashing against health and safety has been going on for many years now and I cannot see this changing in the foreseeable future. Having said all this it would be a pity to lose anyone from this profession and it would be a sad day if you persued this course. regards Ted

Posted By Edward Shyer Clairel, So it boils down to that old chestnut money again. Regards Ted

Posted By SteveD-M Wow...took me longer to read all this than the latests injury claim submission...lol Gary whilst I agree with mosty of what you say I can't agree with comment on CHAS. It is pre qualification and therefore you probably wouldn't have got the contract without it! I agree with the comment that some safety professionals spend more time behind a pc than out on the ground. I visited one company (Tunneling) where the safety advisor hadn't been to any of the new contract sites and they had been running for 2 months...When I suggested I do it 'I was just creating a job for myself'... Claims..mmm..Yes I agree that some insurance companies are very risk averse. I would give them time tho', some have just realised that most of their clients need risk assessments!! Most of the problems are caused by people getting hold of a little bit of information and using it to their own ends - not allowing hot drinks at desks (Which translated was - use the vending machines I've paid for) etc. People are people and so long as we have people in the chain we will always have a battle getting the 'right' message. Bring on a H&S version terminator!!! :-)

Posted By Neil R I am frankly amazed at the responses on this thread, why do any of you work in H&S? if you hate it that much why don't you leave and let somebody else have the job, somebody with a positive attitude? especially the person who said they are embarrassed of their job title, you are a disgrace to the profession. Streamlined H&S can only work in an environment where a positive safety culture exists, however with safety personnel with such negative attitudes such as yourselves then no wonder theres always negativity towards safety and no doubt a poor safety culture. Are we going to far? 228 people died last year! We are not going far enough!

Posted By clairel If I may respond to the last two posts please. As I said I used to investigate accidents for the HSE and therEfore I am not belittling accidents or the fact that we should seek to prevent death and injury. I have seen more tragedy, pain and suffering than I care to remember. However: 1- I dispute that carrying out assessments on making a cup of tea will prevent death and serious injury. I also dispute that the reams of paperwork being requested by some will prevent death and serious injury. What will prevent death and serious injury is manging SIGNIFICANT risks to a sensible level. 2- It is not possible to prevent all death and serious injury and if you think that is achievable then it is you that are sadly disillusioned. 3- I think that is a really low comment to bring up Hillsborough. A tragic event caused by mishandling of a situation by the Police. Of course such an situation should be prevented from occuring again. To try to claim that we are saying otherwise is insulting. It seems that there are a minority of people who think that becuse some of us are saying it has gone to far that we are saying that nothing more should be done to prevent deaths and serious injuury. That is nonsense, we are saying our efforts should be directed sensibly. So I am intending leaving the profession. Not becuase some of you think I am a dsigrace to the profession or becuase I don't think that I do a good job - many of my clients insist on me and not another consultant becuase they appreciate my down to earth and realistic approach. I am leaving becuase it saddens me to see something that should be so postive turning so negative. I get depressed some days when faced with such overwhelming lunacy from so many emerging trends in so called management. However, you're stuck with me whilst I retrain for the next couple of years!!! IOSH MANAGEMENT - I HOPE YOU ARE READING THIS AND CAN SEE JUST HOW MANY PROFESSIONSAL THINK THE SITUATION HAS TO CHANGE BECAUSE THINGS ARE GOING TOO FAR AND STEPPING INTO RISK AVERSION INSTEAD OF RISK MANAGEMENT. NOW IS THE TIME TO TAKE A STAND!!

Posted By EI Claire good response.......good thread. Totally agree with your thoughts and comments. IMO, paperwork and competence levels are seriously hindering the professions ability to continue improving performance and working practices. This creates a lot of frustration with many of us in the profession. PAPERWORK: couple of responses referring to CHAS. Just another good idea turned into a money making machine. I note that some posts are positive for the scheme. Do they have a vested interested in the scheme? Do they earn fees for preparing contractor submissions for approval? Leave that to everyone's imagination. COMPETENCE: reviewed RAMS from a sub-contractor on site this morning. Lifting operation, simple lift really. RAMS 36 pages long. 6 pages of this are the risk assessment. It has been approved by the sub-contractor site manager and competent H&S assistance. Identifies "undermining existing structures" as a hazard. Lifting equipment will be approx. 120M from any structure but underneath 400KV powerlines. Powerlines identified in RA? Leave that to everyone's imagination. Do have some sympathy with the insurers. They are a business and need to make business decisions to minimise loss. EI

Posted By Raymond Rapp I don't think highlighting death and injury rates does anything to add value to this debate. We are all striving to reduce accidents and incidents in the workplace. I could of course highlight road deaths (2,500) and serious injuries (30,000) per year. What is anyone doing about those tragic figures? Personally, for me health and safety has lost it way because of too many regulations, which are not properly enforced, violators are normally only caught when there has been a serious accident. The Courts do not apply realistic penalties on companies or their complicit directors. SMEs find compliance difficult or at least many are not willing to implement health and safety laws for whatever reasons. The industry needs a proper review of existing legislation, its effectiveness and the levels of compliance particularly by SMEs. Parliament are all too keen to introduce new laws without investigating the effectiveness of current laws.

Posted By clairel Are you actually reading what I write or just putting your own interpretation on it? I don't RA chairs and making tea. The problem is that an increasing amount of people do (including people who post on here). I also don't wade through reams of paper if I can help it. I encourage my clients to have paperwork that is sufficient but brief (where possible). However they are being forced to produce more and more paprework to get contracts. Again you miss the point (deliberately?). We are not disputing that a decrease in accident rates is good and in part attributable to legislation, guidance and more empahsis on H&S. However, that does not mean that we haven't strayed from the path by putting too much emphasis on paperwork and because too many people have entered the profession with the idea that risk should be avoided instead of being managed. To say that insurance companies can't be held responsible because they are in the business of making money is akin to saying we can't hold the bankers responible (in part) for the current financial crisis becuase they were in the business of making money too(I think some should go to jail). I believe that everyone has a right to go home from work alive, uninjured and in good health. However, I also accept that accidents do happen and there comes a point where a business will not be able to make money if it is forced to eliminate all risk. I did some research 10 yaers ago for something I was writing and found that 500 people die every year falling down stairs. What are we to do? Ban stairs? Also note that being on the contraceptive pill is a risk but more women would die from the risk of pregnancy and childbirth than the side effects of the pill. If there are too many restrictions more businesses will go bankrupt. With higher unemployment there will be a higher suicide risk. Managing risk is a balance and I'm suggesting we're tipping it too far.

Posted By Neil R What is the problem with the amount of legislation? The Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, places duties on the employer to ensure the health and safety of their employees. It doesn't give any advice or requirements on how to do that though does it? There is legislation dealing with many different topics, you only need comply with the ones that affect you! Its really simple, i get really annoyed with people who seem to think its all too much. Example: Employer- duty to protect employee Employee- needs to use power tools in their job. Employer- Comply with PUWER Employee- doesn't get hurt It's only as complicated as you make it.

Posted By andy.c. I have followed this thread and at the risk of needing PPE have decided to add a grass roots view, i do not have degree's, diploma's or high level NVQ'S in H&S and it is not my primary role, however i am not a complete numpty and have worked in the same environment for 25 years, with my present employer i am involved in many area's of H&S mainly as part of a team (including the OH dept), in analysis of accident stats, reviewing the R/A's concerned and finding practical solutions to improve the methods used. where do i start, Neil R "Risk Free" surely there is a risk attached to everything we do? Jay Joshi You have hit the nail on the head for me, the thread you mention is one of several relating to DSE in a short space of time and left me completely confused, (i know not hard) In asking the opinion of the forum advise included statements such as, any alphanumeric display, prolonged use, continuous use, accumulated use, field of vision, treat as any other DSE, and your own view of not covered by DSE regs, so many different interpretations of just one regulation and associated guidance. I am not naive enough to believe one size fits all but as with the above an overhaul of guidance would surely help in interpretation. Claire, What price do the compensation chasing lawyers pay in the attitude of insurance company's, are insures over-reacting to protect there interests? question not defence of insurers. I also think it is a great shame that so many highly qualified members of this forum are disillusioned, for my part i review the stats and hopefully help in finding practical solutions reducing the risks for my colleagues. Fortunately for me after implementation and the removal from future stats of a previous problem area still gives me the will to carry on. Maybe there is comfort at ground level but it is the expertise of the majority of this forum that drives the safety culture, so my plea to the disheartened is stay and keep up the fight if that means change then change it should be. Regards to all Andy

Posted By clairel Haggis Terry Pratchett states that a million to one shot happens 9 times out of 10!! Just to lighten the moment!:-)