I subscribe to satellite tv and we have been suffering from certain reception problems, including intermittent loss of signal. We arranged for one of the provider's engineering team to call and investigate/rectify. I happened to be at home when the engineer called. We live in a bungalow and the satellite dish is situated on a wall on a side of the building. The engineer made a couple of modifications. He then added that the problem of intermittent loss of signal was due to a tree in a neighbouring garden. He agreed that a solution would be to relocate the dish onto the side of the chimney. He could not do this because of "health & safety regulations". I took an interest in the discussion, which had hitherto mainly involved my wife. I enquired which regulations he as referring to. He replied "all of them" and added that his employer had sent him on h&s courses. From subsequent discussion he had not heard of WAHR and thought that "MEWP" was a word from a foreign language. "Competence" meant something to him but he clearly did not like me using it. I am not sure how he would have managed if I was living in a first floor flat, or higher. My tv reception problems have been sorted in the short term. Longer term I shall either ask for a competent engineer next time, or possibly switch to cable and thus eliminate the need for work at height. I wonder whether any other forum users may have had similar problems with satellite tv providers.

No such problems in the ROI. You are asked when you book as to whether the dish will be placed on a chimney etc and an extra charge is made (to allow for the extra time the operative has to spend). H&S standards were excellent and strictly adhered to (in my case anyway and they had no idea that I was a H&S professional).

My example was with 'contracted out' work. The directly employed guys had a reduced list of installs, therefore, were more likely to comply with the correct Safe Systems of Work (SSW). i.e. ladder stays, eyebolts, cows tail, stand-off etc. Our SSW (as agreed with the HSE), was barely ever implemented correctly (based on my audits), not because the install guys couldn't be bothered, rather that if they did, at every address, they'd install a fraction of their quota and earn a pittance of a wage! This problem was countless times expressed through the ranks, however, 'selective hearing' shall we say. They reacted quickly when it was 'accident investigation' time. A horrible experience racing around the country on the back of a call saying 'so and so's fell off a roof and onto a wall.' I'm sad to say Ciaran that my experience was very different to yours, punctured lungs, broken ribs, fractured jaws etc. Gladly, the contract was not renewed and therefore, in this case, the poor practices are no longer able to be ignored. Food for thought! Simon

Ed - Compliments to you for exploring with the alleged engineer his comment about "health and safety" preventing him from doing what he should have done. He probably says the same thing to various other customers when it suits him. The sad thing is that most customers, with minimal knowledge of occupational safety & health (OS&H), will simply tend to accept what he says. Consequently this only serves to reinforce the negative perception of OS&H held by too many people in the UK and perpetuated by various parts of the media. Therefore, other forum users should be ready for opportunities to challenge people or organisations who use "health and safety" as a spurious excuse or reason for either doing unpopular things or not doing what should be done. Bearing in mind that nearly all satellite dishes tend to be located at height on buildings, the engineer's apparent lack equipment and certainly training doesn't say much for him or his employer. If his usual ladder wasn't tall enough to reach the chimney, surely he should have been able to call for back up with appropriate equipment. Also, if he didn't have enough time for the work needed, perhaps there's something wrong with his time allocations (as an employee or a sub-contractor) and/or those of the company. As with most jobs, some of his visits will take longer than expected while some don't take as long. If the company has a standard alloted time for visits and the engineer involved is taking longer for most jobs, the company needs to decide whether the engineer is not sufficiently competent or to revise its standard time! p.s. As you mention that your TV reception problems have been sorted in the short term, some forum users may be curious to know if this was achieved by a suitable trimming of your neighbour's tree.

Chris, in my case, all were trained with a few labelled 'special height teams'. The company was engaged by Sky to install on their behalf. All were trained to carryout rooftop installs (CAT ladders etc) but a couple of teams trained to cover more unusual installs. As previously said, the routine height work was never carried out to procedure, unlike the Sky guys it appears. I'd suggest Sky's allocated quota was less onerous or they placed more emphasis on safety. Their guys were probably paid more (base wage) too. I recall watching the height trainer demonstrating the safe ladder procedure to the new recruits. Whilst the recruit was climbing with all PPE etc. in place, the trainer climbed onto the 'mock-up' roof without any fall protection, to help place the CAT ladders. The trainer exposed himself to a 5-6 metre fall - Classic!

The HSE view on something similar-http://www.hse.gov.uk/press/record/2011/telegraph240511.htm#?eban=rss-putting-the-record-straight

Was he drilling it round and it ought to be square. Was the shape of it’s wrong, it’s much much too long. And you can’t put hole where a hole don’t belong.. (thanks Bernard)

Colin go to Unst there are a couple of them there if I remember rightly - small ones though;-)