Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
redken  
#1 Posted : 19 December 2012 16:24:32(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
redken

http://www.shponline.co....excessive-fine-challenge "Such risk assessments are the foundation-stone requirement of ensuring compliance with the applicable standard; and, if a risk assessment had been carried out, then barriers would have been erected" No doubt in the judges' minds, a risk assessment would have led to a barrier, so we can look forward to a plethora of the things in the New Year. The pond at Dunham Massey for starters, the cliff edge at Culzean?
Mark Daniels  
#2 Posted : 19 December 2012 18:22:21(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
Mark Daniels

Grateful to redken for finding this piece about Merlin Attractions Ltd. unsuccessful appeal against the fine imposed. The judges' opinion may produce an increasingly risk-averse approach among some organisations managing historic sites. Yet it doesn't always follow that if a risk assessment had been carried out, barriers would have been erected - that might depend on the obviousness of the hazard, the consequences of a fall and the historic importance of the structure. There are many sites in the UK where fall from height risks exist at historic structures, from the prehistoric site at Skara Brae on Orkney to the cliffs at Tintagel via the City Walls at York and the monastic buildings at Fountains Abbey. HSE provided some reassurance to those organisations after the Warwick Castle judgement, in the form of a carefully worded statement posted on the web site of the Visitor Safety in the Countryside Group (VSCG), on its forum pages within a thread on the case, here - http://vscg.co.uk/forums/viewthread/3/. So I don't think we will necessarily encounter a plethora of new barriers at every fall from height risk either in historic settings or at coast and countryside, although hopefully the organisations managing Dunham Massey (NT) and Culzean (NTS) have already considered these risks.
pete48  
#3 Posted : 19 December 2012 22:02:51(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
pete48

Many thanks for that link Mark, excellent stuff! p48
rodgerker  
#4 Posted : 20 December 2012 08:26:32(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
rodgerker

So, barriers will need to be erected at visitor attractions, where the risk of a similar incident occurring is probably small. However, barriers do not need to be erected at railway stations (see post: a railway guard has been convicted of manslaughter) where I would suggest the risk is far higher and could potentially occur 24/7, 365 days a year (strikes days excluded). I used to have a sheet of paper to show people when we had any discussion about legal matters. It said: There are three things we must remember about the British legal system. It has nothing to do with common sense. It has nothing to do with fair play and It has nothing to do with justice. I believe the statement is still true. Something for everyone to think about over the coming holiday, if the world doesn't end tomorrow. Rodger Ker
pete48  
#5 Posted : 20 December 2012 10:56:03(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
pete48

"So, barriers will need to be erected at visitor attractions, where the risk of a similar incident occurring is probably small." Is that really the effect? I would suggest only if owners and operators decide to take that action in an attempt to protect themselves rather than the visitors. The O.P. has indicated quite clearly that sector specific opinion, shared by the HSE, is that such an approach would not automatically be required. Proper assessment and selection of a suite of control measures is all that is required. Barriers of whatever type are but one such measure. The very same type of response to the platform edges? P48
Users browsing this topic
Guest
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.