Rank: Super forum user 
|
Wonder is the H&S manager who is looking for job and his wife, can look at each other and laugh. I don't disagree that there is a job to do, but I believe that there are more way sto skin a cat. Maybe as the director was willing to call you in you could have created an action plan for the H&S manager and monitored progress.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Would have loved to Invictus, but that is no longer possible. Your point about him and his wife is taken out of context - I & the businesses have to think of the 1600.
Please do not ask me for any further specific detail - it would be against forum rules.
I think I have made my points and before anyone asks, I certainly DO NOT need the work..... been trying to retire for the last 6 years. However, I still can't say 'no'. Something about this industry I guess.
Walker - was off it but I could be tempted tonight ;-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
As he was a 'new' H&S Manager if I was the director of the company and found that I was not legally compliant it wouldn't have just been the new person who was gone. Because according to you they had a number of employees to look after and this must have been going on for a while.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Invictus wrote:As he was a 'new' H&S Manager if I was the director of the company and found that I was not legally compliant it wouldn't have just been the new person who was gone. Because according to you they had a number of employees to look after and this must have been going on for a while.
Correct.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user 
|
Ah now, all us ex-army guys ain't the same.
Sounds like some over excited safety guys though
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user 
|
AllanFS wrote:Reference "Holding the Handrail" comment.
This is standard Procedure when Working Offshore, outside on the Platform itself and in the accommodation module when Ascending/Descending Stairs to maintain a 3 Point of Contact at all times.
If you have been Pulled up by this Gentleman in question without being inducted or briefed on this procedure then you have a case to answer.
Come on its not exactly a Jack Up, Semi Or Drill Ship its a staircase in an office block.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
walker wrote:Is he off the cocaine these days?
Rumour has it he moved into H&S and has a strange desire for holding handrails. :-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Frankc wrote:walker wrote:Is he off the cocaine these days?
Rumour has it he moved into H&S and has a strange desire for holding handrails. :-)
Not anymore he doesn't ;-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Mark L Smith wrote:AllanFS wrote:Reference "Holding the Handrail" comment.
This is standard Procedure when Working Offshore, outside on the Platform itself and in the accommodation module when Ascending/Descending Stairs to maintain a 3 Point of Contact at all times.
If you have been Pulled up by this Gentleman in question without being inducted or briefed on this procedure then you have a case to answer.
Come on its not exactly a Jack Up, Semi Or Drill Ship its a staircase in an office block.
Nice 1 Mark - some have forgot about hazard, potential for harm, risk level & priorities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
quote=AllanFS]Reference "Holding the Handrail" comment.
This is standard Procedure when Working Offshore, outside on the Platform itself and in the accommodation module when Ascending/Descending Stairs to maintain a 3 Point of Contact at all times.
If you have been Pulled up by this Gentleman in question without being inducted or briefed on this procedure then you have a case to answer.
This one always confuses me - when I ascend / descend stairs and am holding the hand-rail - my hand offers one point of contact - my feet the other two - then I raise one foot off the ground / step before placing it back down on the next - during this procedure I only maintain 2 points of contact.
If you run up the stairs then it is feasible to have 0 Points of Contact !!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
evans38004 wrote:quote=AllanFS]Reference "Holding the Handrail" comment.
This is standard Procedure when Working Offshore, outside on the Platform itself and in the accommodation module when Ascending/Descending Stairs to maintain a 3 Point of Contact at all times.
If you have been Pulled up by this Gentleman in question without being inducted or briefed on this procedure then you have a case to answer.
This one always confuses me - when I ascend / descend stairs and am holding the hand-rail - my hand offers one point of contact - my feet the other two - then I raise one foot off the ground / step before placing it back down on the next - during this procedure I only maintain 2 points of contact.
If you run up the stairs then it is feasible to have 0 Points of Contact !!
Then there's the way my two year old Grandson comes down the stairs...... sliding down on his tummy feet first ........ even taught his Granddad - great fun ;-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I've slid down the escalator handrail at Moorfields train station in Liverpool.
I had one point of contact which was my large backside. I was a bit worse for wear of course...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Interestingly (perhaps), if you come to Aberdeen and advise directors to sack H&S Managers for implementing reverse parking and use handrail rules then you would be run out of town pretty quickly, nonsense or not.
Oil companies regulate here my friend and these are generally 'must dos'. Failure to comply and its curtains.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
How can you have no points of contact impossible! Anyway we should give the holding handrail a miss. I am just dealing with something more important like a SSOW for making a cup of tea, solicitors request.
I am thinking of writing one for putting boots on that we supply as someone could feasibly pull on the laces to hard the lace could snap and he would end up punching himself in the face.
I had a report last week that a person doing joinery had decided to hook the claw of the hammer over the table whilst trying to get up off the floor and hit himself in the eye with the hammer when it slipped.
Oh the joys of H&S for half wits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Invictus: Impossible:- When people run / walk fast on flat ground for a split second their two feet can be off the ground - except of course in walking races whereby you are disqualified if you do not maintain contact with the ground at all times.
When horses run they have all 4 hoofs off the ground.
Therefore you can have the impossible & no points of contact.
I agree that the use of handrails improves stability - but you cannot have 3 points of contact if you walk up / down the stairs and only use 1 handrail - impossible ! Find another phrase for it
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Agreed at some point you might have no points of contact, I don't agree that we should be teaching people to use handrails etc. I have just copmpleted a training course and was informed that if we asx a company start teaching how to walk up and down stairs then H&S would loose the little credibility that we have built up so far.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
garfield esq wrote:Interestingly (perhaps), if you come to Aberdeen and advise directors to sack H&S Managers for implementing reverse parking and use handrail rules then you would be run out of town pretty quickly, nonsense or not.
Oil companies regulate here my friend and these are generally 'must dos'. Failure to comply and its curtains.
I think if you read the thread carefully, you'll find that the H&S Managers were not 'sacked' for implementing reverse parking / use of handrails..... my friend
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Invictus wrote:How can you have no points of contact impossible!
It is possible, probably more common than you think - I have a photograph of my son taken 29 years ago when he was running - neither of his feet are in contact with the ground.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Victor Meldrew wrote:Invictus wrote:How can you have no points of contact impossible!
It is possible, probably more common than you think - I have a photograph of my son taken 29 years ago when he was running - neither of his feet are in contact with the ground.
Yea I know realised after I had sent it, stupidly my brain wasn't functioning correctly and of course no message recall.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Just reading my last post looks like it still isn't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Invictus wrote:Just reading my last post looks like it still isn't.
Love it :-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Victor Meldrew wrote:garfield esq wrote:Interestingly (perhaps), if you come to Aberdeen and advise directors to sack H&S Managers for implementing reverse parking and use handrail rules then you would be run out of town pretty quickly, nonsense or not.
Oil companies regulate here my friend and these are generally 'must dos'. Failure to comply and its curtains.
I think if you read the thread carefully, you'll find that the H&S Managers were not 'sacked' for implementing reverse parking / use of handrails..... my friend
Excellent point Victor. The main drive to my point excluding the 'sacking' comment was that we should beware rubbishing what appears to be over zealous risk measures, when they could be linked to pressure from external sources, such as clients. To be fair, in this instance that seems not to be the case...we're all friends here arn't we?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
garfield esq wrote:Victor Meldrew wrote:garfield esq wrote:Interestingly (perhaps), if you come to Aberdeen and advise directors to sack H&S Managers for implementing reverse parking and use handrail rules then you would be run out of town pretty quickly, nonsense or not.
Oil companies regulate here my friend and these are generally 'must dos'. Failure to comply and its curtains.
I think if you read the thread carefully, you'll find that the H&S Managers were not 'sacked' for implementing reverse parking / use of handrails..... my friend
Excellent point Victor. The main drive to my point excluding the 'sacking' comment was that we should beware rubbishing what appears to be over zealous risk measures, when they could be linked to pressure from external sources, such as clients. To be fair, in this instance that seems not to be the case...we're all friends here arn't we?
;-) I certainly hope so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Just seen an electrician replacing lighting tubes. 6 tread stepladder surrounded by 4 "A" boards with flashing LED's on top!! Where did my sensible safety culture go wrong?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
garfield esq wrote: if you come to Aberdeen and advise directors to sack H&S Managers for implementing reverse parking and use handrail rules then you would be run out of town pretty quickly
There does seem to be a lot of reverse parking in the Aberdeen area. I have always thought it was the influence of the oil sector but I never been able to work out why they all require it. If it actually reduced accidents then insurers across the country would be insisting on it as a condition of liability insurance. Can anyone from up there enlighten us?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Was once told by one of the plant lads that he knew that our safety culture was improving by the increased wear on the painted hand rails.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
tigers wrote:Just seen an electrician replacing lighting tubes. 6 tread stepladder surrounded by 4 "A" boards with flashing LED's on top!! Where did my sensible safety culture go wrong?
We will never have a sensible safety culture while it is run by solicitors and claims. At one time the risks had to be created by work activities, in my opinion it should have been 'solely' by work activities, we then could have dropped a lot of the so called identified risks, like walking up and down stairs, making tea, ironing, cooking, parking your car etc. as these are on the whole daily tasks. This would have enabled us to really push for a safety culture. While we are percieved to interfere in daily life we will continue to struggle to get the message across.
All safety associations agree in the common sense approach but until IOSH, RSoPH, BSC etc stand up and push this to the forefront then we will continue in the same vane.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
This has been possibley one of the best threads for a long time........
but oh Victor.....my sadness is on the way home you called the Directo....However I am imagining you did not literally do that and that you found a place to stop - reverse parked at a service station......held the handrail as you climbed the steps to Burger King/Little Chef - bought yourself a coffee and sat there smashing your head (gently) on the table!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
AllanFS wrote:Reference "Holding the Handrail" comment.
This is standard Procedure when Working Offshore, outside on the Platform itself and in the accommodation module when Ascending/Descending Stairs to maintain a 3 Point of Contact at all times.
If you have been Pulled up by this Gentleman in question without being inducted or briefed on this procedure then you have a case to answer.
It may be standard on a ship but not in manchester!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
ptaylor14 wrote:
It may be standard on a ship but not in manchester!!!!!
It is a VERY good idea on a ship!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
I have followed this threat for some time, with a mix of amusement and skepticism. Though various interpretations have been proposed one possibility stands out in my mind, that the original poster was spinning a tall tale.
Why they might do that, we'll, it doesn't matter. It might be true. But I'd suggest that those who are concerned about the 'outcome' might consider the entire story to be more apparent than real.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Invictus wrote:tigers wrote:Just seen an electrician replacing lighting tubes. 6 tread stepladder surrounded by 4 "A" boards with flashing LED's on top!! Where did my sensible safety culture go wrong?
We will never have a sensible safety culture while it is run by solicitors and claims. At one time the risks had to be created by work activities, in my opinion it should have been 'solely' by work activities, we then could have dropped a lot of the so called identified risks, like walking up and down stairs, making tea, ironing, cooking, parking your car etc. as these are on the whole daily tasks. This would have enabled us to really push for a safety culture. While we are percieved to interfere in daily life we will continue to struggle to get the message across.
All safety associations agree in the common sense approach but until IOSH, RSoPH, BSC etc stand up and push this to the forefront then we will continue in the same vane.
Excellent points Invictus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
blodwyn wrote:This has been possibley one of the best threads for a long time........
but oh Victor.....my sadness is on the way home you called the Directo....However I am imagining you did not literally do that and that you found a place to stop - reverse parked at a service station......held the handrail as you climbed the steps to Burger King/Little Chef - bought yourself a coffee and sat there smashing your head (gently) on the table!
Yes blodwyn I did call him, hands free. I know, not totally safe & against what I 'preach' but I'm afraid having such a bad day I just 'lost the plot'. Probably shouldn't have left so abruptly, hence the call, anyway, all appears to be going in the right direction now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
ian.blenkharn wrote:I have followed this threat for some time, with a mix of amusement and skepticism. Though various interpretations have been proposed one possibility stands out in my mind, that the original poster was spinning a tall tale.
Why they might do that, we'll, it doesn't matter. It might be true. But I'd suggest that those who are concerned about the 'outcome' might consider the entire story to be more apparent than real.
I find your comment repugnant. I'm not in the habit of telling lies or making up tales / yarns / storys to either amuse / scare you or others. Shame really that my posting earlier in the thread was pulled by the Moderator due to Forum Rules, as the further detail that I had provided made it only all too obvious for individuals and therefore organisations likely to be identified.
If you 'don't believe it' tough. An extremely arrogant & unprofessional statement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Victor Meldrew wrote:
I find your comment repugnant. I'm not in the habit of telling lies or making up tales / yarns / storys to either amuse / scare you or others. Shame really that my posting earlier in the thread was pulled by the Moderator due to Forum Rules, as the further detail that I had provided made it only all too obvious for individuals and therefore organisations likely to be identified.
If you 'don't believe it' tough. An extremely arrogant & unprofessional statement.
Well, he would say that, wouldn't he?
Make you own mind up, but personally, I consider the proposition not at all unlikely.
And as for "repugnant", that's hardly the right tone for the Forum is it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Boys! Everyone hug and lets be friends
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: New forum user
|
Kind of blows plan, do, check, act and popmar out of the water when you get sacked after do!!
It would be interesting to find out what the budget was for HSE in each of the companies. The one in particular, obviously knew they had an asbestos problem and that they needed a register. Yet in the many years of advisory visits had not managed to get the experts in to log it all. An expensive prospect at the best of times.
Is it possible the director had unrealistic expectations and was relying on the HSE manager to identify and test for asbestos himself?
The next question is why were all these reasonably practicable methods suggested or employed? Did anyone stay around long enough to look at the accident book to see if there had been issues with slips and trips or pedestrian/vehicle collisions? Do you think the staff would have moaned less if the HSE manager had made the parking bays larger therefore improving visibility but requiring 10 people to park on the street?
People always complain about change. And what a great signal for the director to send to their staff. "If you moan about safety measures enough you wont have to do them"!! Perhaps a good military kick up the backside is exactly what these people need!
Well Victor, it seems that you have also managed to bring out the grumpy old man in me.
If I come across as harsh I apologise. This is not my intent. I only wish to observe that there are at least two sides to every storey. Something anyone who has undertaken an accident investigation should understand.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
marcus_millett wrote:Kind of blows plan, do, check, act and popmar out of the water when you get sacked after do!!
It would be interesting to find out what the budget was for HSE in each of the companies. The one in particular, obviously knew they had an asbestos problem and that they needed a register. Yet in the many years of advisory visits had not managed to get the experts in to log it all. An expensive prospect at the best of times.
Is it possible the director had unrealistic expectations and was relying on the HSE manager to identify and test for asbestos himself?
The next question is why were all these reasonably practicable methods suggested or employed? Did anyone stay around long enough to look at the accident book to see if there had been issues with slips and trips or pedestrian/vehicle collisions? Do you think the staff would have moaned less if the HSE manager had made the parking bays larger therefore improving visibility but requiring 10 people to park on the street?
People always complain about change. And what a great signal for the director to send to their staff. "If you moan about safety measures enough you wont have to do them"!! Perhaps a good military kick up the backside is exactly what these people need!
Well Victor, it seems that you have also managed to bring out the grumpy old man in me.
If I come across as harsh I apologise. This is not my intent. I only wish to observe that there are at least two sides to every storey. Something anyone who has undertaken an accident investigation should understand.
No need to apologise, but on your points; as I said in previous responses, they didn't get sacked / left for the 'do' as such, but more on what they didn't 'do'.
Budgets...? Can't answer that one at all other than to say there appears to be plenty of money available for me to assist them in getting them compliant.
Unrealistic expectations...? Again I can't really answer fully, but in one case an action plan had been in place for some time / months with little or no action.
Why were these methods suggested / employed....? Goodness knows. There certainly were no incidents or even near misses that suggested they needed even considering. One person did say that when challenged they were being put in place for some 'quick wins'...... unfortunately he lost.
A good military kick up the backside...? I don't think so, maybe, but can't really answer other than to say there is a genuine willingness from all I have spoken to, to get things sorted..... and quickly.
Totally agree there are always two sides but can't help restating that in two of the situations priorities were not addressed.
Interestingly, very little has been mentioned on the noise or should I say lack of noise issue. Now that is what started this whole thing off with me. And, is still gnawing away, because I & others like me can do little to change this. we just have to plough on..... frustrating. The person is not approachable & I'm afraid he is treated a bit like Australia..... everybody knows it's there but nobody cares much. Sorry Aussies ;-)
Come on the Lions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.