Rank: Forum user 
|
Just tweeted by IOSH: http://www.thewestonmerc...safety_gone_mad_1_983359My comment can be summed up in a line from the article itself: “We have been forced into it because the insurance company says we won’t be covered if we don’t do it, which would leave the council and even individual officers open to prosecution if we don’t comply and someone falls over the wall"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
I must admit that of late I have tended to avoid comment on newspaper articles as I feel that they rarely give the full and unbiased 'picture', and many are becoming increasingly tiresome.
I am confused by the comment by the insurer though. What or whom won't be covered for what? And why would not being insured lead to a prosecution?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Phil Rose wrote:
I am confused by the comment by the insurer though. What or whom won't be covered for what? And why would not being insured lead to a prosecution?
You and me both but I suspect the councillor was misquoting or misunderstanding the insurer's position. With public liability cover we can exclude certain activities, for instance, hot work, or manual work away from premises. However, I've never seen a policy written to exclude specific liability for a sea wall without railings (or any other geographical / structural feature). That said, local authority business tends to only be written by a couple of firms (Zurich Municipal being the biggest) and I've never worked for them. I would suspect that the council carries a large PL excess in any event so that they are virtually self insuring for all but major accidents.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Railings along the length of Weston beach?!?! Reasonably practicable??
And there was me shouting about Government cuts being too deep, but with councils prepared to waste the amount of money that this will cost that argument is now somewhat hollow.
Oh well, more fodder for the Daily Wail.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
The truth og this matter is contained within the comments posted by locals at the initial link posted by Marcus8.
In essence, the wall has not "been like this for 100 years". Recent remedial and improvement works have substantially raised the promenade level, and lowered the wall height accordingly.
A barrier was no doubt always an integral part of the CDM Project.
But then that wouldn't be such a good story, would it?
As Phil says, I also wonder why we continue to torment ourselves with reaction to this inaccurate and sensationalist "journalism".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
ron hunter wrote:
As Phil says, I also wonder why we continue to torment ourselves with reaction to this inaccurate and sensationalist "journalism".
Good question. I'd prefer to focus on articles on how health and safety makes thing possible but what 'newspaper' will report that?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.