It's still sad that this is thelevel that we are at. Why don't they make them in paper that way they will float away. Now if it was bricklayers throwing mortar boards I would worry.

If they had said that then I would agree with that entirely. Unfortunately that is most certainly NOT what the myth busters panel has said. It's perfectly clear what they said - "The chance of being injured by a flying mortar board is incredibly small and it’s over-the-top to impose an outright ban" This when people are reportedly injured each year and one required hospital treatment last year. There's nothing in the myth busters statement about this being outside the remit of H&S at work legislation. They simply did not say what you claim, and they did say what I have reported.

Agreed shouldn't have been news, but not a work related activity and therefore should not be subject to risk assessment = frolic of their own, throwing hats around - common sense needed here.

I'm curious about HSE saying that a risk that occurs about once a year, and occasionally hospitalises people, is a frequency that's so low as to be negligible. I'm saying that this appears to be non-negligible frequency to me, but HSE Myth Busters panel have apparently said this is a negligible risk explicitly basing that conclusion on the basis that it's a negligible frequency / probability. Do other people consider happens-about-once-a-year to be negligible probability? There are plenty of other reasons for HSE not being bothered about it, but the reason they give for not being bothered is because "the chance of being injured by a flying mortar board is incredibly small", despite the fact that it apparently happens each year at this university alone.

Of course very few people actually need to go to university in the first place - it seems to be more of a social thing these days - so for most graduation (and hence throwing mortar boards in the air) is a completely unnecessary activity -- Discuss

That's not a question you asked, actually. You asked what my point was and whether I considered it a significant risk. I answered that. However, I will now address your new question: There are plenty of reasons why the HSE should not be bothered by people chucking mortar boards in the air. I agree. Listing out reasons why HSE should not be bothered seems fairly pointless when we both agree they should not be bothered. There are no measures that I believe should be implemented, because I don't believe any measures are necessary, because any small risk of serious injury is down to people off on a frolic of their own and I believe people should be allowed to embark on frolics. However, that is all irrelevant to my question. HSE SAY they are not bothered because of PROBABILITY (and that's the only reason they give for not being bothered). Is one injury a year a low enough frequency that it can be classed as negligible probability? I am questioning the reasoning they present for not being bothered - not the conclusion that they are not bothered. UEA has about 10,000 undergraduates. Assuming 3-year courses that's 3,300 potential hat-chuckers per year, so one injury per year looks quite a high rate of injury to be classing it as a negligible probability of occurrence. (https://portal.uea.ac.uk/documents/6207125/7112761/UEA+Student+Facts+and+Figures+2015-16.pdf/6018c44f-b6de-41a7-9b62-f6325963b394 for figures of undergraduates)

I work at a Uni and have never known of one reported case of someone being injured by a motar board. As H&S people we should be focusing of our time on the control of REAL risks and not over zealous rubbish like this.

Not a work activity (throwing mortar boards), therefore not requiring RA and therefore no control measures applied, this is an individually chosen action, a frolic of their own (students who are not at work) and therefore (again) uncontrollable from an Employers point of view!!!

Here are some further thoughts about mortar board throwing: Even though it's clearly a highly intermittent and very transient social practice which some people indulge in of their own accord (perhaps with some peer pressure), note that the risk hierarchy normally associated with occupational risk assessments is eminently transferable and therefore could be applied to the practice as follows: 1. Consider eliminating/replacing the practice - In addition to posing some degree of risk, the practice seems rather silly and frivolous (Envisage the Monty Python colonel played by Graham Chapman stepping in to utter "Right, stop this, it's all getting rather silly!") Though some people might consider it a "time honoured" custom to be perpetuated, why not change it to one in which students keep hold of their mortar boards and simultaneously raise them aloft with one hand? Isn't this what members of the armed forces have done for many years during some ceremonial occasions? As well as being far better controlled and thus posing negligible risk, this alternative still looks impressive and probably makes for better photographs than an anarchic melee of airborne mortar boards. The hire companies would presumably approve because the mortar boards would be less prone to becoming dirty or damaged. Also, out of interest, can anyone advise whether construction workers tend to hold and raise their helmets rather than chuck them in the air during jubilant occasions? Such occasions include 'breaking through' during major tunnelling operations. 2. Control/minimise the risk - If some students really think they to perpetuate the practice, that's fine - no need to ban it. However, do ensure that students are made aware in advance about the risks by appropriate means. This could include some background information about the numbers and nature of injuries incurred in recent years at universities and colleges throughout the UK. Also, it might be prudent to advise students against wearing high heeled shoes, particularly stilettos, and especially so if they are likely to be throwing their mortar boards while standing on grass. Furthermore, if the corners of gravitating mortar boards pose a foreseeable risk of eye injury, why not encourage participants to first don a pair of goggles or, better still, a face shield? Members of the British Safety Industry Federation (BSIF) would surely applaud and encourage this particular precaution! Also, bear in mind that students might be experiencing some degree of euphoria, perhaps exacerbated by alcohol, when the time comes for throwing their mortar boards. Therefore, they might behave more recklessly than usual and/or be less dextrous/agile at catching their mortar boards. For these reasons and to minimise the risk of bodily collisions I echo my earlier suggestion of encouraging such students to position themselves well apart from each other before throwing. Just to recap - either desist from doing it or do it safely !!! :-) Graham B

It might be more useful to tell them not to throw anything up all over the street the night they finish, or to keep themselves safe by staying together and not drinking to much. If we are looking at none work activities that is. But at least it didn't cost the uni. £170 an hour for the useless input from the HSE.

Couldn't agree with you more. When it came time for my kids to go to university we said "fair enough but if you're going then do something proper like law or engineering or medicine. Don't go to university and incur all that cost to come out with a mediocre degree in music theory and media" (no disrespect here to music theory and media but the world is swamped with people with these degrees). Our daughter went to university and became a qualified nurse. Our son did an apprenticeship and is an IT technician. Our daughter did not throw her hat in the air at graduation - it wasn't called for by the photographer and, to be honest, I didn't notice that this bit of the ceremony did not exist until just now (2 years on). Is the risk huge - no. Is it worth worrying about - not really. Should the HSE get involved - well why would they? The students are not at work and the staff will be standing well clear so it's not likely to be a work related accident, it is a social occasion. What about staff parties - where does the HSE stand on people cutting their bottoms open on the photocopier - should they make a stand to ban this? I mean, absolutely this shouldn't happen but ckearly anyone stupid enough to try this is not going to pay attention to the fact that the mighty HSE has banned it.

I for one will be encouraging my son to do exactly this when he graduates this year...400+ views ...seems a really risky activity to get such and interest.... have we not got more important issues?...strewth!!

Or gives the opportunity to relax from dealing with the serious stuff they are dealing with and relax by answering mundane posts instead!

Did republicanism and revolution come from the USA in 1776?

The advice didn't really work one became a nurse and the other IT. They had enough common sense not to throw them heavy mortar boards in the air, but at least the daughter was on hand to adminster first aid.

Derby - they had their choice of "professions" and could have gone to university to study Indian Head Massage if they had been prepared to go into debt for it. It seems they preferred the bank of mum and dad to support them and chose wisely. Invictus - is nursing not a profession? What are you saying?

Jodie, it's the 'University of Life' skills.

798 view on this topic and 200 on manslaughter charge...mmmm and I did and I will be encouraging my son to do the same when he graduates this year...

And yet you have commented on here twice now, and not once on the manslaughter thread.

Just to expand on RayRapp's point at #34, it seems that many of our experiences in life, whether good, bad or seemingly irrelevant, can be of some use to us in terms of knowledge, decision-making and ability, etc. In terms of study courses, there seems at first glance to be little connection between H&S and the applied geography & geology course I did at college many years ago. However, in retrospect, there were some aspects of the course, albeit small ones, which did have a link. For example, I saw and held sample pieces of mined asbestos including crocidolite which were passed round during geology practicals. Also, in connection with landslides and hydro-geology, we were encouraged to read the Report of the Inquiry into the Aberfan Disaster in which a colliery waste tip slid down a hillside and killed 116 children and 28 adults when it engulfed a primary school in 1966. One of the things which astounded me in the report (it's worth reading) was that NCB mechanical engineers had long been in charge of waste tipping operations. As a result they were wholly outwith their sphere of competence and hadn't grasped the potential dangers of tipping waste on hillsides and especially over springs emanating from them. Furthermore, nobody in the NCB had learned from the hillside tip slides which had occurred before Aberfan, partly because they were in locations where little damage or harm had resulted. I think the report also touched on the NCB's organisation and arrangements for safety at the time, and had numerous references to NCB's then chairman Alfred Robens. Later he became better known in H&S circles as the head of the group which produced for Parliament what proved to be the seismic report of 1972 about H&S standards and enforcement within the UK ! While thinking about getting a job near the end of my course I wrote to the Mines Inspectorate to ask if it had any openings for new inspectors. The reply was yes but added that applicants should have a certificate plus at least umpteen years of experience as a mine manager or similar! This promptly ended my naive aspiration about the Mines Inspectorate, and in retrospect was just as well considering the massive decline of the UK coal mining industry which occurred during the following two decades. Also, during 1974 one of my fellow geology students who hailed from Lincolnshire was visibly upset after a major explosion at a chemical plant at a place called Flixborough. She knew one or possibly two of the men who had been killed in the explosion. For the rest of us this fact altered our original perception of the explosion as simply another disaster in the news. Furthermore, the news reports which continued long after the explosion kept mentioning an investigation by HM Factory Inspectorate and that it was about to become part of an impending new government organisation known as the Health & Safety Executive (HSE). At the time I never envisaged that within 3 years my first permanent job would be as an inspector with the HSE. To conclude this post with a nod to the original subject of this thread I didn't go to either of the ceremonies I could have attended, so have no proper idea about the weight and rigidity, etc., of mortar boards. I avoided spending what was then precious money on hiring academic dress for them. Furthermore, friends told me that I spared myself from spending hours having to sit and applaud countless others being given scrolls at the ceremonies! :-)