IOSH forums home
»
Our public forums
»
OSH discussion forum
»
Bad News ahead. Geoffry Podger. Cheif Exceutive HSE.
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Paul Hi all, First the good news, Geoff Podger chief executive HSE. Raises the issue of, BAD NEWS AHEAD,in the construction industry.(Awarning to all).
Bad news, early indications show arise of 10-15% in deaths on 59 deaths best ever on 2006-7.
Bad news. that's 10-15% MORE ON 59 leaving site in a body bag.
Bad news, that's 10-15% more families to inform face to face that your husband has been killed in an accident at work.
Bad news, for the individual (probably H&S officer) who has to inform the family.
Bad news, you might be one of the 10-15% next.
Bad news, HSE new statistical year 2007-8 starts badly. 2deaths Construction News (26/04/07p3)
Good news's by Geoff, companies,H&S and you the worker,working very hard to reduce this BAD NEWS.But we need to do more.
Any suggestions out there? to Shhhh the BAD NEWS.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By JasonGould Re-look at all the paperwork in these site offices and streamline them to be efficient, simple to use, easily manageable rather than the song and war epics aimed at covering backsides.
I go on a lot of sites to visit these managers and so far the spirit of H&S is actually getting through to most of the people whom I meet.
The biggest problem that I hear is regarding the 15 volumes of folders that just make peoples eyes glaze.
The usual one is the problem between getting information from the head office to the site manager. The HSE even state that interfaces create risk and I am actually starting to see what they mean.
They need a new set of tools and training so that they can actually concentrate on reducing risk and implementing some of the measures.
Its time for all Construction H&S folks to look at the tools they have given the site and ask themselves the following questions.
1. Can the site manager easily locate and store the required information relevant to his project.
2. Is it easy to understand with all the jargon etc removed.
3. Is there too much scattered form filling section located in different volumes.
I know we had to provide sites with more H&S info at one time and we all wanted to make sure they learned from it. The thing is ( My opinion only) We in some circumstances have swamped them and the head offices which makes the information hard to be located, communicated and used when it is needed.
That's one starting point I would look at
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By allan wood paper work is fine as long as it is directed at the task in hand, not to long winded and the operatives have read and understood the content.
could the problem be that site managers are having to spend to much time in the site office going through various paper chase exercises i.e. delivery notes, waste transfer notes etc,etc, rather than out on site or is it down to the contractors themseleves not appointing suitably trained and competent foremen/supervisors for their particular task.
are these very contractors even allowing for supervision in their tender packages? if not then why not? and what are the principle contractors out there prepared to do about it.
for fear of stating the obvious its my view that not enough adequate supervision is leading to an increase in accidents/incidents/near misses on construction sites.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By John Murgatroyd Not enough supervision ? Too much trust ! You send guys onto site to do a job. The job comes complete with a "method statement". The method statement, both copies, is usually returned to a bin somewhere. Unread.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By GT Paul, Whilst the figures are disturbing I think we should identify the trades and whether they are subbies or main contractor personnel that are having difficulty in understanding safety. Not sure if Geoffry Podger identifies these matters. Need to know whats broke before we can fix it?
John, I don't disagree with you but if you can embellish on the statements it may help.You say there is lack of supervision and this may well be the case or it maybe poor supervision that also contributes. Are main contractors not policing the subbies, do they not visit the site and check the job against the site and find out if the job can be done? They then check the job against the method statement. I know it seems simple but it appears it isn't happening.
Trust! By this you mean that site managers trust subbies to work safely because they have had excellent training from his team?
An interesting subject but I really wonder if those at the top of all involved in the industry really care? Cost of compliance against compensation / fines etc ?? Loss of reputation - where is the name and shame list as we appear to continue to give contracts to the offending companies.
Just my view
GT
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By John Murgatroyd By "unread into the bin", I mean just that. Unread because in many cases they are unrealistic. They sp[ecify a way and means of construction that is either SLOW, SLOWER or RIDICULOUS. Many trades ignore them. Totally.
The same with fall restraint, wearing them is ok...but not wearing them is a lot easier and faster. You can watch a site and see the problems occurring as the day goes on. Which is why many get hammered by inspections. All the inspectors have to do is park-up, and watch. It's money for old rope, even a complete idiot can spot them. I'm surprised that ANY site escapes. It is even more stupid when you consider that the primary contractor seems to think that they are not responsible for the sub-contractors, as would seem to be the case on many sites.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By GT John,
Do I gather from you last link that these safety systems, control procedures and people upset you?
slow, slower and safer perhaps?
Easier, faster and unsafe may also be something that pleases people.
As a CMIOSH do you believe what you advocate is is the way forward ?
ok lunch over back to the ironing
GT
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By steven bentham Paul
I agree that it is poor that construction accidents are and will continue to go up.
Perhaps we could examine causes closer to home in IOSH:
(1) you have only to look at a large number of the quality of the questions posted and ask yourself are we dealing with the causes of fatal accidents on our own discussion forum?
(2) who is responsible for the volume of paperwork that construction managers have to deal with?
(3) are we as safety advisers/coordinators/managers up to the job?
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Peter Leese As a CMIOSH do you believe what you advocate is is the way forward ?
GT, you'll need to explain that sentence to me. Where did CMIOSH come into the discussion?
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By John Murgatroyd "Do I gather from you last link that these safety systems, control procedures and people upset you?
slow, slower and safer perhaps?
Easier, faster and unsafe may also be something that pleases people"
You forget. You're dealing with a myriad of trades here/there, many of who never communicate with each other and are only aware of who has been there by what has been done or by reference to the slots allocated in the construction process.
When things get tight, some other things have to go faster or get put off 'til later. Putting things off 'til later means that the tradespeople that should have done THAT job may not be available to do it later. The pressure is on getting EACH job done when it is supposed to be done. So, the onus is on the main contractor and each subcontractor to make sure the process continues. Something has to give, and safety is frequently the thing. It is one of lifes unpalatable facts.
Not to mention that many people don't speak english on sites now....and some of them were born here !
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By John Murgatroyd "Contractors and sub-contractors on construction sites must talk to each other or risk prosecutions for the firm and serious injuries for their staff. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) warning followed the prosecution last week of three construction companies after an employee was very seriously injured. CJ Murfitt Ltd was fined £14,000, Potton Ltd £7000 and Shenley Carpentry Contractors Ltd £4,000. They were ordered to pay £8,588 in costs. The prosecutions arose following an incident on 12 January 2006 when worker Darius Griskevicius suffered serious injury after falling five metres into an unguarded stairwell in the block of the flats under construction. The risk presented by the work had been identified but the three companies failed to communicate and coordinate their activities effectively to ensure that the simple precautions needed were in place at all times. Investigating HSE inspector Sheena Mackinnon said: 'The precautions required are not difficult or costly. A great number of the incidents investigated by HSE show that where multiple contractors are involved it is a failure to properly manage and coordinate their actions, which underpin them. Good communications between the principal contractor and specialists contractors is the key to success.' "
|
|
|
|
IOSH forums home
»
Our public forums
»
OSH discussion forum
»
Bad News ahead. Geoffry Podger. Cheif Exceutive HSE.
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.