Posted By Dave Faragher
On sunday 27/05/07 I was asked by an owner driver to explain the workings of the working time directive for mobile workers. I was invited to his place of work which is a concrete batching plant. After the conclusion of our business I was asked if I would like a tour of the site, on climbing to the top of the mixing pan it was explained to me that an operative has to lift a floor plate to gain access to clean out the mixing vessel, akin to climbing into a food mixer and that the company do not regard this as a confined space, therefore there cannot be any entry permit system, risk assessments, lock off procedures. At the risk of losing a valuable friendship I would not be able to sleep at nightI must report this situation I thought this was a reputable company. Shows how wrong you can be. Opinions please
Faragher

Posted By Dave West
If he is such a good friend i would approach him and see if this can be resolved (though straight away). If not then you will have at least given him that chance. You wont be on his christmas card list either way but if he ignores your advice then he deserves to be reported.

Posted By Catman
Hi Dave

Having been through the risk assessment process for this type of machinery, I found that the ultimate option is an installed washing system.

Over a long term, it is not significantly more expensive than sending someone in every day, and much safer.

Google for concrete mixer washing systems and you will see options which your friend may want to consider.

If they are continuing to send someone in, they should take a very close look at the electrical motor isolation arrangements in the batching plant, I found this the biggest and most difficult aspect to control. Even with a key exchange system providing isolation and access, they need to prove that the paddles cant start.

Of course the alkaline run off, noise, vibration, confined space, slips and falls, electrical, high pressure jet injury, manual handling and other identified risks also require careful consideration.

Just a final note, they may wash with the outlet door in the base of the mixer opened, depending on the delivery method below that door, secondary systems may also require isolation during the wash.

Cheers
TW

Posted By John Murgatroyd
Don't bother. The guy's happy. The workers are happy.
Even if it was changed (unlikely) then the work would still end-up being done the same way.
And if someone does get injured or killed, then it'll give the HSE some work to do that will ensure their continued press coverage.

Posted By Andrew Joule Land
There is also the problem in the construction industry of "jobsworth" make waves - your out.

Be a real friend - tell the guy the truth as best as you know it - you may save him from a jail sentence.

My own feelings regarding construction industry company owners is they don't give a monkeys so long as production rolls along. you have to be a tough cookie to be involved in safety in this industry too.

When they have to some Construction HEO's will give all the rhetoric about how they care and have commitment - B******s. This is also one of and in my opinion the main reason that the construction industry has such a poor safety record.

Posted By CFT
Yes, I have had several of these on site over the past couple of years. They are huge and can be extremely dangerous places to be, but so can WAH, any other confined space etc etc. Whilst I recognised the dangers of said batching plant and they were on site for around 4 weeks at a time working 16 hours a day with some 300 lorries a day back and forth so it certainly does not stop at the plant itself. Having examined carefully all the SSOW/HOS's/ etc that the company provided I was satisfied the works could proceed; at no stage did I consider any of the failsafe systems inadequate and even when pick axe handle managed to get through the system and need to be removed there were simply dozens of automatic shut offs at every stage of the repair/maintenance (done in the remaining 8 hours by a second team) I can say I had only one reservation that required additional control measures and that was the de-commisioning before leaving site, the relationship between crane/low loader/banksman/operative attaching hooks and segregation was simply not good enough and it was stopped at that point pending far more thorough CM's. I personally liked the safe systems and look forward to the next visit from the big man and his team.

CFT