Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By Ali
No, this is not a sequel to a famous Wallace & Grommit story, just me asking for feedback on something we have a battle with each summer. Given that we may have a rather better one than last year, our construction employees are wanting to wear short trousers to complement their T-shirts. Does anyone have a similar problem and what do they stipulate ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Stuff4blokes
Ali, why is it a problem? Once your thoughts are clear on this you should be able to combat the causes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Pete Longworth
Always a bone of contention this. My answer would be in the form of a question. "What are you trying to protect them from?"
If there is a foreseeable risk of injuries to the lower leg that would be significantly reduced by wearing long trousers then it would be reasonable to ban the use of shorts. These could include:
Cuts / lacerations,
Concrete burns
Sunburn
Burns from hot work
If these can be controlled in other ways, then maybe just banning the use of shorts per se would be unreasonable. At the end of the day we all need to be comfortable in our working environment, however it is not a fashion parade.
The use of shorts needs to be justified as does the banning of shorts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Alan Haynes
A major construction Contractor that I worked with a few years ago insisted that [in periods of strong sunny weather] his operatives should wear clothing that helped protect against sunburn etc.
Accordingly 'short shorts' [as opposed to knee length shorts] and T shirts without any sort of sleeves were banned.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Neil R
Shorts are a no go in construction as far as i am concerned, the risk of injury is greatly increased due to the exposed flesh in a dangerous area.
When you look at an average construction operatives tasks:
Cutting with a stihl saw/ floor saw.
Entry into manholes/ ducts/ trenches.
use of cement/ concrete.
etc.
We haven't allowed shorts for a long time and will not be considering the idea in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ali
Thank you all gentlemen for that. The "problem" as I loosley refer to, is in fact not mine but a management one! Each year the managers try to discourage the men from waering them on the basis of appearance, as we work on refurbishment and our risks are lower compared to heavy construction. However, you have made some good points, which I will bring to the attention of the Director and can incorporate in our guidance note / toolbox talk.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Alan Haynes
As it is a matter of 'appearance' - why not issue staff with the clothing you want them to wear - suitably endorsed with the company logo, and make it a 'uniform' they should wear?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Raymond Rapp
I do wonder how much of this about appearance or rather the King's new clothes. Will the wearing of shorts really protect a person from a stihl or floor saw? Yes, cement burns, but only if you are daft enough to sit or kneel in cement for hours!
We had a similar discussion today about operatives wearing either nothing or a vest under their hi-vis vest. "What's the problem" I said. Silence. Then some bright spark later commented that it was against HSE guidance. Yes, technically he is correct because the good old HSE in their wisdom have recommended that exposed body parts should be covered in hot weather. Really...so now we are going to get guys complaining that they are too hot! Ye Gods, no wonder some people think elf and safety is crackers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By GeoffB4
How much protection does a pair of trousers give against a saw or a drill or .....?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Peter F
What are we now the fashion police.
If long trousers are recommended then shouldn't the company supply as they then become PPE. Do you provide gloves, ear defenders, boots, hard hats etc. Do the workers normally wear t-shirts or is this something new? Jeans during hot and wet weather become restrictive due to the material sticking to legs but bet they are allowed to wear these climbing scaffold etc. do you stop them wearing sunglasses surely this restricts their vision. Do you tell them when it's raining or cold that they must wear, one non cotton t-shirt, 1 jumper, a coat, a woolly hat, thick per of socks etc. no I guess not. Give advice, HSE guide on sunburn, tool box talk and let them enjoy the sun. God knows we don't get it that often.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Neil R
Its not the saw/ drill itself the trousers protect from its the flying debris or in the case of metal cutting the 'spray' we had a nasty accident a few years ago where an operative was cutting metal using a stihl saw. his shin was hit by several fragments and hot sparks i won't go into details but there was a lot of blood and some burns, one trip to hospital, operation to remove a fragment bedded deep in his leg, a week off work, one RIDDOR.
Had he been wearing the heavy duty work trousers or jeans required, probably wouldnt have happened.
Also the person who said in regards to cement burns 'unless stupid enough to kneel in cement' firstly it happens, second of all the cement finds its way into boots far easier without trousers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Raymond Rapp
Unfortunately there is little one can do that does not create some risk, regardless of the interventions in place. We need to understand to what level those risks should be controlled. Moreover, as safety practitioners we are responsible for the perceptions and attitudes to health and safety. Treating adults like children is not my way of promulgating the concept of safe working. My view is, wear shorts if you wish, but be aware there is a slight increase of an injury - your choice.
I read some years ago that over a 100 people a year die from swallowing ball point pens. Now prudent advice is not to chew on them, but are we going to insist that manufacturers put warning labels on ball point pens!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Neil R
"My view is, wear shorts if you wish, but be aware there is a slight increase of an injury -your choice."
Nice ideal, but you can't do that you know as well as i do, if theres an injury, there may be a prosecution, there will almost definetely be a claim, there risk is present and its not controlled, trousers arent mandatory/ not provided, game over.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Raymond Rapp
Sorry Neil, but I do not agree with your comments. I accept that it is a contentious issue and perhaps no one is actually correct here, but what prosecution are you referring to? Can't think of one specifically excluding the wearing of shorts.
Any civil claim for breach of statutory duty or negligence will have to be proved (not as easy as some people think) and in the unlikely event of a successful claim, a contributory negligence will reduce the compensation anyway. Need to be realistic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Neil R
Or work trousers can be provided and mandatory and the whole sorry process could be avoided, At the end of the day most MCGs banned shorts a long time ago surprised the topic has re-occurred.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Swis
Everyone’s talking about whether there’re any risk associated with wearing ‘shorts’ etc etc
What about work ethics, decent dress code, company policy on decency etc. We are talking about working people here not people enjoying on the beach. Most of you thinking about ‘men’ at construction sites, what about women?
Take work as work and dress sensibly. How many people do you see in offices wearing shorts, hardly any even though the risks in offices are negligible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Swis
P.S. I agree to Neil's comments to a certain degree.
Ray - Why even risk for 'contributory' negligence? Why can't you simply say 'NO' to shorts at work. I can't see any big issue in having a set policy on dress code.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ali
Neil,
The reason I opened the topic is because we don't often get very sunny weather (a fact that has not escaped many people) and if this is likey to change this year, then it does become topical. People's memories fade and as you rightly said, it was a long time ago that it was last discussed ergo it is not a bad idea to bring it up again, particularly if there have been new developments since. My aim was to promote fair discussion and there have been useful points I have taken away. It will now be up to me how I present this to the Director. I do empathise somewhat with the men - it can be quite uncomfortable to work in thick, tight fitting work clothes when it's hot and I know that when people feel uncomfortable they lack concentration, which is a risk in itself. I'm not a great lover of baggy clothes, particularly when using machines, drills etc and what I want to do is steer the company along a commonsense approach. Thank you all for your valued contributions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Peter F
A dress code is not a H&S issue, safety is. The post office wear shorts. I would bet that there's nothing written down to say that woman on a construction site must wear jeans etc. It will just be a given.
What would happen if the 'sparks' mentioned set fire to the clothing because the jeans were not fire proof, negligent!.
Is it not the point that you will not state what people should wear rather than not as once you start saying what should be worn then this becomes a standard and hence the company would have to pay for PPE.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Sally
Is this not where the HSE 'principles of sensible risk assessment' come into play.
Trousers are not PPE, if there is a risk of serious injury then other control measures must be in place. If the worst they are going to get is a graze or a small cut then don't worry about it
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By GeoffB4
Quote: Had he been wearing the heavy duty work trousers or jeans required, probably wouldn't have happened.
Really? You don't know that. And the wearing of heavy duty trousers in the wrong conditions may even create accidents.
Try it guys, wearing heavy clothing in hot conditions - I'm aiming that at a lot of safety advisors who have never actually worked on a building site.
Now please, could one of the advocates for trousers over shorts, please answer my question
"How much protection does a pair of trousers give against a saw or a drill or .....?"
Perhaps the author of statement showing them as a control measure, could have a go?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Lee Mac
Location & Size of project is a factor- a large building site in the throws of construction is not the place for shorts when you consider the risks available for all to encounter from abrasive wheels cutting(hot sparks), welding (hot sparks), joinery (sharp edges, splinters), mortar & concrete (cement burns) etc. or working in close vicinity to where these works are conducted.
However if the site is coming to a close and it is a case of snagging being conducted, then dependent on the snagging, the rule may well be relaxed.
One word of warning though, when you relax it for one or two operatives, noses can be put out of joint and this can then have a knock on effect on adherance.
I had a site where one phase was nearing completion- hard hat rule was relaxed in this area as there was no opportunity of a head injury. The problem arose when the guys then were venturing from one area of the site to the area undergoing full construction without the hard hat. Happened too many times resulted in the rule reinstated for all.
Lee
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Raymond Rapp
I am an advocate of sensible risk management. On the railway industry shorts are banned due to the increased likelihood of coming into contact with electrical rails with bare skin. No problem there. Indeed, if the risks can be identified and they are significant, then ban shorts. What I do object to is blanket bans for no good reason; this includes some items of mandatory PPE. H&S has in some areas gone OTT, we need to recognise this and be counted, rather than sitting on the fence (ouch).
Just my personal and honest opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Swis
Geoff,
I argued on the case of a decent dress code at work place, nothing to do with health and safety. Some people may say that there’s nothing wrong in allowing shorts at workplace but who will decided how short these shorts would be. If you allow men using short shorts, what about female worker? They too can suffer from hot weather (maybe a little more) What if they decide to wear clothes of their own choice. How would you cope if the very same workers refuse to wear necessary PPE due to hot weather? Allowing the workers to wear shorts is not the answer to tackle climate extremities, you need to adopt a different approach which is more potent.
In regards to health and safety, no-matter how thin the clothes are, they do provide protection in one way or the other. I can give several examples, such as direct sun exposure, direct contact with hazardous materials, prevents contaminants entering the exposed cuts etc etc.
Peter,
I didn’t get your point regarding sparks and fires. I only know one thing, being a smoker, I’ve dropped lit cigarette ends on to my clothes on many occasions, it caused a few holes in my clothing but never resulted in any burn marks on my skin. For me, clothes proved protective from sparks. It would be interesting to know, how many people die each year due to cloth fires resulting from sparks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By GeoffB4
At the risk of being flippant and obvious, I thought plasters were the tools to prevent contaminants in cuts, not dirty trousers, sun cream for sun, proper aprons or overall of the right material for hazardous substances - shall I go on?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Swis
I’ve never seen any doctor or nurse to use plaster on their hands when handling fluids (they use gloves), similarly, never seen any workers in hot countries using sun creams in summer (they cover themselves) AND finally never seen anyone wearing a underwear /shorts below aprons to avoid splashes of hazardous material. I think, a lot of people, like me, haven’t seen anything beyond their own little world.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By John Gilbertson
It is amazing that such a simple issue can elicit so much response. although it has been alluded to in a couple of posts above the real "problem" here is that managers want safety practitioners to do their jobs for them. Ali, make up a safety case that long trousers are essential and you will be their hero. In their next breath they will be telling all of your disenfranchised workforce that it is your fault because of health and safety. My advice.. tell them there is no legitimate reason for banning shorts purely on the grounds of health and safety and make them manage their own problems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Peter F
Swis,
just meant long trousers, manmade fabrics can go on fire or melt, we have just changed a supplier who has sent us a fabric that melted whilst the person was grinding.
Of course jeans etc will not combust with a spark or a cigerette, but nor do they adquately protect.
My point was how is it that the workers are being told what they cannot wear but are not being told what they can wear i.e. long trousers must be worn, but the company are not telling them what material it should be made from. Is this because once they do then it becomes PPE. I also thought as asafety practitioner that the idea is not always about how many people have died but how many people have been protected. proactive v reactive.
How many people have reported that they wore shorts for work and in someway this effected there health or safety.
I don't know why people post on here or reply if they feel that when people reply only there response counts and after that noone else should respond.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Neil R
Geoffb4, I have been in construction for many years in one form or another, in construction there are a world of hazards to bare skin, sharp concrete/ blacktop edges from existing road lay, sharps, protruding pipes, flying debris, chemicals etc etc. Maybe trousers/ jeans are not indestructable but they are better than nothing, a rugged pear of trousers will protect against a lot of things, it is no coincidence that our accident history shows a steep decline in minor injuries such as cuts/ burns since short sleeves and shorts were prohibited.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Neil R
Apologies meant to say short sleeve high vis vests and trousers were prohibited
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By GeoffB4
Neil, obviously it works for you!
But how many others companies have high rates of injuries like yours had - we certainly haven't on any significant figures for those types of injuries at any of our client sites.
Are you sure you can put the reduction down solely to one factor? Could it be your introduction of measures such as long sleeves etc coincided with a better safety awareness from yourselves being reflected to the workforce?
Out of interest could we see your previous figures and your current ones for minor wounds such as you describe?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By GeoffB4
Swis - My doctor had a plaster on his hand Saturday evening (we were having a bbq) but as this discussion is about construction I'll pass on ;-)
Yes, with 9 years overseas working in a number of countries, I've seen lots of workers in just shorts and flipflops - and I'm sure you have. Not sure you will do yourself any favours continuing to quote overseas practices.
Thirdly, yes I have also seen shorts and aprons as fetching combinations both here and overseas.
Doesn't make any of it right but luckily it shows we all have different experiences.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Swis
Geoff - Point taken.
Peter F - your comments
‘I don't know why people post on here or reply if they feel that when people reply only there response counts and after that noone else should respond.’
If you read the whole thread carefuly, then you’ll probably realise who criticised who. I believe that everyone has ‘somewhat’ to participate on this forum, hence a good learning source. However, if someone criticises one’s post than you should expect their elaboration on that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Raymond Rapp
One of the main issues here is the use of mandatory or blanket rules versus injuries, which I have already alluded to previously. This argument has been used for the introduction of mandatory gloves, which in themselves cause countless problems on site, justifying by saying that hand injuries have decreased. Okay, we are all aspire to reduce injuries. But why, why, must someone painting a door, tiling a wall, completing a survey or inspection be forced into the wearing of gloves on site!!! Madness.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Peter F
Swis,
wasn't having a go at you, read the threads. I wasn't having a go at anyone just a comment that I picked up on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Lee Mac
Raymond
If the MSDS states (tiling adhesive or Paint) states gloves as a control- who are we to say no it's OTT.
I personally fully appreciate your sentiments when I am working at home but the rules change when we come into work.
Example: Over 3 years ago I went through the MSDS & COSHH Assessment for applying skim (to ceilings) they both referred to eye protection to be worn. In all my years involved in construction I have seen this put in practice twice. However I together with the Site Manager had a t-b-t with the ops and their boss (subcontract) regarding the lack of eye protection. A couple of men said there was no way they could plaster ceilings with eye protection.
Quite recently (within the claim period) we had a claim arrive on our doorstep from a plasterer who claims to have damaged his eye as a result of skim falling into it whilst on our site. I had the evidence to prove we had attempted to ensure that as a subcontractors employee we provided sufficient information and instruction.
For me this situation gave cause for concern as I know the alleged IP was one the men who had voiced his grievance at having to wear eye protection.
I know sometimes things may appear on outside as OTT but in my experience these are the very things that can protect against both an injury and the commonly followed claim.
Lee
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.