Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By Andrew Cartridge
How do I calculate an FWI (Fatality Weighted Injury Index) as I am certainly no mathematician, any help & advice would be very much appreciated.
Regards
Andy
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ian G Hutchings
Andrew
I think the weighting is dependent on industry/situation. For example value of life (or equivalent injury rate) calculation is higher for rail passengers than road/car users.
There may be more detail in the Rail Safety and Standards Board www.rssb.co.uk website in the annual safety reports. Afraid I can't help with the maths side.
Best wishes
Ian
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Raymond Rapp
Andrew
Agree with previous posting in that the 'weighting' or CBA, is dependant on the value of life within that sector or company. For example, some years ago the railway company I worked for valued a passenger life at £1M and an employees' life at £100K!
The whole process is more subjective than it is objective in my opinion. Hence it is not really any real worth, unless of course you are a numbers geek with few morals.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By IOSH Moderator
Point of order.
The mathematics are merely a tool to inform the morality of the situation. Similarly the mathematicians are the technicians utilising those tools.
Neither the numbers or the technicians have "few morals".
Carry on.
Jon
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ian G Hutchings
The value of life is simply a method for identifying the priority of investment from government. This is based on public risk perception and acceptance of control in certain circumstances.
Best wishes
Ian
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Andrew Cartridge
Ray
Steady on, remember your blood pressure ;-)
I have now been informed that:
Fatalities and weighted injuries (FWI)
1 FWI =
•1 fatality
•10 major injuries
•200 minor injuries
Thanks
Andy
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Raymond Rapp
My 'morals' comment was tongue in cheek and not specifically aimed at any individual. Did it really warrant a 'point of order' comment?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Descarte
I read the point of order comment as also tongue in cheek
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Andrew Cartridge
Ray
As the originator of the thread, I certainly took no offence.
Jon why did you jump in so quickly?
Regards
Andy
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Jim Walker
I thought Ray's comment was quite reasonable ( he did express it as an opinion) as was Jon's.
I think Jon was wrong to have had his Moderator's hat on at the time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Raymond Rapp
Andy/Jim
In fairness to Jon, he sent me an email politely explaining the decision. I still can't see the rationale behind Jon's comments, but at least he made an effort.
No offence taken.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.