This situation has arisen in work.

We have two manufacturing sites that are walking distance apart in fact so close I could throw a stone at the other building, regularly I find myself having to leave one building to go to another which requires me crossing fairly busy road. (Busy times 8-9am and 3-5pm)

There are no pedestrian crossings traffic lights etc.... Using common sense there is definitely a best area to cross the road

Other members of staff need to make regular visits between sites too sometimes to collect small samples less than 2Kg.

We are having staff member refuse to walk over to the other site because they feel it’s too dangerous to cross the road and are not sure that they would be insured to do so, but they have no problem walking out to the shops on their dinner.

People actually use the pool cars to drive 100 yards to the other site claiming that this is a safer practise? I personally think its bone idleness or just being totally argumentative for the sake of it. How is driving site to site any safer than walking how can this be quantified? They may pull out of the yard into an oncoming truck?

I guess what I’m asking is from a company’s point of view what duty of care do we owe our staff, it’s totally necessary for people to cross this public road between sites this can’t be taken out of the equation its fundamental to the day to day going ons of the business, we can’t build a monorail , a bridge or a subway so what are we meant to do when people refuse to walk between sites as part of their jobs?

Sometimes I despair with Health and Safety and this is one of those times, Health and Safety has many more good points than bad without question but I find people being people try to leave common sense at home and try to be as awkward as possible, I'm not for one minute suggesting that people should be forced to carry out dangerous work but come on people cross the road as a fact of life in or out of work its unavoidable

Definitely speak to the council about installing a properly controlled pedestrian crossing. Offer to meet all or part of the costs. If the road is a busy one I can't see how you can justify expecting colleagues to cross it without some form of protection just because crossing a road is an every day part of life.

I like the idea of a green cross code training course...you might like to consider hi-visibility vests as well!

Walker, that made me laugh! thanks.

Our Car park is on the other side of a busy road, we were like you approached the council

In not so many words, their answer was "after there has been two or three deaths outside, we might consider altering the speed limit".

Dependant upon how many persons are required to cross the road each day and at what time. it may be worth putting on a shuttle service until a pedestrian brigde or crossing is implemented. Involve the employees even the regimented ones whose feet are firmly stuck in and thrash it out in a working group.

Failing those: kidnap a lollypop lady.

Back to the old chesnut - risk assessment.

Options for redesigning the work i.e. remove the need to cross the road and collect samples.

Identify (as you have done) the best place to cross - inform staff.

Try and minimise the times of day to cross the road, wherever possible (as you appear to have done)

Transmit reports/data by email by doing the necessary tests from where you would normally collect the samples from, if possible.

Provide hi vis jackets etc

Discuss control options - zebra crossing etc, bridge, speak to the council etc as already done etc - probably not reasonably practicable

Consult and inform staff of the risk assessment and its findings.

It would seem reasonable to expect a rational adult to be able to cross a road - its called normal life.

Document etc.

Risk assessment done, risks reduced SFAIRP.

Refusal to work is then probably a discipline issue and everything it might entail.

Surely there is a crossing somewhere along the road? Just instruct them to use that.

Back in the 70's at Ferranti, (Edinburgh, Crewe Toll) hundreds of us used to cross the road every day. If we didn't, we didn't get lunch (or tea if working overtime) as the canteen was in the factory across the road.
Quite a busy road then too as I recall.
Generally, trips across the road were a frequent and welcome break in our activities between the drawing office and the workshops on the other side, several times a day, every day; carrying drawings, models or prototypes.

Yes, your Company could take up the initiative and maybe fund a traffic island in the middle of the road (road width permitting) and if your pedestrian volumes warrant this.
Using pool cars to cross the road is scandalous - are your Managers aware of this?

Otherwise, I can't help thinking that the "map to the job centre" is probably the best suggestion here.

I'm with BOD on this... see above.
If they applied for a job on a site which straddles a road, surely signing a contract of employment implies acceptance of this "everyday life" hazard; crossing a road. Refusal to comply with contractual obligations could presumably lead down a disciplinary route, or choosing to work elsewhere.
Now if the employee develops a mobility or sight impairment, you have to think again and consider reasonable adjustments. But a non-disabled employee can surely be expected to cross a road! What next; refusal to use the stairs in case they slip and refusal to use the lift in case it breaks?

Greetings All,

I work in a school which has a seperate sports ground which we lease about a mile away in the center of a busy town. We are currently reviewing our arrangements of how the pupils walk to and from our main campus and this sports ground. All of which has been highlighted by the unfolding case at Worth School.

Our pupils (13-18 years of age) currently cross many small streets on the journey, but also are required to cross three larger intersections, which pose the greater hazard. Logistically, staff cannot accompany the pupils to and from the ground, bussing the pupils is out of the question due to numbers, timeframes etc, so what we are left with is an increase in our green cross training, staff walking the route once with the pupils at the start of each academic year and monitoring/spot checks to ensure the pupils comply throughout the remainder of the year.

Given the ages of our pupils and the duty of care owed by the school, can anyone suggest anything more that could be done or that we should be thinking about.

Thanks again in advance

Definitely one for The Tufty Club, or would The Clangers be more appropriate?

Words fail me.

Surely a myth moment is nigh, where is Ms Hackett when you need her?

Do your colleagues need someone to button coats and make sure their gloves are still on elastic so they don't lose them.

The fact is they cross roads safely for the rest of their lives why does being at work make any difference? Or am I missing a point?

Forgive me I'm off tomorrow so today is my Friday.

Do nothing at all. Let somebody get killed whilst doing a task in works time and pay the consequences later. Go to court and state it is a regrettable incident that should never have happened etc. Or pull your finger out and address the fact that RTC involvint fatatalities are arounf 1500 per year.

Material to help you create a course that'll please RayRapp...

http://think.direct.gov....7s/the-green-cross-code/

:)

I have no strong views on this topic but I would like to mention a few points. Firstly is this a 'significant risk' only the OP will truly know this as the variables are: is this a motorway, an A road or even B or C road, is it a dual carriageway is there a footpath, do drivers and pedestrians have good view, do any staff have impairments that hinder in their ability to cross a road........

The Dept. Of Transport release figures each year for the number of casualties and fatalities reported to the Police for all road accidents. The most up to date results are for 2011. The following is an extract of the results:

There were 666 casualties per one billion vehicle miles
There were 88 deaths or serious injuries per one billion vehicle miles
There were 453 pedestrian deaths in total
There were 883 car occupants deaths in total

I'm not a statistician but the numbers are interesting as to whether crossing a road is a significant risk.........

Friday at last...

I'm absolutely astonished - gobsmacked in fact - that we have reached post 32 of this thread with nobody asking why the chicken crossed the road....

It seems he didn't cross the road - he took a pool car....

Sorry... I'll get me coat.

Steve

I once again despair at conventional 'elf and safety'

It is a reasonable expectation for an adult to cross a road with out further instruction. Its a life skill.

If the statistics posted by Lisa Boulton at #31 are correct - for ALL road accidents - then how many casualties are attirbutable to a work situation and in particular pedestrian casulaties.

It certainly sounds as the the risk is ALARP if you compare the risk to the HSE R2P2 document and the figures given in that document as acceptable risk criteria.

Assuming an average speed of 50mph, one billion (1000000000) equals 20,000,000 driving hours.

Given 453 ALL casualties = 1 death every 44150 hrs = about every 5.04yrs for ALL pedestrians casualties across ALL of the country

So if you could get the figures for 'work related pedestrians' then I would suggest the actual the risk of death is a number of orders of magnitude less e.g. maybe 1 every 10-20yrs, directly related to a pedestrian crossing a road while on works time.

A sense of perspective is needed

Wood28983,

You are quite correct. We have recognised that being younger individuals they are far less risk aware than one could expect an adult would be, furthermore there has been a history of horseplay when travelling in groups, we therefore recommended the pupils be directed to travel in pairs or three's at the most.

The roads have neither pedestrian crossings not traffic lights as they lead mostly to streets of residential houses. Due to the times of sports activities the academic heads have made it clear that no academic staff could be made available to assist.

We are fairly confident now (given the various responses) that we have arrived at a reasonable solution. The plan to be effected will be scrutinised in the coming academic year, and that should identify any further deficiencies.

I would like to thank everyone again for their responses. Anyone have a squirrel suit to fit a 6ft 7in man?

Mersey,
I guess a more considered answer would be that if your peeps have true safety concerns then you need to listen. After all, isn't that what a good safety culture is about.

Organise a meeting, listen and provide feedback....

On a related note, does your policy state that 'employees are in their right to refuse to do something if THEY feel it is unsafe to do so?'

Good luck