Anyone else seen this article - https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9308868/furniture-maker-sweeping-factory-ban/

"FURNITURE maker Michael Northcroft has been ordered to stop sweeping his factory floor with a broom by safety inspectors — because they say it is a health hazard.

They insist a broom raises wood dust that can be harmful and want him to fork out for a £2,000 industrial vacuum cleaner to clean up instead.

Defiant Michael, 63, who has used a broom for four decades without any problems, said: “It’s a load of rubbish. My message to the health and safety executives is, ‘Sorry, I’m not doing it. The broom stays’.

“I’ve been managing factories for over 40 years and never have I come across such a joke."

Comments in the article are roughly spit 50/50 with half siding with the H&S gone mad and the rest citing the issues with timber dust. 

This business owner is what we in the insurance surveying world would call a poor moral hazard. 

Suspect this 15 minutes of fame, standing up to the H&S jobsworths will cost him in the long run. 

The "poll" shows 75% think this is unjustified - perhaps it is time to let natural selection be the first control measure deployed

The only problem with the Darwinian approach is that:

1. The poor sod on the end of the broom is probably unaware that hardwood dust is a cause of cancer
2. The effects of this will take years to develop and will probably lead to a miserable end of life for this individual, which will cost the NHS (ie the great tax paying public) loads of money to manage.

Bu then what do expect from the Sun the newspaper that makes the Daily Wail look like the discourses of Plato

If he did buy the vacuum then perhaps he could clean up all the dust lying on top of his LEV ducting

Now the polls at 81%

Quite a well time article as the HSE start a campaign on construction dust control today:

https://www.hvpmag.co.uk/HSE-inspections-to-target-construction-firm-dust-control-practice-/11472

From the current edition of the ACoP for COSHH:

Paragraph 10 - Employers should regard a substance as hazardous to health if it is hazardous in the form in which it may occur in the work activity. A substance hazardous to health need not be just a chemical compound, it can also include mixtures of compounds, micro-organisms or natural materials, such as flour, stone or wood dust.

Originally Posted by: ttxela

My Saturday job whilst still at school was to empty the shaving bins of a joinery workshop, the LEV in the shop sucked the shavings and dust to large 'rooms' accessed by removing an access panel. I then climbed in with a plastic dustbin and scooped up the shavings and dumped them into a skip on the front of a 4wd forklift (a paper dust mask was provided). I then drove the forklift to a dump area across the yard where i spread the shavings out and burnt them whilst wading about in them as they burnt in firemans wellies raking them over.

Great fun as a 15 year old but perhaps I would have been better off with a paper round.....

“When I were a lad on Sundays I’d have to climb up the inside of the factory chimney to scrape off the soot and tar with my finger nails and then I’d get beaten for me trouble… kids these days don’t know their born etc”

(Paraphrase from a sketch from “At Last the 1948 show” not Monty Python like most people think-useful factoid for this week)

Originally Posted by: Safety Geek

I cannot understand why people don't take health risks serious. 

Nobody trusts experts anymore (unless they are sitting in an aeroplane). They think we are all hiding the truth and have an agenda. Click bait such as "The one trick to lose weight that Doctors don't want you to know about" are a good indicator of this.

Originally Posted by: Evans38004

Does anyone know how many staff are employed in this factory?

If he is the sole worker / employee, then I wonder how he could have killed more than Harold Shipman

The article states "I’ve been managing factories for over 40 years" which suggests he is not a sole worker. The photos suggest this is a factory as opposed to a workshop too. 

Also "I’ve been told I have to ban the use of dry sweeping and must confirm with them by a particular date that I’ve complied with their requirements". as opposed to "I have been told to stop using dry sweeping"

The video shows other workers too.

So no, we don't know how many people he has affected, but we do know he is not a lone worker.

The irony that he has a dust mask around his neck, instead of actually wearing it is also not lost on me.

But of course, it doesn't make a good story to say that the law is correct. What was printed might have sold a few more copies of their rag. It might also just have encouraged a few others to ignore safe working practice and damage someone's health. There doesn't seem to be any rule that says newspapers can be held accountable for the effect of the false facts they publish.