Rate this!
Julian Davis
Member - 27 posts
It was proably part of Daily Mail's apparent attempt to discredit Health and Safety on any pretext - no doubt that right of cantre 'paper' would support poor houses and children working up chimneys. Their reporting is sensationalist for the most part and does no justice to what a supposedly serious newspaer shoud be circulating. Good onIOSH to be challenging some of these outrageous statements!
Rate this!
Colin Sandiford
Member - 2 posts
I regularly travel from East Croydon to London Victoria using Southern Region trains. Some of the trains have a GPS system that tells the train where it is currently located.
Some of the guards state that the delay in opening the doors once the train reaches London Victoria is due to “Safety” regions when it is apparently due to the fact that the GPS system takes a while to locate a signal.
I wonder how many other people hear “Health and Safety” used as an excuse for problems that have no connection with Health and Safety.
Rate this!
someone somewhere
Member - 18 posts
Over application is most definately a problem.
Rate this!
Tony Norris
Member - 3 posts
This is fine for IOSH to adopt the sensible line on Health and Safety cases, but at the end of the day, it is the company's, and their H & S managers who will have to suffer the effects and adverse publicity when they are found to be in breach. The problem with all H & S legislation is that none of it has a clear delineation between what is required, and what is acceptable legally. In this age of ever increasing litigation, all H & S employees must have a sense of self preservation in order to maintain their employers integrity, own careers and the safety of employees. As many decisions are based on individual perceptions of a situation, 'better safe than sorry' is the general order of the day.
Rate this!
michelle valentine
Member - 2 posts
I fully support IOSH's stance here. Illinformed organisations think that health and safety legislation is much more prescriptive than it actually is, and often over interpret the legislation to try and reduce risk to zero, something the HSE clearly state is generally not possible.
This is a key issue for disabled people, who are most often the 'victims' of inappropriate and even discrminatory intrepretion of health and safety regulations. I would be pleased to see a much more sensible approach and the level of public debate improved from the Daily Mail approach to something a bit more sensible.
Rate this!
someone somewhere
Member - 18 posts
As we're all aware the HSE rarely (for many good reasons) issues direct rules and boundries. Instead the HSE issues 'guidelines'.
It only takes one clever 'what if person' to trigger many inappropriate control measures one after another in some self perpetuating machine.
The number of times I've heard "Yes but what if?" drives me nuts.
If only there was such a thing as 'Common Sense' in a 'Common' way.
Rate this!
Craig Stuart
Member - 99 posts
We have to be careful about using the term 'Common Sense'. I understand how in this context contributors have used it, but it is sometimes used as a 'catch all' approach to safety management, i.e. 'Why do we need risk assessments, health and safety is just common sense!' The Daily Mail et al, are constantly on the look out for 'Health and Safety Gone Mad' headlines. Why is this? Because they and their ilk see legislation as a financial and administrative burden on business. They would be much happier if they were able to avoid all legal requirements and have no duty of care.
Rate this!
Geoff Porteous
Member - 28 posts
As a Health and Safety practioner for over 20 years i ike you all are probably sick to death of hearing that same old clich'e "Safety is just common sense" the total flaw in the statement is that everyone is credited with common sense !
Rate this!
Mike Hosking
Member - 12 posts
My answer to the common sense stetment is the following and it is amazing how people's attitude changes to sympathy and empathy with the good old HS person.
"I agree and welcome common sense, however see my point in that it is not something that can be assumed/guarnteed to be in the fore front of your mind., all day every day at work,at home or at play." Gotchaaa
Rate this!
Edward Jelliss
Member - 2 posts
The only trouble with common sense is that its not vey common
Rate this!
Irene Farrar
Member - 7 posts
I agree with Edward. Common sense often gets left at the workplace door. My ongoing struggle is to get employees to recognise that it isn't just down to the bosses with responsibility for H & S but they have a duty of care for themselves and their colleagues too.
Rate this!
Nigel DuPree
Member - 158 posts
Dea Irene, you are so right.... The funny thing about "Rights & Responsibilities" is that the employers lawyers and the courts are always gonna check out whether there has been "contributory negligence" by the employee and if so they can kiss good bye to a significant proportion of any compensation and damages being claimed.
You will need to remind them that "their H & S" can not be delegated and that they are responsible for looking after themselves as well as others.
It's a bit like charity it starts at home and if you don't look after yourself first you are not going to be well, fit or secure enough to meaningfully look after anyone else..........
The buck has always stopped with you however tempting it is to blame someone else you have always been responsible for your own poooo.
Rate this!
someone somewhere
Member - 18 posts
The statement said...
"IF ONLY there was such a thing as 'Common Sense' "
We all know it doesn't exist especially with H&S.
Rate this!
Mike Holdsworth
Member - 1 post
The "Common Sense" element must be used in the preparation of all risk assessments. However, some of the comments made by others are quite right. One cannot assume that common sense will always be present in the workforce or the boardroom. it is therefore better to issue common sense instructions and hope others will recognise them as such.
0 (0)
