Comments by Charlie Peel

Charlie Peel
Member - 38 posts

Would be interested in the reason these sites are giving if you can find out please post their reasons here Rebecca

Charlie Peel
Member - 38 posts

Craig, Graham
I am worried by what I am reading.

To me, work in close proximity to HV switchgear means that you are able to touch the switchgear.

Work this close to HV switchgear would most likely need to be controlled by a permit to work or at least a limitation of access. Both of these will give details of what can be done around the switchgear. Indeed I can't think of a time when I have let anyone work within close proximity to my HV switchgear without at least a limitation of access (including painting the walls of the enclosure)

You need to contact the owners of the switchgear, or the authorising authority, or the site authorised (senior authorised) person for further details on how to proceed.

Just remember that HV (High Voltage) is very friendly – LV (Low Voltage) you have to touch to get a shock, whereas HV will reach out and shake hands with you. To this end work should NEVER EVER be sanctioned when a person is close enough to live conductors to have HV arc to them or their work equipment.

I speak with the experience of being a senior authorised person (HV) for more years than I care to remember.

If you are worried about the health risk of working within a close proximity of HV switchgear there are plenty of theories but little if anything has ever been proven.

Charlie Peel
Member - 38 posts

4 x 4's have a place and it is not in the congested streets of a city or a town. Too many of these vehicles are used for the school run and shopping trips to the supermarket. Get them back where they belong on a farm or works unit.

As to the other gas guzzlers it is well known and accepted that they produce more pollution than a smaller engined "city car", again get them back where they belong, in today?s climate of resource depletion and forthcoming shortages of fuel these cars have no place or use in a responsible caring society.

Ken Livingston is right if the owners of these vehicles refuse to be socially responsible price them off the road.

Charlie Peel
Member - 38 posts

What happens in mainland Europe? When I've been there on holiday I have seen work practices occurring on a daily basis that would not happen here, even with the worst cowboy contractor. However they are not being prosecuted, which implies that their legislation is acceptable where ours is not.

Is this a case of Europe attacking our system which most employers comply with, because they can, whilst failing to enforce laws in other countries that are worded to their liking but that every employer seems to ignore in the pursuit of their everyday business

Charlie Peel
Member - 38 posts

Part M building regs applied to premises from 1992 I understand. our prison which we operate under a contract to the Home office was completed by the HO in 1994 and doesnt meet the standards laid down in the regs. Whose responsibility is it to bring the building up to standards ?

I could give you more details but the site limits the size of the email to a small one !

Charlie Peel
Member - 38 posts

Andrew, I suspect that we use the same ?leading supplier?, and have been doing for some time now, the system works well and staff seem to be happy with the arrangement, although there are one or two who prefer to go to their own opticians and we do allow this. In this case we match the cash amount of the voucher. Staff are free to choose between the options although we do encourage staff to use the ?leading supplier?
I do agree with Anon's comments - go for it

Charlie Peel
Member - 38 posts

Taking up on Jane's point, one of our ex colleges who smoked was always nipping out for a ciggy break. Over a week we kept notes of their smoke breaks which totalled up to more than 1 1/2 hours every day.
When you work this out over a year it equates to about 360 hours which is an extra 45 days off every year. Hardly fair on us non smokers is it?

Charlie Peel
Member - 38 posts

A question from our training section:During a recent visit a training inspector commented that in their opinion our risk assessments weren't undertaken correctly.

They advocated that every hand tool used in training areas should be individually assessed rather than a single assessment covering all hand tools in a particular area, such as pottery, carpentry, etc.

When asked to clarify this opinion they stated that it was impossible to use the same risk assessment for a sharp chisel and for a screwdriver or handplane.

Would you agree that in order to be suitable and sufficient a risk assessment has to be about a specific tool i.e. a 12mm wood chisel with plastic handle or a No 2 phillips screwdriver with wood handle.

Or could a more generic aproach covering correct training in the use of tools be acceptable

Charlie Peel
Member - 38 posts

Does anyone happen to know if we have to use the accident book as supplied by the HSE or can we use an inhouse printed version which meets the same criteria and contains all of the same information ?

Charlie Peel
Member - 38 posts

I have read this article and all of the comments with interest. I am a H&S professional with many (too many?) years of experience of both H&S and life. I would not consider it to be safe to climb up onto a window sill at ground floor level let alone third floor level
To me the principle of holding the company libel for the action of a reckless individual who had no intention to take any care of their own safety or others who may be affected by her actions (she could have landed on someone on her way down for example) is incredible. Does this mean that operators of any high structure are to be held responsible if a person falls to their death from the structure, what about land owners with trees on it, do they need to fit anti climb devices to trees?
Incredible !

Charlie Peel
Member - 38 posts

We are looking at setting up a training area for teaching prisoners how to use commercial sewing machines. The machines are electric and use compressed air at around 8bar to assist in the operation of the machines. We will be using cotton fabric to make a variety of bed linen and similar products. we have identified maintenance requirements for the machines and the compressor but haven't been able to obtain manufacturers handbooks for the machines as they are second hand. We are very concerned about exposure to dust from the process and if any health screening is necessary for staff / prisoners? Also is there a MEL for exposure to textile dust ?

Is there anything else to look out for?

Charlie Peel
Member - 38 posts

I faced this same question a few years ago and I then found the only people who could help me were the manufacturers of the copier toner. I asked them for a copy of the material safety data sheet and for any specific disposal instructions. They supplied me with all the details required and also the address of a recycler who would be pleased to receive the empty cartridges for recycling.

Charlie Peel
Member - 38 posts

With the implementation of the Hazardous Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2005 I assume that the following regulations will no longer apply:

- Special Waste Regulations 1996, SI 972

- Special Waste (Amendment) Regulations 1996, SI 2019

- Special Waste (Amendment) Regulations 1997, SI 251

- Special Waste (Amendment) (England and Wales) Regulations 2001 SI 3148

Is that assumption correct ? If so, On what date are the above regulations no longer effective.

Charlie Peel
Member - 38 posts

The DSE regs require the employer to provide corrective glasses which are required for using DSE equipment, or for the eye test. As long as you aren't paying more than the cost of the glasses there is no benefit to the employee you are only meeting legal requirements

Charlie Peel
Member - 38 posts

We have just constructed a ramp out of steel with a fibre glass decking. The ramp is to be used for getting roll cages with up to 500kg of weight in them into a building as well as providing access for mobility impaired persons and staff using the building.

The ramp slopes do meet the requirement of the DDA and a barrier at 950mm high has been constructed to meet the requirements of the working at height regs, a handrail meeting the requirements of the DDA has been fitted.

My question is ?Does the ramp need to be load tested to ensure it will meet the stresses imposed upon it ??

Charlie Peel
Member - 38 posts

Whilst agreeing with Ron that these people do exist. I must side with Dean - I am aware of staff who have been told that. . . ?these are the hours you have to work, but of course when looking for prospective candidates for promotion you must remember that the management will be looking for those people who are prepared to go the extra mile and put in the extra hour, possibly even at home to ensure that the project succeeds? . . .

Having had that said to them, I am sure that many staff, particularly junior staff will feel pressured into doing more hours than the law allows. It is these people the law must protect.

Charlie Peel
Member - 38 posts

Martin

If you have concerns about their use try talking to Colin Saunders of Egress Assured on 01509 829867. If I understand the situation correctly he used to work for evac chair and is now on his own. He will be able to give you an accurate briefing on the use of these chairs

Charlie Peel
Member - 38 posts

I have read all of the comments on this chain with much interest. We have one evac chair and have had for several years, during that time several people have been trained in using it and they have left. We have today had a training session run by Egress Assured (01509 829867) where 4 members of staff were trained to not only use the chair but also to train others in how to use the chair. I do feel that this is the way forward for all companies.

Training involves being shown how to use the chair and how to dispel the fear and myth that surrounds its use. I will admit that as a 17 stone ex rugby player I was a fair bit frightened to be in the hands of a chap half my size especially when going over the top stair for the first time. I can understand how a mobility impaired person would feel, especially if there was panic and smoke all around them at the time. After the first fear had subsided, I enjoyed the ride and looked forward to my second trip down the stairs.

As a qualified health & safety professional I was looking for problems, both for the person in the chair and the person operating the chair. If correct procedures are used there are no problems associated with its use, providing that the following criteria are met.

The chair is maintained in good working order.

The persons operating the chair are trained and competent to do so.

The persons operating the chair practice evacuation regularly to maintain their own confidence levels.

Ideally the persons identified as needing assistance with egress by using the chair should be given an opportunity to experience an evacuation as a practice so as to know what to expect in the case of an emergency.

I add this bit because when we were being trained one of our union reps watched us and we pressured him to have a ride, which he did. He later admitted his concern at the start and stated that he had a bad back and that walking down a couple of flights of stairs usually hurt his back, that was why he usually used the lift, but the ride in the evac chair was comfortable, he felt safe, and would rather be evacuated in the chair than have to walk down 2 flights of stairs.

I honestly believe training and familiarity with the equipment is the key issue here.

Charlie Peel
Member - 38 posts

Surely with technology available today, we could link the DVLA computer listing cars on the road and the MIB computer so that a listing of cars on the road against cars insured becomes available, MOT testing could also be linked in.

Not to difficult if people are serious about controlling the mennace of uninsured cars