Simian, quick tip to avoid being accosted everytime you make a post. Fake your own deaths in a macarbre safety /training accident , we'll all be terribly upset etc etc . Re-join the forum using a different name like "amon is i " or something sneaky and cunning like that and hey presto no hassle ! what do ya think ? only joking have fun and don't take things to heart and hellooooooooo
New Member
- Thread starter simian
- Start date
simian
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2010
- Messages
- 634
- Reaction score
- 0
russ we have big shoulders and if thats your scooter it looks good. Is it a 125
---------- Post added at 09:02 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:57 PM ----------
Steve, only having a bit of a joke about beating the ECITB thread. I am going to start a new thread on CISRS, ECITB and NVQ/QCF as i feel it needs to be seen by all and not just anyone who looks on this. I am doing a report at the moment so it may be later or early tomorrow. I feel it will address a few concerns and put some of the training issues to bed.
Maybe?
S
steve gregory
Guest
Ok look forward to yourselves posting it.. This industry will suceed even better if we work together.
No ,TV175 Series 2 mate. Its a bit girly but I built it for my wife who never bothered to pass her test, shame that .
Exactly Swifty
X
XxIANxX
Guest
The scaffolder is still working at height with the possibility of falling onto the boarded lift. This risk could easily be eliminated by using alternative collective fall prevention equiptment thats on the market. So when you right your risk assesment i'd be asking myself if i'd done all thats reasonably practicable before putting my employees on a pedestal
---------- Post added at 02:26 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:23 PM ----------
.
The statistics for falls from ladders/step ladders are out there for all to see
TomP
Well-known member
I agree to some point with what your saying, but a risk assessment also runs to compliment the company so if the company doesnt have 7000 pounds it cant spend 7000 pounds for the thousands of feet of advanced guardrails needed!
The step is a cost effective method for small and some larger companies.
The step is a cost effective method for small and some larger companies.
X
XxIANxX
Guest
.
Until the inevitable fatality then the cost of £7000 pounds becomes insignificant. If a company can't afford to supply there employees with suitable equipment then there is a major problem.
TomP
Well-known member
agree, but if you mitigate the risks ie handrail = inside and outside ledger, transoms either side and operative clipped on surely the risk is reduced to an acceptable amount, as they are surrounded by handrails and should they slip they are clipped on.
personally i think there is more risk of me slipping on the lift with the single guardrail inplace and going under it while not clipped on?
personally i think there is more risk of me slipping on the lift with the single guardrail inplace and going under it while not clipped on?
I understand the point Ian is making but I have to agree with you TomP, if you manage to fall from the step as in the picture you should never have been allowed to work at height in the first place. As has been quoted many times, you are never going to completely risk assess all the risks out of working at height and that is why highly trained individuals such as ourselves will always be required.
TomP
Well-known member
thanks aom you seem to have put it better than me.
Ian im not saying your not right about the working at height after all its that grey area its all about how you interpret it!
Ian im not saying your not right about the working at height after all its that grey area its all about how you interpret it!
X
XxIANxX
Guest
I'd prefer to look at it from an accident investigators view. Remember when you go up that step your working at height, could you have substituted that risk for a lower risk, yes in my opinion. Have you done all thats reasonably practicable ,no in my opinion.
The same could be said every time you build a scaffold, could you have brought the work to ground level or did you have to do it at all. I prefer to look at it from a scaffs point of view and say if you manage to fall off that your either a contortionist or a fud either way there may be an opening down asda stacking shelves.
X
XxIANxX
Guest
Dailymotion - scaffold fall, new jack throws vic grimes XPW - a Sports & Extreme video
.
Falling doesn't hurt anyway
.
Falling doesn't hurt anyway
i love fridays
Well-known member
hi there
TomP
Well-known member
I'd prefer to look at it from an accident investigators view. Remember when you go up that step your working at height, could you have substituted that risk for a lower risk, yes in my opinion. Have you done all thats reasonably practicable ,no in my opinion.
If it came to court, they would look at Common knowledge then Industry knowledge (other firms use the step) these are the two it would usually be based on and even if it came to Expert knowledge they would go to NASC and surely as it is specific guidance it would be hard to prove that you have not assessed 'reasonably practicable'.
i think we are going to have to agree to disagree on this one Ian, i do understand where your coming from and you do have the health and safety occupation, but while it is in the guidance i see no problem with small firms using them as a cost effective way of reducing the risk, especially if you have had the training and use the process properly.
This will always be open to human error but, having trained operatives in SG4:10 has reduced the risk of the open traverse to fit your next double!?
simian
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2010
- Messages
- 634
- Reaction score
- 0
Good answer there Tom, however if we raise and lower boards we need to be clipped on and we can fall. If we do fall will this mean we now board ev ery lift? that's what I like about reasonably practical it allows the scaffolders some common sense. As an expert witness as well as a consultant, we work on the system of reducing the risk, a 1m fall off a step of which we have none recorded versus a fall from an unguarded traverse. Of course an advanced guardrail or b safe is A better product but you have to cut your cloth to suit and that would be recognised if a prosecution or a claim evolved. Sometimes people and company safety advisors jump to advanced guardrails and fully boarded as it makes it easier for them not you as a Scaff.
Ian
Ian
TomP
Well-known member
Thanks Ian,
do you think that we will see fully boarded lifts coming in on the next revision of the Sg?
i think this would be hard as the smaller firms will not be able to afford to run, unless trying to stay under the radar?
do you think that we will see fully boarded lifts coming in on the next revision of the Sg?
i think this would be hard as the smaller firms will not be able to afford to run, unless trying to stay under the radar?