scaff step

aom said:
Why are they not in line Flinty, and why are they not behind a guard rail?

---------- Post added at 06:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:18 PM ----------

Don't take this the wrong way marra but Flinty, have a wee look at how marra describes how they build their jobs before castigating the step.

It's a simple reasonably cheap affordable method for all and if that was the hardest operation we had to do in our working day we would all be happy.

Anyone who still asks men to throw a couple of boards over a system bay with no rail or inter really deserves what's coming to them.

And yes, I know you can slide it but the step is our preferred method.
Click to expand...

Lashing a job up and working off a couple of boards will always be unsafe, spent the first few years of scaffolding doing that. Even putting a 3rd board in would get you moaned at and ridiculed!

The reason, in my eyes, they are not inline is because SG4:10 is all about avoiding fall protect to the extreme, and using fall prevent. The step requires you to climb onto a small tea tray, clip on and put in tube at a reach. Immediately it has failed to overcome the 'problem' of traversing as it still requires scaffolders to clip on as they are not completely protected from a fall. The ledger (in most cases) only protects from falls away from the scaffold, not back onto the platform.

It's definitely not the hardest thing I have to work with all day, but over time I'm still not convinced that its a solution or even safe.

I still think the industry would be better off getting more people to work to SG4:05, there is no excuse not to. No extra equipment or complicated training. We know it worked and it reduced fatalities to nothing! We know that not everyone is working to these new rules so are potentially working unsafely.
 
It also (believe it or not) overloads the board if you use the type with the steps.
The same theory as a woman in stilettos and an elephant's foot.
 
The annoying thing about it is though as we all know only too well the regulation changed and we will never be allowed to go back to that way of working. Maybe if more worked to it they would never have changed it, maybe they would have I suppose we will never know.

The fact that it is in the guidance means that it is in line with sg4:10.

If you don't like it just don't use it, do it like Swifty and everyone's happy.

---------- Post added at 07:05 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:04 PM ----------
SWIFTY said:
It also (believe it or not) overloads the board if you use the type with the steps.
The same theory as a woman in stilettos and an elephant's foot.
Click to expand...

Yes, I heard this one, couldn't stop laughing for a week.:laugh:
 
I see loads of jobs going on everyday,not a step in sight. Scaffs I talk to, never even heard of them. Was one of those changes without consultation I believe. Are we the only country made to use these??:wondering:
 
aom said:
The annoying thing about it is though as we all know only too well the regulation changed and we will never be allowed to go back to that way of working. Maybe if more worked to it they would never have changed it, maybe they would have I suppose we will never know.

The fact that it is in the guidance means that it is in line with sg4:10.

If you don't like it just don't use it, do it like Swifty and everyone's happy.
Click to expand...

I don't think the regs changed with SG4:10, simply how to interpret it. While using the old method we were still obeying the WAHR but because SG4 changed its interpretation of it that is how we must work.

I wish I could use another method but I'll be fined, its use the step or feck off. No other method tolerated.
 
The trouble is that a lot of companies won't change their RAMS to suit or hide behind "It's company policy" because the ***** are too lazy or scared to change them.

The end result being the steps get left in the van and people lose their jobs.
 
The WAH regs did change Flinty and that was that. These regulations are updated the same way these guidance notes are.
 
SWIFTY said:
The trouble is that a lot of companies won't change their RAMS to suit or hide behind "It's company policy" because the ***** are too lazy or scared to change them.

The end result being the steps get left in the van and people lose their jobs.
Click to expand...

That is very true, but that doesn't mean the steps themselves are rubbish just the usual collection of uneducated and weak managers. You can use the rules to your advantage and do whatever works for you.

---------- Post added at 07:15 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:13 PM ----------
frederik said:
I see loads of jobs going on everyday,not a step in sight. Scaffs I talk to, never even heard of them. Was one of those changes without consultation I believe. Are we the only country made to use these??:wondering:
Click to expand...

We shouldn't be, but other than the Germans no one else really cares about regulation. Can you imagine trying to tell the onion munchers to do anything.:eek:
 
frederik said:
I see loads of jobs going on everyday,not a step in sight. Scaffs I talk to, never even heard of them. Was one of those changes without consultation I believe. Are we the only country made to use these??:wondering:
Click to expand...

In parts of Australia some projects are leaning towards 1 metre lifts. I know its extra material and manual handling but no harness required
 
Exactly, got to be honest I reckon I would rather slit my own wrists than erect 1m lifts all day. How would we manage to price against the cowboy's if we were restricted to that.

Don't know what would be worse, 1m lifts or listening to that horrible fekin Australian accent all day.:eek:

Either way, fookin torture.

---------- Post added at 07:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:22 PM ----------
SWIFTY said:
It would never work over here as no one would pay for it. It's a shame.
Click to expand...

Would you rather erect 1m lifts than sliding it?
 
aom said:
The WAH regs did change Flinty and that was that. These regulations are updated the same way these guidance notes are.
Click to expand...

I must be mistaken

aom said:
at.
Don't know what would be worse, 1m lifts or listening to that horrible fekin Australian accent all day.:eek:

Either way, fookin torture.
Click to expand...


:laugh::laugh: I can think of worse accents.....
 
We had a quiet day last week so I pulled out enough gear for the part 1 13 foot tower which is 2 m high and 3 fekin lifts. the 3 wee apprentices went for it hammer and tong but I could still have put away about 10 ton by the time they sussed out how to do it. I personally would rather go stack shelfs in the co-op but I probably wouldn't be allowed as I would want a podium for the top shelf.
 
when working on a job for the council was a 13ft tower and i was been watched by yan of there fellas so i never had the step and erected it with 1 meter lifts althow there wasnt an inside ledger and it was just doubble off the hand rail to in side standard and 4 boards then the ledger was your hand rail and so on wasnt to dificult but it was only 13ft tower
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom