Legal age of working at height

[Roderick]

Although my expertise is with the Australian H&S Regulation, I have found that they are very similar to the UK Regulation in terms of their aim and responsibilities.

Based on that, my view in the matter is that ANY incident is a breach of the Duty of Care by the employer, which states very clearly that you must provide a safe place of work - as far as reasonably possible. And that is what the prosecution will be based on, failing to provide a safe place of work, not the lack of paperwork or anything else.

But when you are prosecuted then having the appropriate procedures and paperwork in place to use in your defence against the prosecution is very helpful and could shave years and much money of the process and fines. Depending on how ugly it is, verbal statements may not always be accepted and would certainly come under great scrutiny.

 

My advice is: Write down your policies and procedures and keep them up to date, make sure everyone is aware of them and understand their meaning. It will save you time and money if the HSE comes knocking.

[Andrew Edwards]

Not entirely true but it does help.

 

Although arisen after large scale accidents such as train crashes and ferry disasters, we now have the the wonderful corporate manslaughter act (absolutely no sarcasm intended, I genuinely believe it is a great thing). Companies and organisations can no longer hide behind a scapegoat or layers of management. One of the key areas that the enquiry will look at is your health and safety culture. This essentially means that it is not just about getting all the paperwork in order but actually doing what you say you are doing. No amount of documentation will protect you if the enquiry discovers that you allowed it to be consistently ignored. Punishment is in the form of unlimited fines and public naming and shaming of the companies/organisations.

 

Of course individuals can also still be prosecuted for breaches of the Health and Safety at Work act.

[Ike]

Not entirely true but it does help.

What's not true and what helps?

 

we now have the the wonderful corporate manslaughter act...Companies and organisations can no longer hide behind a scapegoat or layers of management.

While the ability to aggregate individuals failings into a single case is a good thing I think it will be a fair while yet before we can actually see if it works.

 

This essentially means that it is not just about getting all the paperwork in order but actually doing what you say you are doing. No amount of documentation will protect you if the enquiry discovers that you allowed it to be consistently ignored.

The idea that an employer has a duty of care to ensure safe working practices are taking place has been key to just about every bit of health and safety and negligent manslaughter legislation from the start. The only big difference with corporate manslaughter as far as I know is that you can aggregate cases. For example if Mr and Mrs Blogs ran a company and and killed an employee through negligence for a manslaughter prosecution to be successful it would have to be proved that one of them was the 'controlling mind' and failed in their duty of care however under corporate manslaughter you would just have to prove that they failed in their joint duty of care.

[Roderick]

For example if Mr and Mrs Blogs ran a company and and killed an employee through negligence for a manslaughter prosecution to be successful it would have to be proved that one of them was the 'controlling mind' and failed in their duty of care however under corporate manslaughter you would just have to prove that they failed in their joint duty of care.

That is interesting.

In Australia, when there is an incident, as an employer you are assumed guilty of failing your duty of care and it is up to you to build a defence to show it was beyond your control. This is quite different from the 'normal' law where you are innocent until proven guilty, under the OH&S Act you are guilty until proven innocent.

The real challenge is that you need to prove innocence at every level of management, having a OH&S Policy at the top but not implemented at the floor could see the company (as an entity) released of its' duties but still prosecute a manager or director for not implementing the policy.

[Seano]

Based on that, my view in the matter is that ANY incident is a breach of the Duty of Care by the employer, which states very clearly that you must provide a safe place of work - as far as reasonably possible.

 

You're contradicting yourself there, imo. The phrase in the UK legislation is "as far as reasonably practicable". It is not reasonably practicable, nor even possible, to reduce the risk of accidents to zero. Therefore however diligently an employer discharges their duty of care, there will always be occasional accidents. So it does not follow that every accident is the result of someone's negligence, sometimes they're just an accident.

[Ynot]

So it does not follow that every accident is the result of someone's negligence, sometimes they're just an accident.

Here I'm going to play the devil's card and make a rather bold statement.

 

There is in fact no such thing as an accident.

 

I would challenge anyone to come up with a situation where ANY so called 'accident' could not have been prevented.

I'll give a couple of examples:

 

Vehicular - whether a collision is due to excess speed, careless driving, DUI, etc, the driver MUST assume all or part responsibility for the consequences, regardless of the circumstances. If due to mechanical failure liability would rest with the owner for poorly maintaining the vehicle or the garage for shoddy work.

 

WAH - You fall off a ladder, it's either your own fault for not climbing safely, or it's the person's fault who walked into said ladder without due care and attention.

 

Tool damage - used properly, ALL tools are perfectly safe - start using them carelessly, or outside the manufacturer's recommendations and you take the consequences on your own head (sometimes literally!)

 

For an 'accident' to happen there MUST be a failure on the part of the victim or a contributor because if either party had done what was necessary to make the work or activity safe in the first place, then that accident would never happen.

 

But incidents DO happen - and more often than not due to inattention on someone's part - distracted, or bored, or feeling unwell, or emotionally disturbed - many things can be a factor, but NONE of them are beyond the realms of being resolved BEFORE an incident occurs.

 

Oh - and have you noticed the police no longer refer to accidents? What used to be an RTA is now correctly re-termed an RTC...

 

So - go on then - give me an example of an 'accident' that you think could NOT have been avoided....

<_< Challenge me...

[Andrew Edwards]

Not entirely true but it does help.

What's not true and what helps?

 

Sorry I read a previous post as 'you are alright as long as you have the paperwork' which was wrong of me.

 

The way I see the new act is it puts more responsibility on everyone. If you as an individual work in an unsafe manner, as part of a group that all do the same, which in turn is allowed by management, the right fines and shaming quite rightly puts the business under. As has been mentioned, whether it works is a different matter.

[Tom Baldwin]

So - go on then - give me an example of an 'accident' that you think could NOT have been avoided....

 

The point is "as far as reasonably practicable" (as Seano's already said).

 

What if a meteor hits Earth while you're climbing a ladder, causing you to fall off? That could have been prevented, if only there had been better early warning systems, so you'd have known not to go climbing right then. But the probability is so small, and the cost so great, that no mitigation is needed - so this "accident" can still happen.

 

Are you sure you're not trolling?

[Ynot]

So - go on then - give me an example of an 'accident' that you think could NOT have been avoided....

 

The point is "as far as reasonably practicable" (as Seano's already said).

 

What if a meteor hits Earth while you're climbing a ladder, causing you to fall off? That could have been prevented, if only there had been better early warning systems, so you'd have known not to go climbing right then. But the probability is so small, and the cost so great, that no mitigation is needed - so this "accident" can still happen.

 

Are you sure you're not trolling?

Certainly not trolling!

But anything of the ilk of the meteor striking the earth I'd still refute being an accident - that would be a natural phenomenon.

 

"Reasonably practical" doesn't come into it - that's just jargon in some ways, (though I'll agree that as a rule of thumb for liability it does go a long way).

I'm nowhere near naive enough to think that anywhere near 100% of 'accidents' can practically be prevented, BUT what I'm saying is that 99.999% of 'accidents' CAN be prevented.

 

The biggest factor affecting the vast reduction of that 99.999% is human error.

 

So - come on - give me another one...

<_<

[steve h]

How about im driving through a wood. Ive slowed down to 30 as there are signs that there are deer about. Suddenly one runs across the road, I hit it and the car then veers off the road into a tree!

 

This has to be quite a regular possibility, there are woods, and there are roads. You cant fence off the roads as the deer would not be able to go and find food, and yet 30mph has to be seen as a good speed for driving through places where deer are a problem.

 

In the same way its made me wonder if, while rigging outdoors, someone has been attacked by birds etc leading to an accident. This cannot be said to be anyones fault surely!

 

Steve

[Andrew C]

But anything of the ilk of the meteor striking the earth I'd still refute being an accident - that would be a natural phenomenon.

WRONG! It would be an "Act Of God" and the HSE could go after him for "Not Having A Safe System Of Work". Just think of how many other cases he would have to have "taken into consideration"? Leaving dangerous fruit lying around, pits full of brimstone not properly fenced, releasing dangerous pathogens and insects into the environment ...

 

<_<

[Ynot]

How about im driving through a wood. Ive slowed down to 30 as there are signs that there are deer about. Suddenly one runs across the road, I hit it and the car then veers off the road into a tree!

Well, I'd apply defensive driving techniques to ensure that I was fully aware at all times of the potential for wildlife running into the road. Dumb animals cannot be held responsible for any damage to property, (eg if the deer runs into and dents your stationary car) but should always be able to act according to the road conditions and circumstances. 30mph may be deemed an appropriate maximum speed to be driving through those woods, BUT it doesn't mean you have to drive UP to that speed - if the woods become thicker, hiding the deer's possible exit point, then it would be logical to drop to 15mph through those sections and thus removing the risk of hitting a surprised doe. <_<

 

In the same way its made me wonder if, while rigging outdoors, someone has been attacked by birds etc leading to an accident. This cannot be said to be anyones fault surely!

You should RA the potential for birds when rigging outside (and inside in some large arenas) and make yourself aware of the potential. Again, however, the actions of dumb animals is involved here, but you can (and should) be assured that your fall arrest etc is capable of sustaining any resultant falls, and also maybe have a colleague on hand to shoo the birds away if they come near.

 

Neither of these solutions might be viewed as practical, but they are certainly feasible.

[torch1972]

Okay I feel a little reasonable for getting the this tread off track. Quinn11's questions were....

 

Does anyone know the age you have to be to go up a scaff tower and work if there is one?

And if there is what can people under that age do?

 

Can we come to some agreed simple guidlines to help Quinn11 while they are working at for the theatre group?

 

I would say get some training on how to put up a scaff tower correctly and safely. Follow the manufactures' instructions unless you think it would unsafe to do.

[Seano]

I would challenge anyone to come up with a situation where ANY so called 'accident' could not have been prevented.

You're assuming the benefit of hindsight. Its one thing to look back on an accident and say what could have prevented it, and quite another to look forward and say what will eliminate all risk of the unexpected happening.

 

The ancient greek playwright Aeschylus was legendarily killed when an eagle dropped a tortoise on his head. Clearly it was his own fault, since he could easily have prevented it by merely taking two steps to the left.

 

For an 'accident' to happen there MUST be a failure on the part of the victim or a contributor

Only if the inability to see into the future and enjoy the full benefit of hindsight before the accident is a "failure".

 

Your argument is silly, but worse than that the notion that anything that ever goes wrong must be somebody's fault is the foundation stone of an odious 'blame' culture.

[Ynot]

For an 'accident' to happen there MUST be a failure on the part of the victim or a contributor

Only if the inability to see into the future and enjoy the full benefit of hindsight before the accident is a "failure".

 

Your argument is silly, but worse than that the notion that anything that ever goes wrong must be somebody's fault is the foundation stone of an odious 'blame' culture.

Not so.

I think you're getting the wrong angle here.

I'm not saying that it's practically possible to prevent all things bad from happening. "To err is human..." etc etc.

But what I am saying is that (blame culture aside, as I know what you mean there) in virtually all cases, there are measures that everyone can take to stop an 'accident' ever happening to them.

 

Let's face it - deer, birds and tortoise related incidents are pretty rare...! <_<

 

However, if they took every step to avoid accidents, then life would be pretty boring, and in some ways meaningless.

 

But to bring the discussion back down to earth, I would say without reservation the vast majority of accidents ARE the fault of someone or someones (sic). Whether it be negligence, inattention, or borderline irresponsibility, accidents as a rule CAN be prevented by good working practices and overall common sense. It doesn't mean that when something happens we immediately dash off to the lawyers - just let's have common sense back on the agenda and a lot of problems can be avoided.