Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 50 total)
  • No bumping (…in the bumper cars???)
  • donsimon
    Free Member

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-14634289
    So it’s not the HSE gone crazy it’s pint sized local bureaucrats getting over enthusiastic.
    What silly rules masquerading as a health and safety issue have you come across?

    yossarian
    Free Member

    Listen, I work in h & s and the amount of crappy rules and what have you that people try and get my backing for is a constant source of amusement. It’s usually lazy middle managers who would rather do fk who try and invoke elf an safety. Twunts.

    Anyway my favourite one was our local swimming pool decided that due to ‘health & safety’ they were imposing a strict ratio of one child to one adult, meaning that if you had two kids you couldn’t take them swimming on your own. I had a very loud and enjoyable conversation in front of about 20 people with the centre manager where she admitted that the decision was actually about the amount of poolside staff the centre were prepared to employ during the holidays. The sign came down. Arsehats

    TuckerUK
    Free Member

    Bumping in dodge’ems (note: not ‘bumper cars’) has been banned everywhere I know for the last 25 years at least. I still managed to break a family members rib by T-boning them in one though.

    Fresh Goods Friday 696: The Middling Edition

    Fresh Goods Friday 696: The Middlin...
    Latest Singletrack Videos
    binners
    Full Member

    I had a massive stand up row with the manager of Manchester Aquatic Centre about the adult/child ratio. He quoted H&S at me to tell me why the H&S executive clearly thought that I, as an adult, was clearly incapable of monitoring 2 children in 3ft of water. Was I not aware this was bound to end in disaster?

    Still wouldn’t let me in though. The ****s!!

    ollie
    Free Member

    Bumping in dodge’ems (note: not ‘bumper cars’) has been banned everywhere I know for the last 25 years at least

    Not In Gullivers world warrington it hasn’t.

    CaptainFlashheart
    Free Member

    Add in a little “Sorry mate, data protekshun innit?” and you’re there!

    konabunny
    Free Member

    it’s pint sized local bureaucrats getting over enthusiastic.

    1) The two cited instances were decisions by private companies. Nothing to do with “pint-sized local bureaucrats”.

    2) If Butlins performed a risk assessment and decided to be more cautious than just their minimum legal requirement, then that’s up to them and the HSE should butt out.

    3) It’s been about twenty years since even dodgy itinerant funfairs told you not to bump into each other deliberately

    IT’S PC GORN MAD! WE’RE GOING TO HELL IN A HANDCART! YOU COULDN’T MAKE IT UP!

    yossarian
    Free Member

    http://www.hse.gov.uk/entertainment/swimpools.htm

    &

    http://www.hse.gov.uk/entertainment/parentalsupervision.htm

    There you go binners. Next time ask to see the risk assessment that determined the need for 1:1.

    jon1973
    Free Member

    I think some blame should be attributed to the “no win, no fee, I take no responsibility for my actions” culture that has developed in this country over the last few years. It’s not surprising that companies air on the side of caution if there is the threat of legal action hanging over them all the time. I think I’d do the same if I ran a business like that.

    yossarian
    Free Member

    I think some blame should be attributed to the “no win, no fee, I take no responsibility for my actions” culture that has developed in this country over the last few years. It’s not surprising that companies air on the side of caution if there is the threat of legal action hanging over them all the time. I think I’d do the same if I ran a business like that.

    Companies err on the side of caution because their INSURANCE COMPANY demands it. The insurance industry is as culpable as anyone. Until very recently most insurers would pay up straight away on a claim under 10k because it was cheaper to do so than spend time and money defending it.

    jon1973
    Free Member

    I agree, it’s the crappy culture of ambulance chasers and chancers that are screwing things up.

    thegreatape
    Free Member

    IT’S PC GORN MAD!

    PC living with mental health issues if you don’t mind

    binners
    Full Member

    Cheers Yossarian. I shall go armed with that next time 😀

    Junkyard
    Free Member

    I take no responsibility for my actions” culture that has developed in this country over the last few years. It’s not surprising that companies air on the side of caution if there is the threat of legal action hanging over them all the time. I think I’d do the same if I ran a business like that.

    most of this stuff is because people have sued someone at some point and so you have no choice tbh
    No sports day because grass may be slippy is another example – there are loads

    Elfinsafety
    Free Member

    I’ve actually gawn mayd, I’m afraid. 😐

    TandemJeremy
    Free Member

    The vast majority of these “health and safety gone mad” stories are complete myths.

    Most of the “you can’t do this because of H&S is actually rubbish thick managers who don’t understand

    H&S is about risk assesment not elimination. This area is another place where the tabloids have done us an enourmous disservice.

    http://www.hse.gov.uk/press/record.htm

    uplink
    Free Member

    I suspect the civil servants at each end of the regs are just making each other jobs

    The 1st lot write the regs and guidelines in an ambiguous way, the 2nd lot then have to employ a 3rd lot to try and interpret them, who then don’t do anything but err on the side of extreme caution and blame the 1st lot

    and round it goes

    Pure job creation 🙂

    yossarian
    Free Member

    I agree, it’s the crappy culture of ambulance chasers and chancers that are screwing things up.

    I’m not so sure tbh. Look at like this, the insurance companies realised some time ago that they could make more money by paying out on most small claims because it’s cheaper than defending them. They recoup the costs incurred by putting premiums up. The idea of your insurers protecting your business from claims is a thing of the past. The insurance industry has lost sight of it’s responsibilty to it’s clients. The result is higher costs for business and an underlying culture within some organisations that small claims are ok.

    I’ve recently experienced this. A woman at my work tripped over a student sat in the corridor. She said in her statement that she wasn’t looking where she was going and I received a statement from her doctor saying that the footwear she was wearing on the day (high heels) had substantially increased the severity of her injury (off work for 10 weeks in a cast with a broken ankle). The students admitted that they knew they shouldn’t have been sat in the corridor and had been asked to move by a member of staff just prior to the accident. What do you think our insurers did?

    RealMan
    Free Member

    The insurance industry has lost sight of it’s responsibilty to it’s clients.

    You do know insurance is a business, and their aim is to make as much money as possible right?

    yossarian
    Free Member

    I suspect the civil servants at each end of the regs are just making each other jobs
    The 1st lot write the regs and guidelines in an ambiguous way, the 2nd lot then have to employ a 3rd lot to try and interpret them, who then don’t do anything but err on the side of extreme caution and blame the 1st lot
    and round it goes
    Pure job creation

    You suspect wrong. The HSE works in conjunction with law makers to produce legislation. Then the HSE produces guidance which gives information etc on how to comply. Quite straightforward really.

    yossarian
    Free Member

    It should be a balance realman, proper regulation would address this.

    yossarian
    Free Member

    Oh and if anyone is interested our insurers admitted full liability and paid her £12k. I got into a bit of hot water over it. Apparently telling your claims handler to ‘grow a **** spine’ is unprofessional 🙂

    D0NK
    Full Member

    This area is another place where the tabloids have done us an enourmous disservice.

    http://www.hse.gov.uk/press/record.htm mostly daily mail. surprise.

    clubber
    Free Member

    Funnily enough I’ve just updated a policy that stated ‘For reasons of H&S’ when H&S wasn’t the reason. Now removed.

    D0NK
    Full Member

    regarding the pool kids/adult thing (pretty sure they have this in my local pool) it’s not HSE but I assume pools can put their own restrictions in place?
    So basically short of telling the counter staff (who presumably have no say in the restrictions) that it’s all cobblers, there’s not much point in arguing. That correct?

    brakes
    Free Member

    there is a lot of ignorance from ‘management’ and the general public that leads to these situations, unfortunately it’s exploited by insurance companies – increasing premiums* and blaming it on a litigation culture, whilst reducing their exposure through ridiculous clauses in policies that force clients to put daft H&S measures in place.
    unfortunately we are governed by greed and stupidity.
    but we’re only human.
    .
    *this is the one that really sticks in my throat – ‘forced’ to increase premiums my arse, just so that they can make record profits again?

    hora
    Free Member

    Its when you play bumper cars in geared Go-karts at high speed that you get into trouble with health and safety 8)

    yossarian
    Free Member

    regarding the pool kids/adult thing (pretty sure they have this in my local pool) it’s not HSE but I assume pools can put their own restrictions in place?
    So basically short of telling the counter staff (who presumably have no say in the restrictions) that it’s all cobblers, there’s not much point in arguing. That correct?

    Of course they can. Most council owned pools are contracted out to leisure groups to run. Some will be better run than others. Usually it’s down to money. Our local pools al nowl put on extra staff at weekends and during the holidays to allow for the increase in usage. I’d say if you come up against a pool that is inflexible you should challenge them, if they quote h & s as the reason you know it’s bollocks.

    Drac
    Full Member

    Bumping in dodge’ems (note: not ‘bumper cars’) has been banned everywhere I know for the last 25 years at least. I still managed to break a family members rib by T-boning them in one though.

    Not in the ones I took my eldest on at the weekend it wasn’t but note they were called bumper cars not dodgems.

    MoreCashThanDash
    Full Member

    Best H&S thing recently was the hill at Wimbledon being closed after it rained for H&S reasons

    I think it was the Chief Exec of the HSE who came straight back at them pointing out that people have walked on wet hills for millenia with relatively few incidents, and if they wanted to close the hill to ensure their insurers didn’t get sued by idiots they should make it clear it was closed for insurance reasons and not H&S

    zokes
    Free Member

    “It’s cos of elf n safety innit” has to be one of the most self defeating excuses ever. Firstly, there has to be a reason why it is a H&S issue; and secondly, it just makes everyone so negative about H&S that most tend to pay less attention to the things that really do matter…

    konabunny
    Free Member

    I think it was the Chief Exec of the HSE who came straight back at them pointing out that people have walked on wet hills for millenia with relatively few incidents, and if they wanted to close the hill to ensure their insurers didn’t get sued by idiots they should make it clear it was closed for insurance reasons and not H&S

    That’s complete toss though. CEO of HSE should STFU and mind his own business.

    Wimbledon’s punters aren’t Nuts-In-May redsocks prepared for wet weather, they’re pissed-up divs. Wimbledon is a drinking establishment with a series of pubs. It is reasonably foreseeable that when being accommodated on a wet, muddy hill, some of those divs will slip and break their arms/faces/ankles and many others will bitch and moan about getting wet and muddy. (It’s also reasonably foreseeable that the Daily Mail would be the first to print a “SHAME OF ENGLAND as Wimbledon tells injured Tunbridge Wells granny the mud is her fault – WHY OH WHY CAN’T THIS COUNTRY GET ANYTHING RIGHT”).

    It’s perfectly reasonable that the venue operator might want to avoid this buggering around and protect the health and safety (falling over pissed is bad for your health and unsafe) of their punters, staff and contractors by telling people not to drink there, and instead to drink their overpriced booze somewhere else.

    Some pissed-up Wimbledon divs on the day in question (massive cracking sound from geezer on left to follow shortly):


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2005491/WIMBLEDON-2011-Elf-n-safety-shuts-Murray-Mount.html

    D0NK
    Full Member

    While I accept that “closed due to pissed-up divs tooling around and people being unable to walk across wet grass without injuring themselves” is a bit of a mouthful and doesn’t really work on CLOSED notices but “closed due to health and safety” just gets everyones backup (undeservedly) and HSE get the negative publicity and are undermined. Worse than that it give the daily mail something to get their panties bunched up about. I think the HSE telling the DM it’s nowt to do with them is fair enough.

    It’s a bit like “Cyclist mugs little old lady” headlines, we say thats not a cyclist it’s a criminal scrote who just happens to be on a bike. The rest of country says shut up that makes him a cyclist. Technically the trolling media are kind of correct but they are distorting things for their own agenda.

    Elfinsafety
    Free Member

    Elf-n-safety-shuts-Murray-Mount

    konabunny
    Free Member

    I think the HSE telling the DM it’s nowt to do with them is fair enough.

    That’s not what she said, though – no-one rattled the HSE’s cage.

    She (Judith Hackitt – apologies for my earlier sexism) stuck her nose into a private company’s decision about how to run its private event with a stupid comment that “there is nothing in health and safety legislation which prohibits the continued broadcasting of Centre Court action to the crowds on the hill during the rain”. Well, a) did anyone claim there was?, b) personal injury law is still mostly tort law, so you wouldn’t expect to find it in H&S legislation anyway, c) PLI will only cover their *legal* liabilities anyway and d) haven’t you got anything better to do than go around responding to the bait that the Daily Mail dangled?

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/jun/23/digger-wimbledon-2011

    brakes
    Free Member

    perhaps she was using this particular case which would gain media attention as an opportunity to get public attention for the HSE.
    knowing that most people wouldn’t give two toots about tort law and PLI.

    ernie_lynch
    Free Member

    Bumping in dodge’ems (note: not ‘bumper cars’) has been banned everywhere I know for the last 25 years at least.

    Oh that’s nice…..blame Thatcher won’t you.

    Maybe these health and safety issues were introduced not because Maggie, gawd bless her, wanted to stop the kiddies fun, but because she was concerned about their well-being. Have you thought of that ?

    Elfinsafety
    Free Member

    Have you thought of that ?

    😆

    I can honestly say, hand on heart; no Ernie, I jolly well have not.

    blame Thatcher won’t you

    Always. It’s obligatory.

    JacksonPollock
    Free Member

    I wrote this ages ago on a similar thread when I was doing my NEBOSH

    I can also detect that the lecturer is spouting fundamental untruths as my degree gave me a better base knowledge of the law (he has not done a degree). What concerns me is this disinformation is being disseminated to 20 odd other people who do not question whether he is right or wrong and apply this disinformation in their own workplaces, its self perpetuating. Hence (in my particular example) you get jobsworths ‘banning’ conkers in schools etc etc etc

    IMO ‘H&S practitioners’ should be legally trained first and foremost. Then reasonable actions can be applied to any legislation. Until then H&S practitioners have no business in ‘banning’ anything.

    TandemJeremy
    Free Member

    Jackson – conkers were never banned – it was a spoof from a headteacher and all the papers fell for it

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 50 total)

The topic ‘No bumping (…in the bumper cars???)’ is closed to new replies.