Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Geoffrey King North Yorkshire on June 14, 2010 at 19:17

Health & safety should be just common sense or the blindingly obvious.
Is their a law that says don't cut yourself, do brambles behave, no LOL

But many people seem to be incapable of thinking for themselves, behaving reasonably, with respect for tools in their hands. Often I see workmen doing the daftest things, eg using a Stihl saw cutting slabs, no protection whatsoever.

When I think of H&S, I'm always reminded of the true incident of a fork lift truck driver, operating too close to a cliff, falling off into the sea, you just can't help some people. One manager we had, was prone to driving a fork lift truck around without lifting the forks off the ground, made a heck of noise.

Law or no law, people will & do, the most willfully stupid things.

People nowadays often seem inclined to blame anyone rather accept responsibility.

Its all rather childish. People don't seem to accept that as a human being that they and they alone are responsible for navigating the streets, use their senses to avoid tripping over paving stones, sliding on wet floors,etc Not the dis-abled though. How are the blind to navigate the streets littered with countless obstacles, often Hazard warning signs, or slow down, speed up, slow down signs for those of us who should be able to work it out for ourselves. Why is everyone in such an almighty hurry all the time?
Slowdown, use your eyes, have less accidents=less compensation claims.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Cesare Harradine on June 14, 2010 at 19:18

I think the heart of the problem is with the 'No Win No Fee' solicitors. I think if a lot of the minor claims actually got to court they would be thrown out. However, the insurance companies don't want to risk the legal bills, so they pay up without a fight. They then insist on overbearing health and safety proceedures of their clients to reduce premiums.

It was hinted (very slightly) that the activities of the 'No Win No Fee' solicitors was to be looked at. Perhaps a lower limit on 'No Win No Fee' claims might curtail their activites.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by T & S Plants on June 14, 2010 at 22:10

Difficult issue !!!

My industry is the most hazardous in the UK according to the HSE, covering Horticulture, Agriculture and Forestry.

Over just the last 10 years, 97/98 - 06/07, 464 workers have died through industrial injuries in my industry. That's 46 workers a year never returning home to their families, or nearly one a week.

Out of this horrific number

145 were Employees
254 were Self Employed
65 were members of the public
26 of which were under 16 years of age.

Out of this, the major factors were:

24% Transport - (being run over or vehicle overturning)
17% Falling from a height
15% Struck by a moving/falling object, Trees etc.
10% Asphyxiation or Drowning

The provisional rate for 07/08 are still awful, 9.7 fatalities per 100,000 workers, still the highest of any industrial sector.

The nonsense of school mum's taking legal action against their kids school over petty schemes to make money for them, and the poxy Solicitors is not Health & Safety, but a waste of public money.

Health & Safety at work is there to protect workers from losing their lives, or limbs, whilst doing their jobs, and based on the figures above, we need tighter regulation at work to do so, and not less regulation.

Perhaps the most interesting fact is the high number of Self Employed fatalities, and the assessment from the HSE that business owners were more likely to take risks, to get the job done, regardless of the implications.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by David Channon on June 14, 2010 at 22:45

Back in Saxon times (Alfred the Great) They had a compensation system called Weregeld. It laid out exactly how much compensation should be paid for the loss of an eye, hand etc.
We need something like it to put an end to ridiculous claims and awards

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by T & S Plants on June 15, 2010 at 0:03

Hi David,

In my view, H&S is not about "how much should be paid" but "how many lives can be saved", but then, I have always been more interested in people than money.

Don't get muddled over H&S, it is not about money, it is about people.

David Channon said:

Back in Saxon times (Alfred the Great) They had a compensation system called Weregeld. It laid out exactly how much compensation should be paid for the loss of an eye, hand etc.
We need something like it to put an end to ridiculous claims and awards

• ▶ Reply

PRO MemberPermalink Reply by Phil Voice on June 15, 2010 at 6:26

I agree that prevention is better than cure but a victim in a health and safety breach is not always the architect of their own demise and they, or their family, should be compensated accordingly if their life is changed by something they had no control over.

I don't think the governments intention is to penalise genuine and needy cases of personal injury but wants to curb the 'no win, no fee' ambulance chasing culture.

Did you know that the National Health Service spent of £8 billion last year defending themselves against claims? Money better spent on improving our services.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Richard Boyd on June 15, 2010 at 8:28

As has been said the premise behind H&S is fine but it has been turned into an industry and so many people who are not fit to make the correct evaluations/decisions have become empowered.

In ye olde days it used to be called professionalism and being able to take calculated risks if need be was a requirement of many of the industries I worked in. For myself it is yet another needless paper trail and one I’m not sure the people who receive RAs fully understand. As an experiment I turned our very basic RA sheet into one of complete gobbledy gook and send it off, no one even questioned it.

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion