Heads up for all those doing woodwork for a living

[lurker]

http://press.hse.gov.uk/2016/three-comp ... accidents/

 

[sunnybob]

Thats madness. the company paid a credited assessment company, and followed their assessments. How can the company be at fault? They have no expertise, thats why they paid someone else.

 

[Adam9453]

I do think they ought to give more information about what happened rather than just who's been fined what.
It would be useful for people to read what the people actually did or were doing, ie the context of the 'accident'. Also providing an explanation of what should have been done to avoid the accident.
People would then hopefully take head of the advice and avoid the same situation occurring.
I feel all this article does is aims to scare employers. It is interesting that the company in question had sought the advice of a consultant but were still found liable. I'm afraid I think if the risk assessment was inadequate as described then more of the liability should have fallen on the health and safety consultants.
Employers should obviously train their staff to operate using best working practices but I have to say some staff can be told and told not to do something but then you see them do it 10 mins later.
Unfortunately I've seen people have horrid 'accidents' simply because they weren't paying attention!
In my opinion, and I realise this will be controversial, but if someone has an accident due to not paying attention then they should be held accountable. Much in the same way as if you had a car accident because you weren't paying attention then you would be prosecuted for driving without due care and attention.
People need to look after themselves and just because they're at work shouldn't diminish the requirement for them to pay due care and attention to what they're doing.

 

[sunnybob]

Couldnt agree more, provided the risks HAVE been explained. A long time ago I worked in a warehouse with overhead gantry cranes, that carried half ton bales of waste paper all over the place. One man consistently wandered around that warehouse and never looked up. I got fed up with yelling at him when he walked under the bales oblivious to the danger above him. Luckily for him, although I saw several collapse and fall, he did not get hit.

 

[AJB Temple]

The article does say that the 3rd party risk assessment was itself insufficient.
It also suggests that supervision was lacking.
It also says training was not sufficient (which is usually endemic when present)

The reality in law is that if you run a business you need to be expert enough to comply with the law all of the time, and not rely on something a 3rd party consultant says on one particular day.

I actually think that employers do need to be very stringent on looking after staff, and the more inept or stupid they are, the more careful it is necessary to be (or dismiss them).

Last year I fired someone for working unprotected on live electrical systems (IT equipment) as it happens in direct contravention of a policy he helped to write. He threatened (via his lawyers) tribunal action because he said it was disproportionate (to dismiss him) and because he was aware of the risk (he wrote the policy after all) and was skilled (he was skilled - but also cavalier and had form). All nonsense in my view and I stuck to my guns on the basis that if I allow staff to do idiotic things I am potentially criminally liable.

Thanks for posting the link. It made interesting reading.

 

[lurker]

Like any wood mangler can set up as a woodworker anyone can call themselves a h&s consultant.
Much to the disgust of those of us who are properly qualified.
I am a chartered safety practioner, my credentials can be confirmed by the awarding body.
My advice is check who you contract to provide you with h&s advice.


I am guessing in this instance, but the law says a employer has an absolute duty to guard a dangerous part.
Anyone here dispute a blade is a dangerous part?
Not rocket science is it?

 

[lurker]

Regardless of what you "sense" is right an employer is always responsible for the employee's actions.
No matter how stupid or disobedient the employee is, and there are a lot of them about!

The employer controls the workplace and all activities.
That's why some h&s "rules" seem so daft.
I would never be an employer it's just not worth the hassle
Grown men & women these days are so immature and lack any self discipline it gets more difficult by the day.

 

[Wuffles]

I am guessing in this instance, but the law says a employer has an absolute duty to guard a dangerous part.
Anyone here dispute a blade is a dangerous part?
Not rocket science is it?

So's a pencil in the wrong hands.

Wouldn't employ anyone, can't trust anyone else.

 

[Roughcut]

I do think they ought to give more information about what happened rather than just who's been fined what.
It would be useful for people to read what the people actually did or were doing, ie the context of the 'accident'. Also providing an explanation of what should have been done to avoid the accident.
People would then hopefully take head of the advice and avoid the same situation occurring.
I feel all this article does is aims to scare employers. It is interesting that the company in question had sought the advice of a consultant but were still found liable. I'm afraid I think if the risk assessment was inadequate as described then more of the liability should have fallen on the health and safety consultants.
Employers should obviously train their staff to operate using best working practices but I have to say some staff can be told and told not to do something but then you see them do it 10 mins later.
Unfortunately I've seen people have horrid 'accidents' simply because they weren't paying attention!
In my opinion, and I realise this will be controversial, but if someone has an accident due to not paying attention then they should be held accountable. Much in the same way as if you had a car accident because you weren't paying attention then you would be prosecuted for driving without due care and attention.
People need to look after themselves and just because they're at work shouldn't diminish the requirement for them to pay due care and attention to what they're doing.

That should be covered under the Company Disciplinary Procedure.

 

[Bodgers]

I notice on the website, of the company listed first in these prosecutions, the workshop pictures show all the guards on etc.

Some nice stuff on there - I hope the company learns the lessons and they can move on...

Sent from my MI 3W using Tapatalk

 

[lurker]

On the hse website there is a large woodworking section with very helpful stuff on it, all downloadable.
Much should be of interest to us amateurs too.

The reason there is so much is because so many folks get maimed by woodwork machinery. Hse are trying to prevent it happening

 

[RogerS]

.....

The reason there is so much is because so many folks get maimed by woodwork machinery..

I couldn't agree with you more and explains why my blood runs cold when some folk post threads starting with 'I've just bought a spindle moulder..now how do I use it' and then go on to ignore all the sensible advice given.

 

[ComfortablyNumb]

A good wood machinist keeps his fingers for life

 

[tomatwark]

We have been pestered by a company wanting to send their sales rep in to sell us risk assessments recently.

We do them in house, also when someone is trained to use a machine it is dated on their employment record and they are made to sign they understand how to use the machine, in a safe and legal manner.

Most of the info is on the HSE website anyway so it is not to difficult or time consuming to do, a lot of it is common sense.

At the end of the day as an employer all I can do is provide training, keep a paper trail and bollock anyone who does not work in a safe manner.

And cross my fingers that we will not have and accident due to stupidity.

These companies who cold call try to sell you the service based on fear.

I am not saying that you should not contract an outside company in to do the risk assessments, but get someone who knows your industry and does not need to cold call to drum business up.

I do send staff on external training where I think it would be a better use of time or if it is something I am not happy doing in house.

I only have 6 members of staff but still have to do the same as a larger firm.

 

[tomatwark]

.....

The reason there is so much is because so many folks get maimed by woodwork machinery..

I couldn't agree with you more and explains why my blood runs cold when some folk post threads starting with 'I've just bought a spindle moulder..now how do I use it' and then go on to ignore all the sensible advice given.

The one that scares me is I have just bought this old whitehill block on ebay for my hobby moulder.

 

[Wizard9999]

I note the fine for the 'middle man' consultants was actually more (significantly so with costs) than for the firm whose employee had the accident. Sounds like they gave the work to a one man band who then did not give good advice. I am not a trade person, but seems to me that Lurker's advice on being careful who you contract with for tis type of work is very sound.

Terry.

 

[lurker]

We have been pestered by a company wanting to send their sales rep in to sell us risk assessments recently.

We do them in house, also when someone is trained to use a machine it is dated on their employment record and they are made to sign they understand how to use the machine, in a safe and legal manner.

Most of the info is on the HSE website anyway so it is not to difficult or time consuming to do, a lot of it is common sense.

At the end of the day as an employer all I can do is provide training, keep a paper trail and bollock anyone who does not work in a safe manner.

And cross my fingers that we will not have and accident due to stupidity.

These companies who cold call try to sell you the service based on fear.

I am not saying that you should not contract an outside company in to do the risk assessments, but get someone who knows your industry and does not need to cold call to drum business up.

I do send staff on external training where I think it would be a better use of time or if it is something I am not happy doing in house.

I only have 6 members of staff but still have to do the same as a larger firm.

What you are doing is exactly how it should be.
And is recommended by both HSE and my Chartered body (IOSH).
I'm H&S qualified up to the eyeballs but I'd never be involved in creating a risk assessment without involving the operative.
A good H&S consultant is unlikely to need to tout for business

Suggestion: when these reps bother you, send them the link I posted.