Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Tue Jan 27, 2026 06:30

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Aug 08, 2007 10:47 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 22:02
Posts: 3266
http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/tol/li ... 217990.ece
Quote:
Fear of heights (ie 3ft ladders) halts speed camera campaign
Creep over the speed limit, and you might get a £60 fixed penalty and three points on your driving licence. Really put your foot down in a built-up area, and the magistrates could relieve you of up to £1,000. And that’s assuming you don’t injure anybody.

But go up a ladder without approved ladder training to install one of those flashing roadside speed indicators, and the bench could have £5,000 off you, plus costs, for working at height without consent. Height in this context could mean 3ft (90cm) off the ground, but you could still end up in the Crown Court. Even if you didn’t break your neck falling off.

Health and safety regulations are now the overarching power in the land, as Lancashire County Council has discovered in its attempt to improve road safety in the northwest by installing electronic speed indicators which are regarded as effective in shaming drivers into slowing down.

Thirty of the devices lie waiting to be put up on their roadside poles, but the council has found that it does not have enough staff qualified to go up ladders to install them.

These days to go up a ladder you have to comply with the Health and Safety Executive’s Working at Height Regulations 2005 (amended 2007) which are the offspring of the EU’s Working At Height Directive born in Brussels in 2001. Last year about 350 road deaths were ascribed to speeding. In the same period 14 people died after falling off ladders.

Lancashire used to have three roadside speed indicators, which were erected and maintained by the police. Policemen are qualified to go up ladders, but they are not qualified to teach other people how to do so. With the sudden expansion of speed indicators, the police have decided that they are too busy to look after them and have passed off the responsibility. PC Ian Ashton, of the county’s road policing unit, said: “Officers who deal with the signs have had ladder training, but they are not able to train others.”

Peter Andrews, manager of the county council’s environment directorate, said with a hint of desperation that he had approached the county fire brigade to see if they could help. Of the many skills acquired by firefighters, climbing ladders is near the top of the list.

“Until we get the fire brigade’s help we won’t be able to get any new signs up and running because we have to make sure people are safe and within the law. It is not a decision we have taken lightly but we have to make sure people are properly trained because there is an element of risk,” Mr Andrews said.

The HSE takes ladder training very seriously. Ladder training involves being supervised the first time you go up one, checking that you have the right one for the job, and – ideally – not touching anything electrical while you’re up one. It even runs a ladder exchange, offering to replace dodgy ones with ones that are suitable for the job.

Tony Martin, Lancashire County Council member for Burnley and the council’s cabinet member for sustainable development, said he was disappointed that the police had given up responsibility for the speed indicators. “When the first ones came out the police were very insistent that they wanted to install them and be responsible for charging them up. Now that there are more than three in the county they want rid of the responsibility. Now that we have bought quite a few of these, they are languishing in village halls for want of people with ladder skills.”

Roger Vincent, of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents, said: “Road safety measures can save lives if they persuade motorists to slow down and stay within the speed limit. A sensible approach is needed in this case.”

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 08, 2007 10:53 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 15:05
Posts: 1225
Location: Glasgow
Quote:
Now that we have bought quite a few of these, they are languishing in village halls for want of people with ladder skills.


Utterly, brilliantly insane. At this rate society will eat itself.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 08, 2007 12:53 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 16:04
Posts: 816
So, according to the HSE, painting my ceiling by standing on my step-ladder, which is greater than 3 feet, will land me with £5000 fine? I pity the poor window cleaners and roofers.

Absolutely barking.

_________________
Prepare to be Judged


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 08, 2007 17:01 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 15:05
Posts: 1225
Location: Glasgow
This is of course an indirect product of 'compensation culture'. The formal training of 'ladder skills' is all about avoiding accusations of negligence should a council employee fall the three feet and then sue.

Is there a way back from this madness? Would it not be better for councils to add up the potential cost of administering the training and then spend it instead on some proper indemnity, thus putting the responsibility for loss on a third party who actually has some negotiation skills and might tell the greedy, lazy sueing bastards where they really stand and where they can get off....?!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 08, 2007 20:37 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 04:10
Posts: 3244
No. It is sod all to do with the non-existent "compensation culture".
It is to do with ensuring that people who work on ladders do so in a manner that will not kill or injure themselves or any passer-by.
It is to do with councils and other pulic service organisations that mis-use or mis-quote the regulations (which are so vague that they may as well not be there) or just cannot be arsed to do it properly.
There is NOTHING to stop ladders being used except the local council "my jobsworth is being a dim health and safety dummie" (most of the council health and safety guys and gals are totally dim....but the job pays well, so you hear a lot about them)

Never mind the 300 killed on the roads...they would have died without the displays or with them.....also figure the cost to the people injured falling off ladders, and to the state who will pay their health care.

The health and safety at work act, and its sundry offspring, are to establish safe methods of work. And if you ever read them, which by your comments I can see you have not, you would realise how non-specific they really are.

There is no compensation culture, if you bothered to check you'd find that over 75% of cases never get off first base.....and the majority of those that do are settled for low four-figure sums....mind you, you won't have the same attitude if you had to claim off someone for injury or damge for yourselves....would you.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 08, 2007 20:58 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 10:30
Posts: 2053
Location: South Wales (Roving all UK)
Hmm kind of

There is no ban on working from ladders but you must prove that there is no safer way of carrying out the task. Working off ladders really isn't that safe.

The working at height directive basically call on an employer to risk assess prior to working at height. HSE has issued guidance 'outlawing' the use of ladders but remember it is 'guidance'

personally in this case i love the glorious irony of it all.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 09, 2007 04:59 
Offline
User

Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 11:46
Posts: 125
Quote:
Peter Andrews, manager of the county council’s environment directorate, said with a hint of desperation that he had approached the county fire brigade to see if they could help. Of the many skills acquired by firefighters, climbing ladders is near the top of the list.

“Until we get the fire brigade’s help we won’t be able to get any new signs up and running because we have to make sure people are safe and within the law. It is not a decision we have taken lightly but we have to make sure people are properly trained because there is an element of risk,” Mr Andrews said.


Am I missing something obvious here?

Couldn't someone who works for the council take the necessary course and be certified 'ladder safe'?

_________________
www.misspelled-signs.com - A tribute to illiterate signwriters.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 09, 2007 19:53 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 04:10
Posts: 3244
And why should the council even bother ?
Training establishments are all over the place...every college has courses in safety....
But then, not everything is simple.
You have to remember that accidents happen.....
You employ a window cleaner, said cleaner falls from the ladder and injures a passing person.
So, who gets "done" ?
You do, and the cleaner.
Better make sure your household insurance includes personal liability.....
And it doesn't even matter IF they're trained, since they may well be trained and yet work in a manner that is unsafe, resulting in an accident.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 13:01 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
Not too unrelated:

BBC.co.uk wrote:
Gardener must use warning signs

A pensioner has been told she must stop tending a public flower bed unless she agrees to wear a fluorescent jacket, put up warning signs and use a lookout.
June Turnbull, 79, of Urchfront near Devizes, has nurtured the blooms on the plot for eight years.

But now she is being told to obey health and safety rules after being spotted by a county council official.

Mrs Turnbull said: "They can send me to jail if they like - I just want to be left alone to do it."

Peter Hanson, from Wiltshire County Council, said: "We require that people undertaking this type of work follow the same safety procedures as our own staff.

"This will include wearing fluorescent jackets, placing warning signs and in some cases such as this location in Urchfont because it is on a bend, working in pairs."

Peter Newell, chairman of Urchfont Parish Council, said the council's demands would mean Ms Turnbull would have to apply for a licence.

"We need to get a licence from the Highways Authority if she is to continue and she must wear a fluorescent jacket and have three warning signs and a man standing on guard to get that licence and go on our insurance.

"If we don't June will have to stop."

A defiant Mrs Turnbull said it was "health and safety gone mad" and has vowed to continue gardening despite the warning she will be banned.

She insisted: "I love doing it. I want to make it as pretty as I possible can. I will continue working on the flower bed."


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 19:19 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 19:50
Posts: 3369
Location: Lost in the Wilderness
smeggy wrote:
A defiant Mrs Turnbull said it was "health and safety gone mad" and has vowed to continue gardening despite the warning she will be banned.

She insisted: "I love doing it. I want to make it as pretty as I possible can. I will continue working on the flower bed."


Good on the old girl! it's about time the rest of us did the same.

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 29 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.042s | 11 Queries | GZIP : Off ]