Mintball wrote:Not now – sorted. Cheers. Here's a case that sounds similar: http://www.hse.gov.uk/press/2010/coi-yh-24410.htm

Mintball wrote:Not now – sorted. Cheers. Here's a case that sounds similar: http://www.hse.gov.uk/press/2010/coi-yh-24410.htm

Keith wrote:Cheers. Here's a case that sounds similar: http://www.hse.gov.uk/press/2010/coi-yh-24410.htm All this elf and safety madness – it's wot's stopping the country becoming great again!

Keith wrote:Cheers. Here's a case that sounds similar: http://www.hse.gov.uk/press/2010/coi-yh-24410.htm All this elf and safety madness – it's wot's stopping the country becoming great again!

1. You need to know that employers across the land French Connection UK up on employee safety, every day, all the time. Claims arising are almost an industry and it is mainly these that have served to slowly (but very significantly) increase employee safety (insurance premium driven, and an increasing risk assessment culture). I can assure you that thousands of employers ranging from careless through dolt to downright couldn't-give-a-shyite continue to exist and I think always will.

2. The possibility that an employee may be negligent is precisely one a good employer is well aware of, and takes into account.

But if your gaffer says "Do this, but stand at this side, so if it grabs your arm you can hit the stop button" it's all very well for you to be clever and say he was negligent for following the instruction, but it takes some courage to challenge your employer, all the more so in this economic climate, and personally I can entirely understand why someone worried about a risk may opt to shut up and take the risk of injury instead of speaking up and losing their job.

Oh, and it's "kerching" because:
(a) the machine was obviously dangerous in that configuration
(b) the specific risk of what happened happening was as plain as the nose on your face, and worse still, was seemingly specifically known to the employer
(c) it could easily have been eliminated (stop the machine, do your taping, restart the machine).
Open and shut.

Oh, and it fookin well SHOULD be "kerching", to teach assholes like this employer, who pay scant or no regard to the specific regulations they are legally obliged to apply, and thus are happy that their employees should run the risk of injury, a lesson. (And as Mintball points out, in appropriately serious cases, they can be prosecuted too).

Was there a whooshing sound as you typed that?

i'd ask to see the risk assesment for that machine before anything else?

HSE would ask the same thing, any safety guidelines, training and PPE etc required should be in that report?

April 6th, still 3 days under RIDDOR until then.

I am involved a lot with H&S on construction sites and I asked a manager what was the most important change in H&S legislation to him, he replied 'corporate manslaughter, now the bustards will let us have what we want'

RIDDOR

as stated reportable for a 3 day absense, although the poster above who said 7 days is nearly correct, that changes on April if legislation is passed.

Glad to hear there was no serious injury. I note you do not want to risk a fall-out with the company. It is worthy of note that you have 3 years to bring a personal injury claim, should you wish to at some point in the future.

the risk assesment was done in 2009

All the things what were needed e.g a winch system to lift 50k+ coils off wire on to a turntable were classed ticked as urgent as possibility off hurting backs an still not in place resulting in a complaint end off last year when a lad could't lift a reel he was called a wimp an told to get to the gym or go through the door by the superviser. He was a agencey lad the superviser was given a warning he left. cant rember anything about the lathe but a will have a look tomorow as have access to it

They accepted fault and give me full pay plus redoing the risk assesments also now gloves are not to be used well in opperation