I always read the Daily Mails rantings about the 'Tyranny' of Health and Safety with a pinch of salt. I have heard that occasionally they can be slightly prone to exaggeration and hyperbole.

Yesterday, however, I experienced the full-blown nonsense of it all.

I took the kids swimming at Manchester Aquatic Centre. As I have been doing every weekend for the last 2 years. My daughters are 2 and a half, and 5. They both love splashing around in the little pool (less than a foot deep), playing on the slides and lounging in the jacuzzi. When I went to gain admission I had the following exchange:

"An adult and 2 children please."
"Are you the only adult?"
"yes"
"I'm sorry, I can't let you in"
"Why not?"
"Health and safety regulations. There has to be a ratio of one adult per child"
"Since when? I've been taking them here every weekend for two years"
"I'm sorry sir. I can't let you in. Health and safety regulations"

I eventually managed to get a manager who said I definitely can't take both my daughters swimming at the same time due to Health and Safety regulations. There has to be one adult per child

I had quite a queue behind me by this point (all of whom were joining in to point out the absurdity of this). And, of course, two very upset children. I pointed out that they both have arm-bands and the 5 year old is a great swimmer. And that, due to not being an idiot, I didn't actually want to see either of them drown. All to no avail.

So… the Health and Safety bods have now deemed that any parent is now incapable of supervising two of their own children in a safe environment. So a single parent with 2 children can no longer take them swimming. And the same goes for a family with more than two kids

Absolutely ****ing ridiculous!!!

Any other great personal examples of this utter and complete madness?

Probably just didn't like your face, I cant see how this 1:1 ruling could be pulled from the H&S laws.

That's usually the issue though isn't it – it's not actually EHS laws that cause the problem but rather, over-zealous application of them.

I was at a recent out-of-hours public meeting in the local council chambers.

We weren't allowed to make tea or coffee as using a kettle constituted a Health & Safety issue.
So we all brought flasks…

CB

I would imagine its less HSE and more over zealous following of the below guidelines from ISRM:

"The Institute of Sport and Recreation Management (ISRM) have issued guidance on child admissions which states that a responsible person, aged at least 16 years, should accompany all children under the age of 8 into swimming pools and go in the water with them. The guidance includes a standard ratio of:-

Children under the age of four should be accompanied by a responsible person on a one to one basis
Children aged between four to seven should be accompanied by a responsible person on a maximum two to one basis"

Source

In fact the HSE themselves state:

"The law imposes no specific restrictions"

Yeah this was all over the papers a couple of months back

Crazy isn't it?

H&S shouldn't be taken lightly though
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ouD7VT1cTRk

When our nipper was about 2 we took him to a water park with all the slides & chutes. At the top of one slide we were told he couldn't go down as he was wearing armbands.

So we took the armbands off, and they were fine with that.

I should point out that I went down first, to catch him.

You should have chosen your favourite child and taken her in, the other one could wait outside, or in the pub.

I'm a 'Elf N Safety bod…

As people have said, it's not the law that's the problem, 90% of the time it's some local authority official who puts these rules in place, my sister in law works for the council and they have been told they aren't allowed to have drinks on their desks because of health and safety..

What really grips my s**t though is when people say

You can't do that because of Health and Safety..

I always challenge with the question – what part of H&S? tell me where it's written..

If I stop anything from happening at work, I tell the staff involved the reasons behind that decision, "It's for Health and Safety" is the defence of those who don't understand or don't want to explain their reasonings 👿

samuri – Member
You should have chosen your favourite child and taken her in, the other one could wait outside, or in the pub.

Tough but fair.

As people have said, it's not the law that's the problem, 90% of the time

Perhaps it is?
Maybe it's worded so badly that it leaves it open to all sorts of interpretation? & the resulting over-reaction is simply the fear of not getting it right?

I'm supposed to check the tyres and fluids in our pool car every time I use it. Yet we have not been given a pressure or tread depth gauge, nor have we been shown how to correctly check the fluids (and the method does vary in different vehicles).

Same with that "law" about not allowing kids to play conkers in the playground any more. It's become a kind of urban myth but all that happened because of an over-zealous application of it by a school, suddenly it was all over the papers reported as being a "Health and Safety LAW" when all it actually is is a bit of guidance.

Where I work is obsessed with H+S

Ecologists were doing a kick sample in a river, over river was a bridge. Surely common sense would tell you to watch your head when going under the bridge. Muppet bangs head on bridge, 4 months off law suits flying around and payouts all because the working plans for the sample did not specificaly mention the danger posed by the bridge.

We then had to endure a 2 hour feedback session with Q+A's about what we would do differently. Then got into trouble for not being a team player for questioning the mental wellbeing of the person who nutted the bridge.

H&S isn't all bad, work bought me a load of 'H&S' warm clothing that I've only ever used mountain biking! Just need to play the system 🙂

I disagree uplink, the law is supported by guidance, a qualified and competent safety professional should have a good understanding of the law and it's application to real world situations, there are, unfortunately, a lot of people out there making a lot of money acting as consultants with very little knowledge or understanding, the HSE is trying to educate people on the 'myths's that spring up in places like the Mail

Sky "Engineer" informed me that it was "illegal" for him to go up onto my roof alone to get to the dish (on the chimney). Told him it was NOT illegal in any way shape or form, rather it was Skys policy to reduce accidents and thus claims against them.

He wasn't having any of it (actually said Its more than my jobs worth). To which I said- I wouldn't tell anyone if he didn't! But no…

Net result of all this is I now have two satellite dishes attached to my house!

I'm actually currently studying for a H&S qualification, so can tell what is a legal requirement and what is overzealous jobsworths exerting the minuscule bit of power they mistakenly believe they have.

Ask them if the ratio of 1 adult to 1 child applies, how many lifeguards do they employ?

You should have chosen your favourite child and taken her in, the other one could wait outside, or in the pub.

No, no, just leave them in the car.

Remembering to leave them a bowl of water and open the window a little if it's a hot day. 🙂

Me and the daughter pass through a park on our little cycle round the area. There is a toilet there and my nearly nine year old daughter is not aloud in to the ladies on here oqn due to health and safety.! What a load of tosh. I have told the woman in charge many times before that she is toilet trained and everything, she fails to see the funny side.

Sky "Engineer" informed me that it was "illegal" for him to go up onto my roof alone to get to the dish (on the chimney).

👿

…. and breathe

Been that way for years

Unfortunately due to drownings

Every time there is an incident at a pool they have an inquiry that is passed on and action taken etc, etc.

The outcome is the above posting from jamie

These "rules" are not applied for no reason. It has and does continue to happen. How can any pool decide who is a fit parent to look after their child/children. Same as how do you tell who is a burglar/criminal.

Like all businesses they are running a "lean" staffing levels.

Seems it does not apply to private clubs and places like Center Parcs tho!!!

It's all about arse covering at the end of the day. Not about "being safe".

H&S legislation (most of which I agree with the spirit of) is worded such that if the HSE decide you are guilty of causing an accident, they *can* and *will* lock you up. That puts the shits up the small minded little oiks who are "responsible" for H&S at end user level, who then decide the easiset and laziest way to cover themselves sufficiently is to slap a blanket ban on everything, so they can't possibly be found guilty of negligence.

I spend a lot of time writing Method Statements and Risk Assessments. Most of which I know for a fact never get read. I regulary insert Monty Python gags in the body of the text, which have *never* been picked up those who I send the paperwork too. It also fascinates me that H&S only applies between 9AM & 5PM, after which the office bound H&S bods go home, leaving us to start work at 6PM, in whatever fashion we choose.

Sky "Engineer" informed me that it was "illegal" for him to go up onto my roof alone to get to the dish (on the chimney).

As I understand it [working at heights regs etc.] he certainly couldn't use ladders – so if that's all he had ………….

Jon.. why do your do them if they never get read?

You should have known things were going badly when they started calling swimming pools "Aquatic Centres".

Each time we have an H&S inspection at work I have to drag out a soldering iron fume extractor and stick it next to the iron. This year the stasi on looking at the carefully positioned and dusted down unit (we even put a new filter in) asked to see the carbon filter replacement schedule paperwork, and was seriously concerned that we hadn't got one. And stated that as a matter of urgency we should have a policy and that we need to check that the filter is working correctly. So I asked how we should test that the 50p bit of carbon foam filter is working correctly – to which the reply was 'with a calibrated foam filter tester'. When further asked how much such a device costs or where to get one from the waste of oxygen with a clipboard became rather reticent, so fell back on the "that's what the legislation says" guff.
Once they'd gone I lobbed the extractor back in the cupboard, and decided to google carbon filters and flux particulates. It turns out that the stuff goes straight through carbon foam filters, making them as much use as a chocolate tea pot, but not as nice to eat.

As I understand it [working at heights regs etc.] he certainly couldn't use ladders

Why?

They are only Regs. anyway and NOT law.

I work in the construction industry. I wouldn't even know where to finish with such stories.

So I asked how we should test that the 50p bit of carbon foam filter is working correctly – to which the reply was 'with a calibrated foam filter tester'. When further asked how much such a device costs or where to get one from the waste of oxygen with a clipboard became rather reticent, so fell back on the "that's what the legislation says" guff.

The law (H&S At Work Act 1974) states repeatedly "so far as is reasonably practicable" so in that situation I would say that its not reasonably practicable!

work in a lab and daily go out to collect samples from our herd of horses. currently in a pointless circular argument with the poison dwarf in our department about the definition of protective clothing – apparently I am not allowed to keep my smelly, horsey overalls hanging up with my lab coat because they are 'not protective clothing' and thus have to 'keep them in my office'*

this morning was the last straw and they have been very strategically placed on her desk (with the addition of a few gratutious streaks of horse poo and lots of blood smeared on them. I await her return.

is it not related to insurance as well?
can businesses/ councils not get reduced insurance premiums if they can show that policy is in place to mitigate certain risks?

binners- its not just H&S in the pool. The steam sauna is set low there- possibly to stop anyone building up a sweat.

Why?

They are only Regs. anyway and NOT law.

I'm not entirely sure what you point is
He may well be legally permitted to use ladders to climb onto the roof, I don't know – as I said "As I understand it"

The word illegal doesn't just relate to law you know?
i.e an illegal chess move, against the regulations, rules etc.

The word illegal doesn't just relate to law you know?
i.e an illegal chess move, against the regulations, rules etc.

Come on! Are we defining the word illegal now? For the purposes of this discussion my definition of illegal is 'against the law'.

Why can't he use a ladder? How do window cleaners do their job?

My point was that he, like you, has displayed a lack of understanding of the legislation.

jackson.. The Working At Height Regs are law, through application via the HSWA '74 – check section 15

Regulations are brought in when more specific or modernisation of legislation is required

Well – I'd be interested to hear how a man on his own could assemble & use a ladder & then a cat ladder to get to a chimney stack
After that he would then somehow need to be able to work up there, lashing steel cable around the stack etc. & stay within the regs

The regs may not explicitly disallow it – but they put so many obstacles in place that it effectively becomes impossible to do with ladders unless you're prepared [like most window cleaners] to ignore the regs.

Ladders are legal. If it's a one off job of low duration (>15 minutes), there is no problem. Providing of course the ladder is suitable, has been checked for damage and the engineer has been trained in how to use it.

Regulations are laws BTW. Guidance is like the highway code – you can't be prosecuted for breaking it, but if you break it and something bad happens, you'd better have a pretty good reason…

Boris

(Member of the Chartered Institute of Occupational Safety and Health)

I work on a large industrial site and unfortunately we've had two lower leg amputations in the past five years. I also get regular email bulletins giving details of accidents at other sites including fatalities from falling, crush injuries, chemical burns etc. etc. Everyone on-site sees safety as a priority, not just the H&S specialists because if you don't then you won't last long.

There is a significant difference between jobsworths using H&S as an excuse for petty rules and those safety controls which are in place to prevent serious injuries or deaths. You won't get rid of risk and the HSE acknowledge that, but I'd rather put justified controls in place (and enforce them) than explain to people that a member of their family is in hospital or worse following an accident in a workplace which is under my control.

IMHO!

There has been a shift towards working from the ground in window cleaning, they have long poles which pump heated water to the head of the pole which has a brush on, the heated water dries without smearing meaning the requirement to climb a ladder is removed, the whole argument about reasonably practicable springs into action at this point though.. can every window cleaner afford this?

no..

working from a ladder isn't banned, short term work is acceptable, long term working requires 3 points of contact (two feet and a hand).. the ladder should be stabilised (but isn't that common sense?) and should be set at a safe angle (2 up, 1 rung out)

The thing is, safe working at height has groun up in each industry, the regs really just draw this knowledge together to create safe working guidelines, a pain it may be, but remember the words are there to help people to stop dying at work

The regs may not explicitly disallow it – but they put so many obstacles in place that it effectively becomes impossible to do with ladders unless you're prepared [like most window cleaners] to ignore the regs.

You will be surprised by this but here goes.

Ive done work for a couple of window cleaners recently because they needed policies and procedures for corporate clients. NO LADDERS on any sites – these are small industrial estates (blanket ban) so the guys use lllloooooonnnnnggggggg poles which shoot the water up to the brush at the end. Very light and one of them was carbon! No need for ladders.

The other guy does georgian mansion office blocks and was told to use a different method than ladders or they would find somone else.

Got to agree there are some small minded people involved in H&S. That comes from someone who does it for a living. If the regs are applied with a bit of thought, the upshot will be safer working environments and not endless paper chases.