Vegas & The Aftermath - Diary

[RED-DOG]

Mr & Mrs Rausing met in rehab and it seems that she died whilst she was home mid-rehab to attempt to persuade Mr to come back with her.
All of the reports speak of how much in love they were. Soulmates it seems.

Back on the H&S, I've had a few that defied belief in my brief time in the supply of drivers. Common sense is a contradiction in terms it seems.

I recall a report of someone once using a high pressure water jet to wash the mud off their wellies and cutting his toes off. That wasn't one of yours was it Tony?

Toes were the least of Tony's bloke's problem.

[Geo the Sarge]

But it does NOT work - the incidence of accidents increases, & whether the bloke agrees it was his responsibiliy or not, you still get sued.

You cannot allow people to be self-accountable for H & S in this day & age, they just don't get it.

They are FINE whilst they are safe. When they have an accident, though, gg you.

I understand that Tony. What I'm saying is, the law that allows employees to sue, and then holds employers responsible, is at fault and ultimately produces sheep, incapable of thinking for themselves.

Sometimes you just have to be able to say fk it, get in there and get it done

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-15739209

Geo

[tikay]

But it does NOT work - the incidence of accidents increases, & whether the bloke agrees it was his responsibiliy or not, you still get sued.

You cannot allow people to be self-accountable for H & S in this day & age, they just don't get it.

They are FINE whilst they are safe. When they have an accident, though, gg you.

I understand that Tony. What I'm saying is, the law that allows employees to sue, and then holds employers responsible, is at fault and ultimately produces sheep, incapable of thinking for themselves.

Yes, I understand that.

There are two very distinct sides to this debate. 

A nanny-state produces nanny-state people & nanny state thinking. These days, whatever happens is ALWAYS someone else's fault, "Blame Society" is rife. Even Online poker sites suffer. A bad river card comes down to beat A-A man, & it's the "'Stars/Ladbrokes/Sky river"...... 

In a Premiership football match last season, one Team lost (something like) 5-1. I saw that result, which sounded like a good thrashing to the world & his wife, blamed upon a female lineswoman.

[tikay]

Mr & Mrs Rausing met in rehab and it seems that she died whilst she was home mid-rehab to attempt to persuade Mr to come back with her.
All of the reports speak of how much in love they were. Soulmates it seems.

Back on the H&S, I've had a few that defied belief in my brief time in the supply of drivers. Common sense is a contradiction in terms it seems.

I recall a report of someone once using a high pressure water jet to wash the mud off their wellies and cutting his toes off. That wasn't one of yours was it Tony?

Toes were the least of Tony's bloke's problem.

Ha, Tom knows the story!

[david3103]

Mr & Mrs Rausing met in rehab and it seems that she died whilst she was home mid-rehab to attempt to persuade Mr to come back with her.
All of the reports speak of how much in love they were. Soulmates it seems.

Back on the H&S, I've had a few that defied belief in my brief time in the supply of drivers. Common sense is a contradiction in terms it seems.

I recall a report of someone once using a high pressure water jet to wash the mud off their wellies and cutting his toes off. That wasn't one of yours was it Tony?

Toes were the least of Tony's bloke's problem.

Ha, Tom knows the story!

do share

[RED-DOG]

But it does NOT work - the incidence of accidents increases, & whether the bloke agrees it was his responsibiliy or not, you still get sued.

You cannot allow people to be self-accountable for H & S in this day & age, they just don't get it.

They are FINE whilst they are safe. When they have an accident, though, gg you.

I understand that Tony. What I'm saying is, the law that allows employees to sue, and then holds employers responsible, is at fault and ultimately produces sheep, incapable of thinking for themselves.

Yes, I understand that.

There are two very distinct sides to this debate. 

A nanny-state produces nanny-state people & nanny state thinking. These days, whatever happens is ALWAYS someone else's fault, "Blame Society" is rife. Even Online poker sites suffer. A bad river card comes down to beat A-A man, & it's the "'Stars/Ladbrokes/Sky river"...... 

In a Premiership football match last season, one Team lost (something like) 5-1. I saw that result, which sounded like a good thrashing to the world & his wife, blamed upon a female lineswoman.

It seems we have reached a point of mutual understanding , if not agreement.

Eye protectors to open the fridge still irritates me though.

[RED-DOG]

But it does NOT work - the incidence of accidents increases, & whether the bloke agrees it was his responsibiliy or not, you still get sued.

You cannot allow people to be self-accountable for H & S in this day & age, they just don't get it.

They are FINE whilst they are safe. When they have an accident, though, gg you.

I understand that Tony. What I'm saying is, the law that allows employees to sue, and then holds employers responsible, is at fault and ultimately produces sheep, incapable of thinking for themselves.

Sometimes you just have to be able to say fk it, get in there and get it done

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-15739209

Geo

FFS!

[Doobs]

But it does NOT work - the incidence of accidents increases, & whether the bloke agrees it was his responsibiliy or not, you still get sued.

You cannot allow people to be self-accountable for H & S in this day & age, they just don't get it.

They are FINE whilst they are safe. When they have an accident, though, gg you.

I understand that Tony. What I'm saying is, the law that allows employees to sue, and then holds employers responsible, is at fault and ultimately produces sheep, incapable of thinking for themselves.

Sometimes you just have to be able to say fk it, get in there and get it done

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-15739209

Geo

FFS!

I guess if it was a fire they would have a much better idea what to do and wouldn't be so paralysed.  Sometimes people make bad decisions and sometimes they will make them because of health and safety rules, sometimes despite health and safety rules, and sometimes they will just. Lame the rules for their inability to make the right choice. 

Or maybe they just realise mines are dangerous places, especially abandoned ones.  Even with the sting rules we have here, a lot of miners finish up scarred and/or injured and/or diseased

FWIW
http://www.usmra.com/rescuer_deaths.htm

And to be fair to the fellas who will have this on their conscience, they may have acted differently with our levels of hindsight.

[tikay]

Tremendous post, Doobsy.

[MANTIS01]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2104358/Simon-Burgess-drowned-firemen-refused-wade-3ft-deep-lake-health-safety-rules.html

[Geo the Sarge]

Tremendous post, Doobsy.

Why is it such a tremendous post?

All the examples I read there were related to working mines and involved smoke/fire/explosions. Totally different scenario from a poor lady falling down a derelict shaft and firefighters being stopped from giving her immediate assistance due to H&S

I personally cannot comprehend both in this case and in Mantis' example how an individual cannot offer immediate assistance here, H&S or not

Geo

[tikay]

Because, Geo - and IMO - it gives balance to the debate, it is the world's easiest thing to criticise, particularly from afar, but for those with responsibility for staff under their control, it is not as easy as we may think. If they get it wrong, just the once, in their entire life, or career, they could well face prosecution and even prison, not to mention the tin tack.

I agree, on the bare facts presented by Mantis (in the Daily Mail of all things) it all looks rather ridiculous. But I bet if that article had better balance, and those responsible for refusing permission had contributed, it would at least make more sense.

Everyone is an expert on everything these days. But they - we - are not.

[Geo the Sarge]

Because, Geo - and IMO - it gives balance to the debate, it is the world's easiest thing to criticise, particularly from afar, but for those with responsibility for staff under their control, it is not as easy as we may think. If they get it wrong, just the once, in their entire life, or career, they could well face prosecution and even prison, not to mention the tin tack.

I agree, on the bare facts presented by Mantis (in the Daily Mail of all things) it all looks rather ridiculous. But I bet if that article had better balance, and those responsible for refusing permission had contributed, it would at least make more sense.

Everyone is an expert on everything these days. But they - we - are not.

I understand what you are saying and have maybe not explained myself properly.

I accept that the people giving instruction are hampered by the rules. I can't understand in severe cases as outlined why someone hasn't the balls to say fk the rules and orders I'm being given and assist.

Geo

[Doobs]

Tremendous post, Doobsy.

Why is it such a tremendous post?

All the examples I read there were related to working mines and involved smoke/fire/explosions. Totally different scenario from a poor lady falling down a derelict shaft and firefighters being stopped from giving her immediate assistance due to H&S

I personally cannot comprehend both in this case and in Mantis' example how an individual cannot offer immediate assistance here, H&S or not

Geo

I just think overall health and safety rules have been a tremendous force for good.  Work place deaths from accidenets etc have dropped enormously because we care about these things here.  I simply have no doubt that lives saved >> lives lost.

I suppose it is inevitable that people will make incorrect judgements.  It is interesting how the daily mail etc are implying that H and S is to blame.  But there were a bunch of "witnesses" there who watched the man drown.  I assume not one of them was encumbered with any health and safety rules which stopped them stepping in 3ft of water.  

I always like to think I'd step in but you never really know either.  I suppose your average policeman isn't much different to me.

[Knottikay]

I once worked as a Junior (the old YTS) at an Insurance Brokers long before all these H & S rules were brought in. I remember my induction course in the 1st week where I was given two basic rules of thumb....

1) An ACCIDENT, by definition, is an UNFORESEEN CIRCUMSTANCE.
2) The ONLY difference between insurance and assurance is one 'might' happen, one 'will' happen.

Another one, which I will add, is what is the main difference between illegal and unlawful??......................




















(the second one is not a sick bird!)

I will get my coat!