V S again

[Richard Bustens]

Well all you CCers, you have a reprise from Victor for a bit.

 

He now appearers to be campaigning against trade sterns.

 

Stating that the H&S are concerned by the lack of railings.

[Stephen Sugg]

I read victors piece on that, I got the impression that it wan't him but the HSE that are worried. I can't see much happening though, at the most they may be concerned with hire boats rather than privates, given the fact that private boaters know what they're buying, hire boaters don't always know what they're hiring...

[Derek]

Private Buyers don't always know what they're buying (see post on condemned residential boat!)

 

Derek

[nichimyo]

I can't see that HSE would get into that. They're far more concerned about for instance deaths in the construction industry, and explosive and radioactive substances than to worry about the odd drunken tumble off a trad stern into a couple or three feet of sligtly dirty water. Only if someone caught leptospirosis or something as a result would they be even faintly interested, is my guess.

[DHutch]

One of the old working boats at the IWA preston brook was converted to a mobile classroom, using lottery money at the IWA preston brook rally said that they had to change the layout out to meet health a safty.

- Aprently it was to dangerous the expect kids to climb onto the stern and into the boatsmans cabin.

- So the had to turn the whole cabin round, and swap the engineroom and cabin around, so that the 'back' of the cabin is got to though the bulkhead that would have seperated the cargospace and the engineroom!!

 

Madness

 

 

Daniel

[nichimyo]

Pretty daft, I agree. I wonder whose interpretation of "health and safety" it was. The trouble is, people are so twitchy these days of activities involving school children that understandably they do tend to go over the top.

I suppose they were thinking that if the children started pushing on the stern, someone would fall off. Getting on at the side (which I presume is what they do now), it's probably far less likely that someone could get pushed into the water.

[Maffi]

I can't see that HSE would get into that. They're far more concerned about for instance deaths in the construction industry, and explosive and radioactive substances than to worry about the odd drunken tumble off a trad stern into a couple or three feet of slightly dirty water. Only if someone caught leptospirosis or something as a result would they be even faintly interested, is my guess.

29864[/snapback]

 

 

N, The HSE were investigating the death of a man who fell off the back of his boat. They commented that they were concerned at the 'total lack of any restraining rail' on a trad stern.

 

We can't expect HSE to understand that a Trad is a Trad, but they do have a point. Had there been a safety rail as on Cruiser sterns this man might still be alive, however difficult fitting one would be.

 

Once the HSE get their teeth into something it is difficult to stop the momentum.

Edited September 7, 2005 by Maffi

[Sam]

I agree,

however i do think a trad with railings just would not look very good.. and like everything one does there is always a risk of an accident.. just like falling over and breaing something or having a car go into the back of you i suppose.

 

One must be carefull and one will not get hurt (well.. if other people are carefull too)

 

 

(Did any of that make sense? )

[DHutch]

Its just a whole load of political nonsence!

- How can you have a 'trad' with railings? Thats not very traditional!

 

Ahhhh, its just silly.

- Sure, health and safe ideas have somtims been good, but more ofthen then not the whole lot gets blown masivly out of proportion by some stupid pen pusher who doent even know what a trad stern is.

 

- You cant make everthing safe.

 

 

Daniel

[Sam]

I agree Dan, but a lot of things have been turned silly ( oes that actually make ANY sense?) by the HSE etc.. which people always think are just stupid like you do.. it is a shame!

 

Its just a whole load of political nonsence!

- How can you have a 'trad' with railings? Thats not very traditional!

 

Ahhhh, its just silly.

- Sure, health and safe ideas have somtims been good, but more ofthen then not the whole lot gets blown masivly out of proportion by some stupid pen pusher who doent even know what a trad stern is.

 

- You cant make everthing safe.

Daniel

29919[/snapback]

[Maffi]

You cant make everthing safe.

Daniel

 

Your right Dan, but it is the HSE's job to make things as safe as possible within their remit.

 

Accidents are rarely accidental. Most are avoidable.

 

The police in my area (Wiltshire) no longer refer to Road Traffic Accidents (RTA) it always Road Traffic Incidents (RTI) nearly always, someone is responsible.

 

Recently here in Saudia a truck 'U' turned across six lanes at midnight. No street lights, no running lights on the truck. One of our company buses ploughed in to it killing the driver and two others. Had he driven on for another mile there was a place where he could have turned with street lights and the 'accident' would probably never have happened. Now, and only now, there is a sign saying No 'U' turns.

Edited September 7, 2005 by Maffi

[Gary Peacock]

The production of true Trad sterns without any form of rail could come to an end fairly soon!

The concerns of the HSE are backed by the Trads non compliance to elements of the RCD in reference to safety rails.

 

It is fairly common knowledge in the industry that it will only take one successful prosecution against a builder to see the rapid withdrawal or modification of the style.

 

Existing boats in private use will not have a problem but commercial or boats made available to public use will need to be modified.

 

A few high profile accidents on the inland waterways over the last few years have woken up the HSE to a potentially neglected sector of industry!

[fender.]

Its probably the same as a number of locks in certain places around our canals -that are very busy with towpath users and now having rails installed around them for the safety of these passer-bys. Anything that's (over) protective is obviously a boon to BW or boat hirers because it means less chance of them being sued for neglience.

[Liam]

I guess you'd need some sort of safety rail round a tug deck in the future too?

[steveh]

The production of true Trad sterns without any form of rail could come to an end fairly soon!

The concerns of the HSE are backed by the Trads non compliance to elements of the RCD in reference to safety rails.

29963[/snapback]

 

 

Introducing any form of railing system on any semi-trad or trad stern could cause more problems with restricted access for fire escape.

 

The concerns of the HSE are backed by the Trads non compliance to elements of the RCD in reference to safety rails.

29963[/snapback]

 

The RCD is only valid for 12 months correct? So after that I whats stopping poeple removing the saftey rail from the stern if the was introduced?

[fender.]

I guess you'd need some sort of safety rail round a tug deck in the future too?

29969[/snapback]

 

Not quite. I think that specialist industries who have suitably trained and qualified people will be ok, so tug and lighterage services wont be affected. The issue that seems to be crucial in our situation is the number of inexpereinced and unaware people who use the canals. The opening up of the canals is proving to have some far reaching consequences that we have never thought about - until possibly now.

[Richard Bustens]

I suspect your insurance C/O would have something to say if anything happened.

[gaggle]

safety ought to be a concern to everyone.it will play a part in dragging the canal community screaming through major changes.

its only commen sense that changes take place as the waterways get more people using them.

trad sterns to my mind were built to minimun standards and costs i dont think the old bargee,s welfare ever entered into it.

easy to get on and off to carry out the job may have played a part but i think leisure use is a different kettle of fish altogether.

hse can be a pain sometimes but our interests and safety left to ourselves would result in more accidents and deaths of that i am sure.

anyway it gives work to someone somewhere.

[bottle]

I did hear that all persons born after April 1 2006 must wear a cotton-wool/fire resistant/wetsuit from birth to death.

[nigel carton]

he he... oooops laughed at bit to loud then and fell off me chair, and done my back in! Bottle can I have you details so I can pass them on to my lawer

[DHutch]

I did hear that all persons born after April 1 2006 must wear a cotton-wool/fire resistant/wetsuit from birth to death.

No, only till there 85, then you get chucked in a big padded room and hidden from sight. Forever.

 

 

Daniel