New warning signs at Knowle

[BruceinSanity]

Poor b*****s (CaRT) can't win, can they - No notice and they get sued - but more expensively, big fine from the Gov't, if they don't stick up the notice.

My Management won't go up Knowle again - they're heavy gates and gear, but last time I recall that the bottom gate balance beams overhang the edge of the lock and are very close to the top of the steps - so it's difficult to get a good purchase.

 

For regular users you (should be) aware of the tricks of that flight - but there are strange folks - hirers (shock horror!) who pass that way but once and need to be saved.....

 

It took me three years to recover from the rotator cuff injury I gave myself winding paddles at Knowle. My fault, should have been a wimp and fetched the long throw windlass. Like you say, never again, but it didn't occur to me for a moment to sue BW.

[dogless]

To be fair, these sorts of signs are a response to 'our' (that is the general publics) desire to constantly blame others and seek compensation.

We shouldn't really blame the authority for seeking to protect itself from us.

Rog

[Tom and Bex]

My Management won't go up Knowle again - they're heavy gates and gear, but last time I recall that the bottom gate balance beams overhang the edge of the lock and are very close to the top of the steps - so it's difficult to get a good purchase.

 

For regular users you (should be) aware of the tricks of that flight - but there are strange folks - hirers (shock horror!) who pass that way but once and need to be saved.....

Have to say I hate Knowle locks as well. Not cos of any danger (perceived or otherwise) but due to them being so damn heavy and awkward. There's nowhere to wait above or below each lock due to them being in the middle of the large pounds, and if you stop in the lock entrance to open or shut the gates the bow gets blown completely across the pound by the permanent cross wind. At least on this occasion it was dry for the first time.

 

Tom

[nicknorman]

Have to say I hate Knowle locks as well. Not cos of any danger (perceived or otherwise) but due to them being so damn heavy and awkward. There's nowhere to wait above or below each lock due to them being in the middle of the large pounds, and if you stop in the lock entrance to open or shut the gates the bow gets blown completely across the pound by the permanent cross wind. At least on this occasion it was dry for the first time.

Tom

Personally I always find them quite easy to operate. I steer and Jeff winds and pushes. Simples!

[Cas446]

I am sure it won't be long before we have to fill out induction sheets and start signing bits of paper.

 

..and thus just like being at work!

Edited February 13, 2016 by Cas446

[bigcol]

Wonder what danger signs, and how many, were arround on the lock gates and canal back in the 1800s

[FadeToScarlet]

Wonder what danger signs, and how many, were arround on the lock gates and canal back in the 1800s

Not many.

 

But then, a lot of navvies and boatmen and women, and their children, died, compared to today.

[Captain Pegg]

Not many.

But then, a lot of navvies and boatmen and women, and their children, died, compared to today.

And that's exactly the point. The introduction and enforcement of Health & Safety legislation has saved literally countless lives. It has never gone 'mad' just maybe over zealously applied at times.

 

This is such a low level control it really shouldn't bother anybody. Why can't it just be taken that an individual in an organization is simply trying to make what is undoubtedly a dangerous environment a little bit safer.

 

I wouldn't be allowed to work without restriction or some form of safety device (such as a fence) in that environment because there is a clear risk of falling.

 

JP

[nicknorman]

And that's exactly the point. The introduction and enforcement of Health & Safety legislation has saved literally countless lives. It has never gone 'mad' just maybe over zealously applied at times.

This is such a low level control it really shouldn't bother anybody. Why can't it just be taken that an individual in an organization is simply trying to make what is undoubtedly a dangerous environment a little bit safer.

I wouldn't be allowed to work without restriction or some form of safety device (such as a fence) in that environment because there is a clear risk of falling.

JP

Because I would say it doesn't make it any safer. It does however set a precedent that the ambulance chasers could capitalise on.

 

If you disagree, please cite any research that shows that fatuous and obvious signs like this have ever saved anyone.

[adam1uk]

Because I would say it doesn't make it any safer. It does however set a precedent that the ambulance chasers could capitalise on.

 

If you disagree, please cite any research that shows that fatuous and obvious signs like this have ever saved anyone.

 

That might be tricky -- not becaise fatuous and obvious signs have never saved anyone, but because people who take extra care because they've seen the fatuous and obvious signs usually don't register the fact anywhere.

Edited February 13, 2016 by adam1uk

[nicknorman]

That might be tricky -- not becaise fatuous and obvious signs have never saved anyone, but because people who take extra care because they've seen the fatuous and obvious signs usually don't register the fact anywhere.

This may be true but normally such research would look at a site with such signs, and a very similar one without, over a long period, and determine whether there was any statistically significant difference. If there is no evidence to show that the signs work, why not just get a Shamen to cast a spell of safety at the site? Ok may not be cheaper, but certainly more entertaining! And probably just as effective!

[john6767]

Wonder what danger signs, and how many, were arround on the lock gates and canal back in the 1800s

None at these locks for sure, they were built in the 1930's.

 

I have to say I don't see the issue with the signs on the widened GU Birmingham main line, the locks do have significant drops off the back of the locks which is not always the case elsewhere.

[Captain Pegg]

Because I would say it doesn't make it any safer. It does however set a precedent that the ambulance chasers could capitalise on.

If you disagree, please cite any research that shows that fatuous and obvious signs like this have ever saved anyone.

There is research on this subject which itself acknowledges the difficulty of demonstrating effectiveness of signage. However signage remains a significant tool in the armoury of H&S professionals and I doubt they do it in the knowledge it doesn't work. I made no claim about the necessity or effectiveness of this particular sign merely noted that in an environment where there are identifiable dangers we should be careful about rubbishing the efforts of those who aim to make it safer. It is the culture of organizations and the attitude of individuals towards H&S that saves lives.

 

If canals want to be relevant and remain an operational asset for boaters and the public we have to accept they must fit in with 21st century attitudes not 19th century ones. That's not to say I don't the lament the loss of character or originality on a personal level the same as many others do. But on balance who wants to live in the 1800s?

 

JP

Edited February 13, 2016 by Captain Pegg

[nicknorman]

There is research on this subject which itself acknowledges the difficulty of demonstrating effectiveness of signage. However signage remains a significant tool in the armoury of H&S professionals and I doubt they do it in the knowledge it doesn't work. I made no claim about the necessity or effectiveness of this particular sign merely noted that in an environment where there are identifiable dangers we should be careful about rubbishing the efforts of those who aim to make it safer. It is the culture of organizations and the attitude of individuals towards H&S that saves lives.

If canals want to be relevant and remain an operational asset for boaters and the public we have to accept they must fit in with 21st century attitudes not 19th century ones. That's not to say I don't the lament the loss of character or originality on a personal level the same as many others do. But on balance who wants to live in the 1800s?

JP

In my view H&S professionals like signage because it means that when someone falls down a drop they can say "well there was a sign, so that makes it your fault". In other words it is all about arse covering and avoiding blame, it is not about preventing accidents.

 

And even if it were, personally I don't want to live in a world plastered with fatuous signs everywhere. The real world is a dangerous place, get over it or die! In my view the only place for warning signage is where the hazard is hidden or at least not obvious. Having to point out that height + gravity = danger is fatuous. No doubt H&S professionals would like signs plastered all over our Scottish mountain ranges but hopefully I will be dead before that pollution is allowed.

 

Ultimately fatuous signage will be responsible for our downfall once all vestiges of common sense are removed by constant exposure to signs telling us that if we jump off a cliff it might be dangerous etc. Then someone will injure themselves by bumping into a sign and we shall have to have signs warning about the signs. Eventually Englandshire will sink into the ocean under the weight of signage and then we'll all be dead.

 

Yes I like that, fatuous signage is pollution just like dropping litter is. I propose all H&S professionals be prosecuted for littering.

 

My, I feel much better now!

Edited February 13, 2016 by nicknorman

[Jim Riley]

There is a precedent, set by the notices and instructions on the guillotine gate controls at Salterhebble, for notices to be in braille.

[cuthound]

In my view H&S professionals like signage because it means that when someone falls down a drop they can say "well there was a sign, so that makes it your fault". In other words it is all about arse covering and avoiding blame, it is not about preventing accidents.

And even if it were, personally I don't want to live in a world plastered with fatuous signs everywhere. The real world is a dangerous place, get over it or die! In my view the only place for warning signage is where the hazard is hidden or at least not obvious. Having to point out that height + gravity = danger is fatuous. No doubt H&S professionals would like signs plastered all over our Scottish mountain ranges but hopefully I will be dead before that pollution is allowed.

Ultimately fatuous signage will be responsible for our downfall once all vestiges of common sense are removed by constant exposure to signs telling us that if we jump off a cliff it might be dangerous etc. Then someone will injure themselves by bumping into a sign and we shall have to have signs warning about the signs. Eventually Englandshire will sink into the ocean under the weight of signage and then we'll all be dead.

Yes I like that, fatuous signage is pollution just like dropping litter is. I propose all H&S professionals be prosecuted for littering.

My, I feel much better now!

Not like you to rant Nick.

 

Given you are a qualified electrical engineer I am surprised you are so against warning signs.

 

I well remember working on switchboards in the 70's and not knowing if removing a cover would expose live components or not.

 

Working live was routinely expected on 415 volt equipment then and sometimes on 11Kv. Now it can only be undertaken if someone signs to say it is necessary (it usually isn't). Testing excepted.

 

The working world is a much safer place now, mainly due to a wider appreciation of the risks in which appropriate signage plays a part.

 

Edited to add the last paragraph.

Edited February 14, 2016 by cuthound

[nicknorman]

Not like you to rant Nick.

Given you are a qualified electrical engineer I am surprised you are so against warning signs.

I well remember working on switchboards in the 70's and not knowing if removing a cover would expose live components or not.

Working live was routinely expected on 415 volt equipment then and sometimes on 11Kv. Now it can only be undertaken if someone signs to say it is necessary (it usually isn't). Testing excepted.

The working world is a much safer place now, mainly due to a wider appreciation of the risks in which appropriate signage plays a part.

Edited to add the last paragraph.

A good rant is very cathartic! Anyway, I didn't say I was against all signage. I said that warning signs should cover things that are not obvious. High voltage inside a cabinet is such a thing because you can't see it. I am also not against HSE in the workplace, although it can have a tendancy to be unimpeachable and thus get out of hand. For example in my workplace HSE applies on the ground. Once we get airborne it doesn't apply, and thus it doesn't care. So it didn't care when it wanted to do stuff on the ground, that might have an impact on safety in the air since it was not its responsibility. As I have said before, HSE is all about compliance with regulations and arse covering, it isn't primarily about avoiding accidents. Whereas flight safety is about avoiding crashery, end of. There is a noticeable difference in attitude.

 

Where I resent HSE is where it leaves the workplace, which was its original domain, and encroaches on people's private and leisure lives. The signs at knowle being a classic example. And mostly it irritates me because it is so foolish and illogical to have a smattering of signs here and there whilst leaving many other equally "dangerous" features of our environment un-signed. Of course it is neither feasible or desirable to sign everything. But creeping signage has a creeping effect on society, it makes us more and more certain that someone else is responsible for our safety, and thus makes us more and more careless and thoughtless in our daily activities on the grounds that if there isn't a sign, there obviously is no danger in the scenario, meanwhile most of the world remains a dangerous place and live remains a fragile thing.

[b0atman]

I think that we should sue Isaac Newton fancy inventing gravity with no thought to the repercussions.

[steve hayes]

What the HSE Zelots don't get that it is possible to assess a risk and the outcome quiet often should be to nothing as the risk is either minimal or any reasonable person would identify the risk.

[cuthound]

What the HSE Zelots don't get that it is possible to assess a risk and the outcome quiet often should be to nothing as the risk is either minimal or any reasonable person would identify the risk.

I think people are becoming less able to assess risk. I noticed this in the last 15 years or so, that younger people have much less risk perception than when I was their age.

 

Whether this is due to them getting out less as kids and learning through doing dangerous things, or whether it isbecause even very small risks are often signed, so they rely on signage rather than use their eyes and ears to asses risk I dont know.

 

Given that kids today spend virtually all day on computer games, I suspect the situation will bet worse rather than better, and it will become necessary to sign all risks, however small.

[WotEver]

There is an apartment block in Gran Canaria which involves a long looping walk along the road when you wish to walk down the beach. There is a short-cut which involves crumbling concrete steps and a very unsafe wobbly hand rail. There are no warning signs. The Spanish authority's attitude is "You've got eyes, you can see it's unsafe. Use it at your own risk." Folk slip, fall and scrape themselves daily but nobody sues anyone; they simply take more care coming back.

 

I can remember when the UK had a similarly pragmatic attitude.

 

Tony

[matty40s]

There is a precedent, set by the notices and instructions on the guillotine gate controls at Salterhebble, for notices to be in braille.

That will help those who are hard of hearing at Newark Town Lock who can't hear the incessant chanting of how dangerous the locks are from the loudspeaker system.......the most irritating noise I have ever come across whilst boating.

Edited February 14, 2016 by matty40s

[MtB]

The problem with these fatuous signs is they devalue signs warning of real, concealed dangers. When they are EVERYWHERE warning of trivial and obvious dangers we are aware already, we become de-sensitised to them. A visual version of "the boy who cried wolf", sort of.

 

If warning signs were rare, we'd be more likely to notice them, read them and take on board the danger they warn about. But as it is, when somewhere is plastered with them, they are all ignored/not noticed and the effect of the (few) important ones is diluted to almost zero.

Edited February 14, 2016 by Mike the Boilerman

[Captain Pegg]

The problem with these fatuous signs is they devalue signs warning of real, concealed dangers. When they are EVERYWHERE warning of trivial and obvious dangers we are aware already, we become de-sensitised to them. A visual version of "the boy who cried wolf", sort of.

 

If warning signs were rare, we'd be more likely to notice them, read them and take on board the danger they warn about. But as it is, when somewhere is plastered with them, they are all ignored/not noticed and the effect of the (few) important ones is diluted to almost zero.

That's true Mike. You can find proof in the research that Nick Norman was interested in yesterday ?

 

True human factors and H&S professionals totally understand that; it's their duty to do so as professionals. The folk that apply H&S badly are H&S unprofessionals. Essentially managers who think they are doing good but are misguided precisely because they aren't specialists and haven't sought or adhered to professional guidance.

 

It is entirely possible that this is what has happened at Knowle. It is also entirely possible that a risk assessment of Knowle and other locations identifies that there is heightened risk at Knowle. That would also be the defence against 'ambulance chasers'.

 

Maybe you should be thankful a railing a la Marple hasn't been proposed!

 

The world is a dangerous place - Nick has told us so - so we must man up or die; or perhaps instead we could just do something to make it a little safer for our fellow human beings?

 

I know where I sit.

 

JP

Edited February 14, 2016 by Captain Pegg

[MtB]

That's true Mike. You can find proof in the research that Nick Norman was interested in yesterday

 

True human factors and H&S professionals totally understand that; it's their duty to do so as professionals. The folk that apply H&S badly are H&S unprofessionals. Essentially managers who think they are doing good but are misguided precisely because they aren't specialists and haven't sought or adhered to professional guidance.

 

It is entirely possible that this is what has happened at Knowle. It is also entirely possible that a risk assessment of Knowle and other locations identifies that there is heightened risk at Knowle. That would also be the defence against 'ambulance chasers'.

 

Maybe you should be thankful a railing a la Marple hasn't been proposed!

 

The world is a dangerous place - Nick has told us so - so we must man up or die; or perhaps instead we could just do something to make it a little safer for our fellow human beings?

 

I know where I sit.

 

JP

 

 

Many a true word spoken in jest, they say. I've been keeping a weather eye out for just such a proposal from CRT. A proposal to fit railings around ALL locks wouldn't surprise me one jot.

It's already been done on many of the Thames locks.

(A fence to keep the public OUT, and boaters IN, that is)