Health and Safety
Lots of chatter about this recently, particularly on the Preserved Diesels Forum (a great facility, which is five years old this month). Now the froth is settling, lets look at the whole issue dispassionately. However as I am not a H&S specialist please don’t consider any of this as advice or criticism.
As I understand it, the current H&S rules apply anywhere in the UK except in the resident’s own home. So they apply in all public spaces, at work (the rules still apply whether you get paid for it or not), and in someone else’s home. The only loop hole I can see is that if you are lucky enough to work on your own in a railway workshop that is part of your home. They would however apply to anyone who doesn’t live there working with you.
No one wants an accident to occur and no one in their right mind would plan to undertake a job where the risks of an accident were known to be high. However through ignorance of the risks many people think activities are completely safe when they are not. In the railway preservation world people from all walks of life get involved (brilliant, this is to be encouraged), and in many cases this is the first time they have set eyes on many of the tools they are about to use. Consequently they have no basis on which to assess risk, and frequently end up learning the hard way.
I know of two incidents that illustrate this from my railway preservation experience:
1) A bank clerk was given the task of washing out a set of paint brushes. This he completed, but left the top off the tin he’d filled with white spirit on the work bench. A hospital porter had a rusty hinge to repaint, so he had set it in the vice on the same bench and set to work with a grinder. The sparks from the grinder set the fluid in the can alight. Fortunately no real damage done.
On enquiry, neither had considered the use another might put the same work space to. The porter hadn’t checked what else was on the bench before he’d started and the bank clerk wasn’t aware that white spirit was flammable.
However before you start writing both off as idiots, both understood the importance of segregation of work areas from their employment. The porter knew about isolation ward procedures and which medicinal chemicals could be carried together and which needed to be kept apart, both in transit and storage. The clerk knew how to keep segregation of monies and understood why the best practice approach would prevent confusion and potential damage his employers reputation.
2) A group was trying to get their diesel loco started, but it just wouldn’t take. Eventually the freshly charged batteries were flat. So they rigged up jump start from another loco using some wire they found in the yard. The distance between the locos was around 20 feet across a road access, and the cables were around 40 feet long, so they coiled the cables down and put a rubber mat over them to remove a trip hazard.
When they tried to start the errant loco, the cables between the engines thrashed around like live snakes tied at head and tail. The rubber mat was sent hurtling through the air and landed on the roof of a workshop building. Within 10 seconds one cable fell apart through metal fatigue, and the free-end smashed a shed a window before coming to rest.
No one was hurt but a few were quite shocked.
The group involved included a number of quite well respected professional railway engineers, but they were mechanical specialists and had not understood the action of high levels of DC current (amps) passing in adjacent cables that were not securely clamped down. The fact that they had picked a pair of welding cables up from scavenging around the yard was both fortunate and unfortunate. Fortunate, in as much as although not fully rated for the current being passed, it was at least capable for the relatively short term it was exposed to. Unfortunate, as they are highly flexible, and the magnetic fields generated by the current sent the cables unwinding at a huge rate of knots. If they had not fallen apart through fatigue and had melted (fuse like), through overload, other serious side effects could have occurred.
So in both cases mistakes were made through ignorance. But ignorance that could have been overcome through a bit of thought by the individuals concerned, and consultation with other people within both organisations. As we have just seen, even a group of seasoned professional railway engineers didn’t know everything there is to know about the work being undertaken, so I think it is safe to assume that no one can have all the knowledge they need to undertake every task safely.
I will point out the incident 1 was with a group I am directly involved with and 2 was with a group I was not involved with, but shared a facility with over 10 years ago.
Education is part of the answer. New volunteers need to be mentored, that is to work with more experienced people until they can be trusted to be let loose on their own. The point they realise their own limitations and you can trust them to come and ask for guidance is the time you can let them work less supervised.
Another part of the answer is to consider the risks in an open way with your fellow preservationists before starting work (especially if the task is a new one to you and your group). There is a huge wealth of experience out there and most people who work on one type of loco will gladly advise another even for the price of pint, or some other returned favour. Apart from the most serious of tasks, formal risk assessments are not probably not necessary (but can be demanded by the HSE, or even your host railway’s safety officer), common sense can be applied, but the discipline of thinking the issues through and get a range of opinions before work starts can only be a good thing.
Why is this important?
To answer that I’m going to be totally selfish:
From time to time all preservation groups need to undertake work that has by its very nature built in risks. Predominantly but by no means uniquely, these involve powered machinery or lifting equipment. If we do the work using sensible precautions (learned from the professionals in that field) we will be left alone by the HSE. If we don’t, and a number of accidents occur or even just one serious injury results from carelessness (or recklessness), then the HSE will start to take a great deal of interest in our activities. This will mean we will;
a) spend far more time on paperwork and much less on the work that really matters. Result; slower restoration.
b) in some cases we will be forced to get in professional help, as the HSE will prevent certain types of activities. Result; costlier restoration.
Both of the above will put off new recruits joining in with railway preservation activities and seriously frustrate the rest of us.
In addition I don’t want someone else’s lack of thinking resulting in me getting injured (or worse). Neither do I want that injury to be on their conscience for the rest of their lives. There, I told you I was going to be self centred about it!
H&S is everybody’s responsibility, and a lot of the work we do requires everyone to be sensible. If any one group isn’t sensible and an accident happens, we will all end up loosing a freedom and I fear we will end up having to pay professionals at full rates to do that job for us. Taking money we can ill afford away from our hobby to pay their salaries and let them make a profit.
As I understand it, the current H&S rules apply anywhere in the UK except in the resident’s own home. So they apply in all public spaces, at work (the rules still apply whether you get paid for it or not), and in someone else’s home. The only loop hole I can see is that if you are lucky enough to work on your own in a railway workshop that is part of your home. They would however apply to anyone who doesn’t live there working with you.
No one wants an accident to occur and no one in their right mind would plan to undertake a job where the risks of an accident were known to be high. However through ignorance of the risks many people think activities are completely safe when they are not. In the railway preservation world people from all walks of life get involved (brilliant, this is to be encouraged), and in many cases this is the first time they have set eyes on many of the tools they are about to use. Consequently they have no basis on which to assess risk, and frequently end up learning the hard way.
I know of two incidents that illustrate this from my railway preservation experience:
1) A bank clerk was given the task of washing out a set of paint brushes. This he completed, but left the top off the tin he’d filled with white spirit on the work bench. A hospital porter had a rusty hinge to repaint, so he had set it in the vice on the same bench and set to work with a grinder. The sparks from the grinder set the fluid in the can alight. Fortunately no real damage done.
On enquiry, neither had considered the use another might put the same work space to. The porter hadn’t checked what else was on the bench before he’d started and the bank clerk wasn’t aware that white spirit was flammable.
However before you start writing both off as idiots, both understood the importance of segregation of work areas from their employment. The porter knew about isolation ward procedures and which medicinal chemicals could be carried together and which needed to be kept apart, both in transit and storage. The clerk knew how to keep segregation of monies and understood why the best practice approach would prevent confusion and potential damage his employers reputation.
2) A group was trying to get their diesel loco started, but it just wouldn’t take. Eventually the freshly charged batteries were flat. So they rigged up jump start from another loco using some wire they found in the yard. The distance between the locos was around 20 feet across a road access, and the cables were around 40 feet long, so they coiled the cables down and put a rubber mat over them to remove a trip hazard.
When they tried to start the errant loco, the cables between the engines thrashed around like live snakes tied at head and tail. The rubber mat was sent hurtling through the air and landed on the roof of a workshop building. Within 10 seconds one cable fell apart through metal fatigue, and the free-end smashed a shed a window before coming to rest.
No one was hurt but a few were quite shocked.
The group involved included a number of quite well respected professional railway engineers, but they were mechanical specialists and had not understood the action of high levels of DC current (amps) passing in adjacent cables that were not securely clamped down. The fact that they had picked a pair of welding cables up from scavenging around the yard was both fortunate and unfortunate. Fortunate, in as much as although not fully rated for the current being passed, it was at least capable for the relatively short term it was exposed to. Unfortunate, as they are highly flexible, and the magnetic fields generated by the current sent the cables unwinding at a huge rate of knots. If they had not fallen apart through fatigue and had melted (fuse like), through overload, other serious side effects could have occurred.
So in both cases mistakes were made through ignorance. But ignorance that could have been overcome through a bit of thought by the individuals concerned, and consultation with other people within both organisations. As we have just seen, even a group of seasoned professional railway engineers didn’t know everything there is to know about the work being undertaken, so I think it is safe to assume that no one can have all the knowledge they need to undertake every task safely.
I will point out the incident 1 was with a group I am directly involved with and 2 was with a group I was not involved with, but shared a facility with over 10 years ago.
Education is part of the answer. New volunteers need to be mentored, that is to work with more experienced people until they can be trusted to be let loose on their own. The point they realise their own limitations and you can trust them to come and ask for guidance is the time you can let them work less supervised.
Another part of the answer is to consider the risks in an open way with your fellow preservationists before starting work (especially if the task is a new one to you and your group). There is a huge wealth of experience out there and most people who work on one type of loco will gladly advise another even for the price of pint, or some other returned favour. Apart from the most serious of tasks, formal risk assessments are not probably not necessary (but can be demanded by the HSE, or even your host railway’s safety officer), common sense can be applied, but the discipline of thinking the issues through and get a range of opinions before work starts can only be a good thing.
Why is this important?
To answer that I’m going to be totally selfish:
From time to time all preservation groups need to undertake work that has by its very nature built in risks. Predominantly but by no means uniquely, these involve powered machinery or lifting equipment. If we do the work using sensible precautions (learned from the professionals in that field) we will be left alone by the HSE. If we don’t, and a number of accidents occur or even just one serious injury results from carelessness (or recklessness), then the HSE will start to take a great deal of interest in our activities. This will mean we will;
a) spend far more time on paperwork and much less on the work that really matters. Result; slower restoration.
b) in some cases we will be forced to get in professional help, as the HSE will prevent certain types of activities. Result; costlier restoration.
Both of the above will put off new recruits joining in with railway preservation activities and seriously frustrate the rest of us.
In addition I don’t want someone else’s lack of thinking resulting in me getting injured (or worse). Neither do I want that injury to be on their conscience for the rest of their lives. There, I told you I was going to be self centred about it!
H&S is everybody’s responsibility, and a lot of the work we do requires everyone to be sensible. If any one group isn’t sensible and an accident happens, we will all end up loosing a freedom and I fear we will end up having to pay professionals at full rates to do that job for us. Taking money we can ill afford away from our hobby to pay their salaries and let them make a profit.
