Post by thread:Re: [OT]Interesting health and safety rules

Where I work amongst the various electronic items to be repaired are, 15A SMPS, CRT Neckboards, 25vdc fluoro inverters, isolation transformers and similar. An HR person has decreed due to health and safety concerns the company policy is for employees not to work on any live equipment. It has pointed out scopes and multimeters are not as useful as measurement tools with no power applied to the systems and as for testing well.... I do like it when someone makes a policy who has no idea how it pertains to the working environment of that workplace. And yet, insulated screwdrivers have just been doled out, but technicians are still allowed to wear rings and watches whilst diving into equipment as that hasn't been identified as yet as a hazard, as no one has been injured doing that. I fully believe in health and safety, but only when it has been thought through and not as a we're just covering our 'cul'. Colin -- cdb, on 14/09/2011

On 14 September 2011 21:45, cdb <spam_OUTcolinTakeThisOuTbtech-online.co.uk> wrote: {Quote hidden}> Where I work amongst the various electronic items to be repaired are, > > 15A SMPS, CRT Neckboards, 25vdc fluoro inverters, isolation transformers > and similar. > > An HR person has decreed due to health and safety concerns the company > policy is for employees not to work on any live equipment. > > It has pointed out scopes and multimeters are not as useful as measurement > tools with no power applied to the systems and as for testing well.... > > I do like it when someone makes a policy who has no idea how it pertains to > the working environment of that workplace. > > And yet, insulated screwdrivers have just been doled out, but technicians > are still allowed to wear rings and watches whilst diving into equipment as > that hasn't been identified as yet as a hazard, as no one has been injured > doing that. > > I fully believe in health and safety, but only when it has been thought > through and not as a we're just covering our 'cul'. > > Colin > -- > cdb, on 14/09/2011 > > > Hi Colin, We had similar rules introduced where I used to work. - SMPS equipment development. Fortunately someone saw sense about it before either extremest viewpoint (work to rule or ignore & suffer the consequences) got entrenched. A compromise was reached by such actions as additional isolation transformers etc. being installed and people agreeing not to work on hazardous gear when alone. There was still the occasional small fire & explosion, but injuries & shocks were very rare.. In contrast, where I am now seems almost paranoid about voltage and smoke, but the equipment (GPS receivers etc.) draws far, far less power and the biggest hazard is Lithium batteries. Even so we had a major fire (cause unknown) about 3 months ago and are still purchasing replacement gear and are now crammed into a single building. But I'd agree that rules made without an appreciation of the work requirements are not a good idea and only serve to alienate the workers . RP

On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 22:38:17 +1200, Richard Prosser wrote: :: But I'd agree that rules made without an appreciation of the work :: requirements are not a good idea and only serve to alienate the :: workers . This tends to be my beef, if the rules or training are not properly tailored to the work environment there is the danger that people will just ignore it to the extent of ignoring rules that do make sense. So I'm agreeing with your agreement! :) Colin -- cdb, .....colinKILLspam@spam@btech-online.co.uk on 14/09/2011 Web presence: http://www.btech-online.co.uk Hosted by: http://www.justhost.com.au This email is to be considered private if addressed to a named individual or HR department, and public if addressed to a blog, forum or news article.