Jump to content

Rock n Roll touring vs H&S


Just Some Bloke

Recommended Posts

I've been following with great interest this thread elsewhere in this forum.

 

I've also been working, for the last 3 years or so, in a venue that takes more and bigger 'Rock and Roll' tours than I've worked before (being, at heart, very much a theatre bod) and I've been thinking about how H&S seems to be treated in opera houses (where it's taken very seriously, especially after the ROH ruling) and ATG venues, for instance, as opposed to how it's treated on some of the tours we see coming to us (SJM, Live Nation etc.).

 

On these tours the crew will work up to 17 hours a day (8am - 1am) then start again 7 hours later and do this 5 or 6 days a week. We'd never allow that sort of thing in our venue for H&S reasons: people just won't be safe on that little rest. At my venue, if we have only a couple of those kind of shows a week then I may put house crew on for the full 17 hours, knowing that they have the day off on the following day. But if I had more than 2 per week then I would always split the days up into 2 shifts so everyone gets a decent break. Yet the people coming in have had no such break.

 

Equally, when we get orchestral musicians in the building they will often have acoustic screens in place to protect other players from the trumpeters or percussionists, but backline techs (guitar techs especially) have no such protection and are exposed to loud sounds constantly every day of the week. I am friendly with a chap who is a guitar tech with a rock band and, in his 30s, already has tinnitus. He's planning on working in the same job for many more years to come.

 

The reason they can get away with this is that these people are freelancers.

 

We were just discussing, in the office, that the promoters might look at their finances and say "these crew we keep using are costing us a fortune on freelance rate - why don't we just employ them ourselves and then move them around from one tour to another?". And, yes, that would appear to be a lot cheaper for them.

 

 

The reason seems to be that if they were no longer freelancers they wouldn't be able to work so many hours or expose themselves to such high levels of sound, or various other H&S requirements for employed staff. If the tour employed their crew direct, they would have to monitor their sound level exposure and pay for individual, fitted ear plugs. They would also have to double the number of crew so that, instead of working 16 hours a day, they would each work 8 hours a day. Twice the crew means 2 tour buses so the costs go back up again. I wonder how long this can go on.

 

Allowing freelancers to do as many hours as they like and damage their hearing as much as they like has got to come to an end some time, surely? Maybe it will take another court case for that to happen?

 

Your thoughts, fellow Blue-Roomers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a relevant article in this month's TPI magazine. (Focussing on the sleep/fatigue issue rather than noise exposure)

 

 

I am friendly with a chap who is a guitar tech with a rock band and, in his 30s, already has tinnitus. He's planning on working in the same job for many more years to come.

 

What's stopping him from wearing plugs when he's working? I appreciate he may need to take them out for certain tasks, but surely it must be possible to significantly reduce the overall exposure?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I am friendly with a chap who is a guitar tech with a rock band and, in his 30s, already has tinnitus. He's planning on working in the same job for many more years to come.

 

What's stopping him from wearing plugs when he's working? I appreciate he may need to take them out for certain tasks, but surely it must be possible to significantly reduce the overall exposure?

 

I understand that he prefers to tune guitars without ear plugs and that there is a lot of re-tuning required for the main band he goes out with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand that he prefers to tune guitars without ear plugs and that there is a lot of re-tuning required for the main band he goes out with.

 

If it's loud enough to give you tinnitus, what chance do you have of hearing a guitar anyway? <_<

 

I can see where he's coming from, though. The first time there was a mistake it would automatically be blamed on the plugs. It does highlight the need to change working practices and come up with more imaginative solutions to problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tell the guitar bloke about my uncle who was in a band in the sixties and early seventies when the backline would have been drums and 200 watts max ( or at least a claimed 200 watts) with 100 watt PA who has crippling hearing loss/tinnitus now that his consultant says can be pretty well put down only to that exposure.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand that he prefers to tune guitars without ear plugs and that there is a lot of re-tuning required for the main band he goes out with.

I would have thought that moulded IEMs would be perfect for that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got some of the MU sponsored moulded attenuators and if I stick them in, it goes quiet. After 3 mins or so, you acclimatise and can make the same quality and quantity judgments you did before. I can play my double bass with them in with not tuning issues. I've not yet found anything that doesn't work wearing them. My band IEMs keep the noise out too and I can't adjust to going back to the old levels. I would expect that a court would seriously reduce compensation for hearing issues when once aware, the subject chose to continue exposure. Like the asbestosis thing. Once you discover you have it, you always wear a mask. Not to do so is just plain stupid.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used to place great stress on a few things when talking about Noise At Work.

1. Unless you have a pre-existing hearing test, which is free, how do you know if your hearing is undamaged to start with? I used to carry my results sheet around and ask if anyone knew what it was to start the discussion. Few did.

2. NIHL hits you where it really hurts because voices are the first to go with high pitched weak voices going first of all so if you want to actually hear the words "I love you grandad/nana" then take care of your ears.

3. Those who need to protect their hearing most of all are the humheads who rely on them for their living.

4. It's the law. You have a duty of care to yourself and those around you. Note that yourself comes first.

 

The major venues and tours have more or less taken the fatigue thing on board and have actually "doubled the crew" so I suspect you are talking about smaller projects. The question then is that if you actually do know they are suffering from fatigue why are you letting them work in your venue putting themselves, your crew and the audience at risk? You too have a duty of care and you wouldn't let a drunk work an event (I trust). Exhaustion and inebriation have almost identical effects on human beings, physically, mentally and emotionally.

Accidents resulting from fatigue have proved fatal and resulted in jail sentences and at least one £22M insurance payout. It is a serious issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I am friendly with a chap who is a guitar tech with a rock band and, in his 30s, already has tinnitus. He's planning on working in the same job for many more years to come.

 

What's stopping him from wearing plugs when he's working? I appreciate he may need to take them out for certain tasks, but surely it must be possible to significantly reduce the overall exposure?

 

I understand that he prefers to tune guitars without ear plugs and that there is a lot of re-tuning required for the main band he goes out with.

 

I wonder if he's tried anything except the disposable squishy foam earplugs? Nothing sounds good through those. I would have thought he'd be an excellent candidate for electronic earplugs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if you actually do know they are suffering from fatigue why are you letting them work in your venue putting themselves, your crew and the audience at risk? You too have a duty of care and you wouldn't let a drunk work an event (I trust). Exhaustion and inebriation have almost identical effects on human beings, physically, mentally and emotionally.

Accidents resulting from fatigue have proved fatal and resulted in jail sentences and at least one £22M insurance payout. It is a serious issue.

 

It's an interesting point and I have a couple of answers.

 

Firstly, I'd just start by agreeing with your point about not letting people work who are unfit: many years ago we I worked as a Senior Tech in a team, two of whom used to like to smoke a "herbal" cigarette from time to time when off duty. One day, one of these chaps had clearly smoked prior to work and was so confident that he was not able to judge risk appropriately and I felt he was putting the rest of us at risk. I had a word with the Tech Mgr and said that either he needed to be sent home or I would walk for my own safety. The chap was sent home with a reprimand and never did anything like that again. So my credentials are good here and I certainly would act if I thought the outcome would be favourable.

 

However, when you are welcoming tours from named artistes the stakes are a little higher. Not a single one of the tours we take are double crewed and nearly all of them are touring 5-6 days a week. We also take a major sporting event every year and the team that work on that are doing other events before and after, in some cases meaning they are working 8am - 10pm for a month, with maybe just one day off. We also take conferences where crew move from one show to another and are loathe to turn down work if it is offered, so could again be working for a few weeks without a day off.

 

This is the life of a freelancer. You can't turn down work because doing so would mean the boss will find someone else and you have now lost that client forever (or so they fear). It's legal to work 15 hours a day for 2 months without a day off, so anything less than that is sometimes seen as a worry ("I've got 2 days off next month - how am I going to pay the bills?"). It's wrong, but it's understandable.

 

The thing is, when they start on this way of life, the first tour is a nightmare for them and they show the lack of sleep in their work. By the second tour, though, they have got used to it and have learnt to crack on without showing the tiredness. So someone like myself is going to have a hard time proving they are unfit for work. I'm going to be asked "give concrete examples of how they are a liability". There are 2 possible answers: either give specific examples which are unlikely to be found, or say "they haven't had enough sleep so clearly they are not at their best" in which case the entire crew will need to be pulled. I'm going to be really popular then, aren't I! 'Sorry, Michael Ball* will not be appearing tonight as the venue Technical Manager refused to work with his crew and yes we will refund the £75,000 taken at the box office'.

 

My point is that I wouldn't allow this sort of thing with my own crew but as long as freelancers are outside these laws then things will continue to happen and we are powerless to stop it. Although I sometimes do freelance work myself and am glad to be able to work whatever hours the show requires, from the point of view of a receiving Tech Mgr I can see that this can't go on forever.

 

Freelancers are people too and will need to be treated the same as employees for their own safety, surely?

 

I'd love to hear the other side of the argument from those who are doing the kind of jobs referred to above.

 

 

.

 

 

P.S. I give Michael Ball merely as an example. Actually his crew were amazing guys and did get sensible days off. Couldn't have been happier with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Freelancers are people too and will need to be treated the same as employees for their own safety, surely?

H&S law requires that people working are "safe" - there aren't different laws for self employed people, employed people, amatures, council staff, etc. If your venue is routinely getting in crew on shows that are clearly too tired or present safety risks then management need to be making decisions about who they book and the extra conditions you impose on visiting companies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So someone like myself is going to have a hard time proving they are unfit for work. I'm going to be asked "give concrete examples of how they are a liability".

 

There's no equivalent of a breathalyser for sleep deprivation.

 

Hard to prove, even subjectively, that it's lack of sleep causing someone's deficiencies and that they're not just as slow/grumpy/inept all the time.

 

Also, unlike drunkenness, it's possible to get through a show on a burst of adrenalin fuelled by caffeine and empty calories. It can make it hard to find anything concrete to complain about, and the problems/accidents are more likely to occur during the out or on the onward journey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So someone like myself is going to have a hard time proving they are unfit for work. I'm going to be asked "give concrete examples of how they are a liability".

 

There's no equivalent of a breathalyser for sleep deprivation.

 

Hard to prove, even subjectively, that it's lack of sleep causing someone's deficiencies and that they're not just as slow/grumpy/inept all the time.

 

Also, unlike drunkenness, it's possible to get through a show on a burst of adrenalin fuelled by caffeine and empty calories. It can make it hard to find anything concrete to complain about, and the problems/accidents are more likely to occur during the out or on the onward journey.

 

Very true.

 

And, of course, the guys driving the tour bus and the trucks all have very tight laws to abide by when it comes to driving hours. Yet the rigger who puts up the trusses has no such laws.

 

To be honest, I'm not sure I could point to a specific occasion when I didn't feel safe at one of these tours. I am also glad that there is always an extra level of defence - me. My job is to check that everything anyone does is safe, and I luckily [not] I get sensible sleep patterns (on the whole!). All the guys (and girls) who pass through are great and do a terrific job. I just know that I wouldn't be allowed to rota my staff to the same hours as them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I completely get JSB's point. I sometimes work in a venue that gets a lot of the same shows, and while I've never had a safety issue it is clear that with crew working silly hours something could easily go wrong.

 

 

One tour that came through had the crew finishing a load out in Edinburgh at 1am, then driving down (in 3 sprinters) to Brum for a 9am load in working through to a 1am load out. Normally thankfully, it isn't this bad, but it's not rare at all. I wouldn't want to be around them on the M6! That tour managed to leave half their cabling in Scotland, so evidently the schedule was causing them to make mistakes...

 

The issue of freelancers being made responsible for their own safety while not really being given the chance to schedule or have much say in how things work on the day is something the industry needs to look at. I've seen it all kick off when a sound company (rather sensibly considering the setup) had two crews leapfrogging the tour, but the promoter wanted the same team everyday.

 

It's interesting to be venue staff and watch different shows on different budgets come through, some doing 3 days on 2 off, some doing 21 days on 1 off, some with plenty of locals booked and the tourers coordinating, some with the tourers doing everything. The touring schedule seems usually to be set by the artist and their requirements, with crew left to take it or leave it; and some crew inevitably take it.

 

I've had a show come in and we were having issues with a desk and digital multicore we'd subhired for them; I'd been working solidly since 8am and when I suggested at 2pm taking a short food and water break and coming back to it with fresh heads the response was a rather short and pointed 'we'll get the show up then eat' line. I see their logic, but having walked away from it for 15mins for a quick snack and a bottle of water I came back and solved it in 30 seconds. I suspect if I'd stayed there I'd have been no further on an hour later.

 

There's a macho bravado that pervades, and it's not healthy. As a venue our rigger does top rigging and checks bottom rigging, and we check power; but it's hard to check everything a tour is doing, not least because you don't know what they're doing half the time and getting involved with the practised dance of the load in is a silly idea at best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.