Safety in Schools

[DSA]

As it happens, I did know that particular safety requirement. However I am sure that there are many more which go by unnoticed.

 

This reminds me of last year, when it dawned on me that 'should we be wearing harnesses etc. when focussing/rigging on tallescope for FOH bars'. The teacher in charge didnt know, but he found out, and the answer was no as, ' the tallescope is designed to be safe - therefore no need for harness'.

 

I accepted this, as he said that had come from the manufacturer.

 

However, for a week or so, I did think carefully about using without a harness...just in case.

 

Another example is that the caretaker never gives us the toe boards when we ask for the tower. I suppose he doesnt see the point as he takes the approach of, it 'won't be up for long', and 'as long as you are sensible' sort of approach.

 

Anyway I still think there are some stupid rules - however its hardly surprising there are so many 'building site' accidents - have you seen the state of some of the temporary scaff that they use, and how they erect it!

 

David

[wodp]

For years at my secondary school (which I left just over a year ago to come to uni) H&S wasn't officially an issue - we were admittedly a rather posh place (lots of rich snobs, and all male bah) so common sense wasn't hard to come by and neither was logic. Basically we were just left by the effective head of tech and head of drama to get on with what needed doing however we saw fit and not so unsafe it was worrying.

 

Then a heating engineer fell backwards off a ladder and died of head injuries on the way to hospital. No-one was at the foot of the ladder keeping it still (one of those straight ones leant up against about a 15ft wall). I kinda knew the guy, so RIP to him and death to whoever sent him out without someone to put a foot at the bottom of the ladder while he was up it (something I was taught very early on and have always done for working heights above 2m where there isn't a secure fixture to grab, i.e. scaff bar bolted properly to the wall). We were then asked to sign a code of conduct which had been revised twice in a month by H&S types (who were from the schools foundation I think).

 

They didn't stop us working at heights as high as our tallest A-frame ladder (about 8-10m I'd guess), but did stop us doing it unsupervised. Our lighting bars were all on winches in the main hall (mixture of manual and motor-driven) so when we had time we could do it pretty safely by bring the bar down half or all the way (all the way when putting lights on, 1/2 when focusing if we had time and space to get the ladder up). The manual winch ones we tended to do with a ladder most of the time cos it took so long to winch these things up and down.

 

Electrics wise, we usually were just, again, left to get on with it. We did our best to get things looked over by effective chief technician (there wasn't really someone paid to but he was production manager so good as chief tech - we took our orders from him at any rate). Never did any repairs of dimmer racks though - ours was too complex for that (72 channels worth with 6 channels done on a card - none of us were electronicsy enough).

 

Dave

[Brian]

Just to be picky...

 

H&S wasn't officially an issue

 

Surely you mean that 'Unofficially H&S wasn't an issue', in other words that the HSWA was being ignored.

 

death to whoever sent him out without someone to put a foot at the bottom of the ladder

 

Whilst I'm sorry for his families and friends loss, I have to say that we all need to take responsibility for our own safety. If something is unsafe then DON'T DO IT.

[P. Funk]

I am in the 6th form at my school and am one of about 4 pupils who manage most of the stage tech there. we have got a very nice scaff tower, which I use regularly.

 

and yes, I have done the qualifications. however, I think it completely stupid that we should have to do all this. I mean, the course we did, taught us nothing that common sense wouldnt dictate. I think that as long as the people that are doing it aren't completely stupid then it should be alright.

 

H&S laws in schools are getting to be ridiculous now. its a drain on time and resources. one, slightly less serioous example, is that for christmas, all xmas lights pupils or staff brought in to put up had to be safety checked by the caretaker.

 

my personal opinion of the matter is, you got to risk it. you put your own life in your hands and use common sense. people with no experience shouldnt do it.

 

I realise that H&S laws are to stop people dying. but they get to the extent when you are prohibited to do anything even slightly dangerous. people do more dangerous things than rigging all the time. And no, I do not think that rigging/electrics is dangerous - if you do not know what you are doing, don't do it.

 

What does annoy me though, is when things get in the way of what you're doing because of legal reasons. that is stupid and annoying.

 

Jon

 

P.S. as for the qualifications, my school organised it for the first time this year. 6 members of staff were trained, and 4 pupils (a year 10, a year 11, and 2 sixth formers). Climbing a scaff tower is not dangerous if you don't piss around...

[Ike]

I agree with you that a lot of health and safety is plane common sense and dont really think it is something that can be taught on courses.

 

In the example you gave about christmass lights I would have thought a visual inspection would be a good idea including removing the plug top (if its not of the nasty molded variety) to check connections, strain relief and fuse.

 

Ike

 

EDIT: I should also say that some H&S courses can be very usefull and am not saying they should not be used.

[tuxlux]

H&S is generally common sense, I agree. Unfortunately I think everyone would think they have it! - so why do accidents happen?:-p surely most people think they know what they are doing?

 

I think partly H&S has become driven by litigation, so people can't turn round and say they didn't know " but you didn't tell me that cup of coffee you've just sold me was hot" (refering to the McDonalds case in America).

 

I disagree with , theatre stuff is generally quite dangerous, its a stressful, high risk environment, with little time, dealing with heights, fairly hefty electrical power, big lumps of set and normally an enthusiastic cast.

 

I still think you can't really teach common sense, however you can at least tell people of the dangers, and what they should be doing. H&S has a place, but nowadays seems unfortunately not always to be "applied" with common sense. Once instance is the suggestion to put a barrier across the front of the stage so the cast couldn't fall into the pit!

[Rob]

and yes, I have done the qualifications. however, I think it completely stupid that we should have to do all this. I mean, the course we did, taught us nothing that common sense wouldnt dictate.

 

The school is helping to minimise the risk which should be applauded. If you had an accident and died your folks would probably sue the school so they are covering ther backs as well. Just because you learnt nothing new, maybe the other 5 people did.

 

one, slightly less serioous example, is that for christmas, all xmas lights pupils or staff brought in to put up had to be safety checked by the caretaker.

 

Sounds like you've got off lightly, some might suggest that every set of lights should be fully PAT tested. Say you bring in a set of lights with a slight hairline break in the insulation and someone touches it while they are on - Again, the school is reducing the risk and covering it's back.

 

my personal opinion of the matter is, you got to risk it. you put your own life in your hands and use common sense. people with no experience shouldnt do it.

 

We all take risks every day, but we also take precautions. You wouldn't walk into the road without looking, likewise you would not "risk it" in a highly dangerous environment.

 

With the greatest of respect to yourself, who's to say how much experience makes you 'competent' in your eyes - Everyone has to learn stuff the first time and you cannot assume that everyone has the same level of common sense that you do.

 

And no, I do not think that rigging/electrics is dangerous

 

I have to disagree - "rigging/electrics" requires working at height, with high voltages, in dark and difficult conditions, with pressures on time and resources and often for long periods of time.

 

What does annoy me though, is when things get in the way of what you're doing because of legal reasons. that is stupid and annoying.

 

No, this is called keeping people safe. People's health and safety is far more important than 'the show must go on' attitude. Common sense only goes so far - risk assessment guards agains the unexpected, however unlikely it may seem.

[Ike]

Common sense only goes so far - risk assessment guards agains the unexpected, however unlikely it may seem.

Every time I do something which involves considerable risk to me or others I do a 'risk assessment' i.e. I think to myself what could go wrong what the chance of it going wrong is and what would happen if it did go wrong. I did not learn this on any H&S course and put this down to common sense.

eg if I was waiting to cross a road and a car was coming I would think of the chance it would hit me, and what the consequences would be, I would then decide whether to cross based on this 'risk assessment'

Formal risk assessments can be useful as they make people aware of things they might not otherwise think of, however they rarely fit the situation precisely when used in variable environments such as a theatre and they could lull people into a false sense of security where they stop using common sense.

An example of this is today I was on a platform behind the booms in a theatre and a color frame got stuck in a lantern. I then had to chose between de-rigging the lantern to get it out or simply climbing onto the boom to get into a better position in order to free it in situ. For this unexpected incident there was no risk assessment so I did one there and then, ok it was in my head and would be no use in court etc but it did keep me safe.

 

Sounds like you've got off lightly, some might suggest that every set of lights should be fully PAT tested. Say you bring in a set of lights with a slight hairline break in the insulation and someone touches it while they are on - Again, the school is reducing the risk and covering it's back.

OK firstly a hair line break in the insulation is incredibly unlikely to case electric shock - even if you poke it. Secondly PAT wouldn't pick this up. Thirdly if it was any bigger than a hairline break a visual inspection should pick it up and surely it is just common sense to inspect electrical equipment in this situation?

[Brian]

P.Funk...

 

Rob made some excellent points in his post, I'm just going to amplify a few of them.

 

however, I think it completely stupid that we should have to do all this

You are quite entitled to an opinion and that right is something I will always defend. However, experience tells us that you are wrong.

 

Have a look around the HSE web-site and look at the statistics for the number of people killed and injured through avoidable accidents. In my working life I have had to make individuals redundant, have people arrested for theft from the company, sack people for being incompetent and close down whole parts of a company. The one thing I have never done and never want to do is to have to tell someone that their partner has been killed as a result of an accident at work.

 

my personal opinion of the matter is, you got to risk it. you put your own life in your hands and use common sense. people with no experience shouldnt do it.

If that is the case, then why do experienced people die every single day of the year as a result of accidents at work? Even larger numbers of people are seriously injured.

 

In the last 2 years I have worked with two very experienced people (probably around 30 years experience each) who have recently become separated from part of their body. I think that if you have...

a) lost part of a finger to a powered saw or

b) had a power press push it's punch tool through your hand, severing muscle, nerve, bone and tendon, resulting in partial loss of use of the hand and amputation of a finger when the tool ripped it off as it exited your hand...

then I think you might have a different view.

 

What does annoy me though, is when things get in the way of what you're doing because of legal reasons. that is stupid and annoying.

Say you are in a hurry to get to somewhere, is it acceptable to speed through a built up area, past a school? Laws are based on taking a balanced view of what society finds acceptable. You might not like it, I might not like it but the majority prefer it.

 

people do more dangerous things than rigging all the time

It's not the doing of something that is dangerous, it's the lack of control measures to minimise the risk that makes it dangerous.

 

 

Ike...

 

Formal risk assessments can be useful as they make people aware of things they might not otherwise think of, however they rarely fit the situation precisely when used in variable environments such as a theatre...

One of the points of a risk assessment is to remove any variables from a situation. One that is well done will cover all possibilities. The art to a good risk assessment is to not make it too specific but to use it to evolve a safe method of working, whatever you are doing.

 

In the example you gave, you would not assess the risk of a gel frame getting stuck and what happens when you try to free it but break it down into two or more 'generic' situations...

 

1/. Risk of dropping objects from height

2/. Risk of working at height

3/. Risk of working on electrical equipment

4/. Risk of working with hot objects

 

With those 4 assessments and their appropriate control measures you would probably cover over 50% of all theatre related risks.

 

As an example of a good risk assessment, on the recent ABTT pyro course run by our very own Lincoln, we were given a copy of the full risk assessment done for the millenium night fireworks display on the Thames. Imagine the risks involved in that? And yet the assessment runs to under 3 sides of A4 for the whole thing including get-in, show and get-out.

[JMeG]

The problem is we're living in a world where common sense is not included in the equation, where all you can hear is 'have you been injured?' on the radio and TV, encouraging people to sue if you break a nail.

 

I am in lower 6th form at a secondary school. For years now, the sparkies there have rigged lights, assembled towers, fired pyros and by-passed fuses without interference from staff. Before I got involved (about 3 yrs ago), the lads thought they belonged to some kind of elite club with privilages to be abused. I think I'm putting it a little harshly, but I wouldn't be doing what I am now if they caused an accident (i.e. there wouldn't be a technical department)...

 

Last year, we got a new business manager/safety officer combined; he was certainly less flippant than the previous guy, but managed still to be human and reasonable, despite his job description. Since then, we've been left to get on with it to an extent - this is less ignorance on his part and more his trust in me to help him help us .

 

In general, I'm against all things H&S. I'm one who believes you should use your nouse and take responsibility for your actions. However, I never blame the staff for enforcing these rules - it's not their fault, they merely need to cover their backs in this world of lawsuites. The main problem I encounter is when some people find it hard to draw the line between safety and practicality. There's a guy who has been appointed to overlook the approaching show, as we'll be using more serious kit than usual. I think he's taking it a little far by saying we shouldn't have a waste bin in our room at all, in case a stray spark ignites the contents. What? We have three 32A dimmers which are all isolated until shows. It is impossible to make any room completely safe. Wearing hard hats on a tower, I accept, but it just goes too far.

 

I suppose if anyone bothered to look into it properly, pupils would not be able to be a 'technician'. On one hand, I could be grateful for being allowed to rig lights and wire plugs, but on the other hand, having to remove a waste bin from a room with 3 'dead' dimmers in when we don't even have a safe tower is unacceptable. It suddenly gets very hypocrittical when the annoying, niggly, FREE safety points are zero-tolerance, but the more important ones concerning an unsafe tower that could kill a witless user are ignored because they cost money.

 

Personally, I feel responsible for everyone in the crew and always do what I can to make our actions as safe as possible. This is partly genuine and partly because if the safety officer wanders in, he'll see that I'm a responsible lad.

 

GRR, what a long post. I could write a book about this! :blink:

[egw]

Personally I think Health and Safety is always a bit odd in schools, partly because teachers are often not experts in theatre which makes it hard for them to make an informed judgement regarding its hazards and risks. It can also be difficult for a teacher to work with students as colleagues rather than treating them as pupils, a relationship which can make it hard for the teacher to learn from the student. Hence if you know more about the activity in question and feel that it is safe then you may be told 'no - its unsafe' and be a bit fed up which can contribute towards a dislike of H&S.

 

I think a lot of problems are about how people percieve H&S, I try to explain to people who join my group that H&S is not all about restrictions and limits but about keeping people alive and healthy. One thing I always say about H&S is that it should prevent a single mistake being dangerous, e.g. you are working in a truss and fall off - mistake 1 - your harness catches you, if you weren't clipped on - mistake 2 - you fall and get badly injured / die. I'm not suggesting that any of the above posters would do anything so stupid but an extreme example conveys my point very easily. It is often difficult for somebody to think that a new regulation will help if 'we've been doing it like that for twenty years and nobody's been hurt yet', however it's like rolling a set of dice; each throw is a new gamble and if the magic number come up its endgame - please hold that thought. Formal risk assessments for activities helps both the management, who can prove the activity is safe (both for the law and their own moral satisfaction), and the students on the ground who get to see the justification for the rules and can suggest alternative control measures to make their work easier whilst maintaining the same level of safety.

 

I agree entirely with those who have said that we should be responsible for our own actions, however, please remember that what we do often makes us (at least partly) responsible for the lives of other people. That may be one of your colleagues or it may be the several hundred capacity of your venue. An example of both: JMeg mentioned bypassing fuses; hopefully I am misreading what he meant but that could (in conjucntion with another fault) allow a cable to melt and start a fire or mean that a colleague going to wire something in disables the supply at the labelled fuseboard and (assuming they don't check) then gets a nasty electric shock.

 

cheers,

Ed

[JMeG]

JMeg mentioned bypassing fuses; hopefully I am misreading what he meant but that could (in conjucntion with another fault) allow a cable to melt

You didn't misunderstand. Previous technical pupils have done things like bypass an MCB in order to reach those extra couple of amps. But I don't applaud that - this is what annoys me. It's fools like them who ask for problems by crossing the line and if they did start a fire, not only could it do the obvious, but it puts even the most mature, sensible school technician into a nasty pigeon-hole.

 

Using one safety bond for six parcans is one thing, but bodging electrics is another. If I caught anyone in my crew doing the latter, I certainly wouldn't let them get away with it - I'd make sure they were taken off the job for pure stupidity and ever considering that as a viable option.

 

Jamie

[tuxlux]

It idiots who think they know what they're doing i.e. "we don't need the mcb..." that cause trouble for others. I assume you (jmeg) know what you're doing, but from other people's view how do they know you any different from the others - it partly explains why people are now asking for proof of competence.

 

Sorry, I can't get over their stupidity though, - if they're that stupid to consider taking it out, I wouldn't be convinced at how safe they were actually doing it (and maybe reinstalling it). I'd have thought that a member of staff should certainly be supervising/looking what was going on every once in a while though - surely they'd notice it wasn't the brightest of ideas?.

 

Various people have said HSE is common sense, problem is If you asked your "we don't need the mcb..." associates if they thought they had common sense, I would suspect they'd claim they had.

 

Another point, people tend to talk about accidents affecting the person doing the work - in some cases its causing harm to others (both punters and other workers) . - At times we need hse to help protect us when we're working from others.....unsafe electrical installations for instance.

[JMeG]

I agree entirely, tuxlux.

 

I think staff should be involved. It's a shame that those staff rarely know what they're doing and so tend to interfere from time to time (e.g. our safety officer recently ordered an external company to change all our luminaires' plugs to 13A [with insulated pins], without even consulting us; the result was a waste of time and money for the school and electrical firm, as they didn't know 15A was industry standard). This is why pupils still need to somehow be kept at the forefront of the operation, as their the ones with the interest and expertise.

 

I'm all for training. That way only the proper people filter through and have the confidence of a qualification too. Perhaps staff should do the same course. But it all boils down to money, which schools will not spend on such things as technical theatrical departments. I'd love to have a proper qualification; that way I could get on with what I'm doing knowing no-one can barge in and question it, and the management would hopefully feel they had no need to do so.

 

But what qualifications would they have to be? Electrical? Working at heights? Surely there are lots of fields connected with the job?

 

Jamie

[Brian]

egw...

 

Formal risk assessments for activities helps both the management, who can prove the activity is safe (both for the law and their own moral satisfaction)...

It is very rare that you will use a formal risk assessment, by which I assume you mean a written risk assessment, to prove anything. It is statistically unlikely that you will ever have to provide a written risk assessment to the HSE before an accident occurs unless you are working on larger public event. If an accident happens then having a written risk assessment proves nothing at all. You will still have to justify your decisions, possibly in court.

 

To reduce a risk assessment to the level of a moral salve for 'management' is to do it a great disservice.

 

Formal risk assessments for activities helps ... the students on the ground who get to see the justification for the rules and can suggest alternative control measures to make their work easier whilst maintaining the same level of safety.

Better. One of the main points of a risk assessment is to get people to consider the alternatives.

 

JMeG...

 

In general, I'm against all things H&S. I'm one who believes you should use your nouse and take responsibility for your actions.

Fine, I supose in a less charitable mood I might suggest that what we see is nothing more than Darwinism at work. BUT it is all well and good taking responsibility for your own actions and the consequence on yourself but what about the effect on others?

 

it's not their fault, they merely need to cover their backs in this world of lawsuites

Or maybe they don't want to have to tell your parents and friends that you are dead?

 

egw...

 

It can also be difficult for a teacher to work with students as colleagues rather than treating them as pupils

I'm sorry but the hard fact is that you are pupils, nothing more, nothing less.

 

JMeG...

 

For years now, the sparkies there have rigged lights, assembled towers, fired pyros and by-passed fuses without interference from staff.

I'm sorry but this is just WRONG, every one of those statements breaks at least one regulation.

 

egw...

 

It is often difficult for somebody to think that a new regulation will help if 'we've been doing it like that for twenty years and nobody's been hurt yet',

exactly, see my two examples of people separated from parts of their bodies.

 

JMeG...

 

The main problem I encounter is when some people find it hard to draw the line between safety and practicality.  ... I think he's taking it a little far by saying we shouldn't have a waste bin in our room at all, in case a stray spark ignites the contents. What?

The guy basically does not understand what risk assessment is about and shouldn't be doing it.