Brian Posted January 11, 2004 Author Share Posted January 11, 2004 I have to admit to being deeply concerned about issues raised in this thread. I supose that at the end of the day I can just shrug my shoulders and say 'So what? What do I care that another fatal accident statistic has been added to the HSE web-site?' I think that there are two main problems here... 1/. Many, many, people do not understand what Risk Assessment is all about.2/. There are HUGE problems, it would appear, with the management of H&S in some (many?) schools. The second one is probably the more difficult to solve. It's probably fair to say that most teachers have never been properly taught how to manage H&S. Most teachers in the drama/theatre field have never worked or been taught proper technical theatre. To solve this is going to take a fundamental change in education policy and a lot more money. It isn't going to happen. The first one is easier to solve. There is nothing difficult about doing Risk Assessment. The most difficult part is understanding the 'philosophy' behind it. I worry slightly when people talk about 'formal' Risk Assessments. There is no such thing. If it's a Risk Assessment then it's written down. So let's talk about written Risk Assessments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P. Funk Posted January 11, 2004 Share Posted January 11, 2004 all very valid points when I said I didnt think rigging/lighting was dangerous, I meant that its not dangerous if you know what your'e doing. but people who dont know what they are doing that cause the h&s laws... think back 20 years... H&S was far less picky... and everyone (seemed to) get along much better. I think now, with people suing for everything, that the laws have had to change, and that annoys me. having said that, I think there is a valid point in all this. shorted out fuses *are* dangerous, as are a lot of things. luckily we dont have that at our school - we are perfectly safe as far as I'm concerned, and yes H&S laws save lives, they are just extremely annoying from our point of view. example: having to put cross bars on scaff tower, then take them down, move the tower past an LX bar, and put them back up again. If we took down the 2 highest bars, noone would kill themselves, and itd get the job done a lot quicker. but we have to, because of H&S. technically, as a tower cannot be moved when it is incomplete, we would have to move the platforms down a rung, reconstruct toeboards and handrails, move the tower, and put it back up again.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted January 11, 2004 Author Share Posted January 11, 2004 think back 20 years... H&S was far less picky... and everyone (seemed to) get along much better. I think now, with people suing for everything, that the laws have had to change, and that annoys me.I would simply point out that 20 years ago more people were being killed at 'work' than they are today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robloxley Posted January 11, 2004 Share Posted January 11, 2004 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.As per the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, and I'd miss out the 'partly'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robloxley Posted January 11, 2004 Share Posted January 11, 2004 when I said I didnt think rigging/lighting was dangerous, I meant that its not dangerous if you know what your'e doing. but people who dont know what they are doing that cause the h&s laws...Understand - health and safety law isn't designed to get in your way, make you job difficult or stop you getting sued; it's there to stop you killing or injuring yourself or other people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMeG Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 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. Please note that on my post I was against these things Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted January 12, 2004 Author Share Posted January 12, 2004 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. Please note that on my post I was against these things Sorry, should have made it clearly that you were not in favour of these practices but merely reporting them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DSA Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 I think that most of these problems could be sorted if 'the big companies' were to say sponsor productions in schools. Not only would the pupils benefit from the opportunity of using kit which they could otherwise not afford, but the company could show the pupils how to rig/operate safely, more than anything else. In return the company would have their logo around the auditorium, in programme etc. It would only take say 2 days - or perhaps a week? but what do you think of the idea. It would certainly raise the profile - and would clear up misconceptions, and alert teachers to how to deal with the problems. David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryson Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 Unfortunately, that kind of sponsorship advertising only works if they're getting at thier target demographic - which I doubt a school show would provide. There aren't enough kids that go on to work in technical theatre in later life to make it worth thier while - unlike sponsorship deals of uni courses and the like, where they get to influence people who, a few years later will be in a position to specify kit. Sorry - I just don't think they'll ever do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted January 12, 2004 Author Share Posted January 12, 2004 Hi David it's a nice idea, the problem is the sheer scale of what would be required. IIRC there are over 20,000 educational establishments in the UK, take out those that deal with younger children and those who do no drama then I guess you have over 5,000 worthy cases. The number of 'big' players in the market probably number no more than 50 companies operating in the UK so each would be asked to help 100 schools ! That's an awful lot of support. The other issue I would have is of the teacher training aspect. A few days spent with someone sent along is not going to help much. Anyways, I always thought that we paid taxes to fund education. I pay tax as an employee, as an employer, as a company, as a consumer, as a motorist (three times), as a TV viewer, as someone who has insurance, as someone who flies, as someone who goes to a pub........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DSA Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 I take your points, and do indeed tend to agree, however it doesnt change the fact the people like me generally need training, and the school can't afford it. Oh well, I suppose things will stay as they are for the moment....at least I'm going to university next year, and will hopefully receive training from any 'extra-curricular' theatres I help. David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomo Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 Unlikely. At our venue we have had to fight to get minimal training - a lot of the training has ended up being given by myself and a couple of other students and recent graduates. At the University venues, there doesn't appear to have been any safety related training given, even to people on the technical theatre course. (This is from watching some people currently on that course at work, with heart in mouth a lot of the time.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P. Funk Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 when I said I didnt think rigging/lighting was dangerous, I meant that its not dangerous if you know what your'e doing. but people who dont know what they are doing that cause the h&s laws...Understand - health and safety law isn't designed to get in your way, make you job difficult or stop you getting sued; it's there to stop you killing or injuring yourself or other people. yes but it *does*. thats what annoys me. I suppose the majority of it is fine, its just that 5% that can be really annoying. for instance, at a youth project I was building set at, we were just outside the scene dock (wycombe swan). a H&S official then demanded that we wore 'hi visibility jackets' to stop us being 'run over'. this was middle of the day, in summer. and anyone who knows the wycombe swan will know that that part of the theatre is hardly busy.. .its a turning circle... and the only cars that ever go down that road are theatre/argos employees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryson Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 Sorry P.Funk, I just don't agree. I'm prepared to say that some people over-apply what they think are Health and Safety "laws" and end up getting in the way of useful work. But only some people. Most of the time the rules are they to protect you and others - certainly in most of the examples you've given. Yes, they slow you down a bit - the fastest way across the road is to just leg it without looking - but they're worth the trade-off. There's nothing that slows you down like getting someone killed. .. and the only cars that ever go down that road are theatre/argos employees. ...driving great big trucks to deliver kit and not expecting to see a bunch of people standing on the road. I'd make you wear a High-vis too - especially if we shared the road with an argos store. (Case in point - we share an access with a Sainsburys at one of our venues, and I'll make you wear a high-vis there.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P. Funk Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 ok I'll put my hands up then and stop trying to sound clever :blink: Jon admin.. is there any way of displaying my real name in the left bar with my user name? I hate people calling me 'P. funk' - its just that 'Jon' wasnt available Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.