adam2 Posted February 27, 2018 Share Posted February 27, 2018 At 16C I'd call it a prime legionella RISK! A fairer figure would be 60+C. In general, water should be above 60 degrees OR BELOW 20 degrees, so a water supply that is meant to be hot should be fine at 16 degrees. It would be of much greater concern if lukewarm. Water at otherwise risky temperatures is generally acceptable provided that it is not stored at such temperatures. Warm water at 40 degrees from a tap is fine if produced by nearby mixing valve that blends hot water at over 60 degrees with cold water at below 20 degrees. Warm water at 40 degrees from a bulk tank held at 40 degrees is almost certainly a risk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seano Posted February 27, 2018 Share Posted February 27, 2018 What I see here is an axe-grinder with a zoom lens looking for a power hit. ^^This^^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Some Bloke Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 Terrance Murray of Blackburn [snip] was also ordered to pay costs of £500 and a victim surcharge of £115. Who was the victim and what was (s)he going to do with the £115? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart91 Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 The "victim surcharge" is a blanket policy that applies to any sentence, irrespective of whether there's an actual victim or not. The money is pooled, and given out according to need. More info on Wikipedia here. It does seem a bit ridiculous in cases like this one, and there have been other unintended consequences too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smalljoshua Posted March 4, 2018 Share Posted March 4, 2018 My favourite overreaction was a recent survey I went and did. Measuring up for a range of acoustic panels in an office building. Note, there were a range of office workers safely present within the space. We were required to wear boots, vest and hardhats. They relented on eye/ear protection after protest but wouldn't budge on the other ones. My most hated H&S requirement I see on sites is for full length trousers! As someone who spends approx 360 days a year in shorts, I do not like full length trousers one bit and certainly don't see how they will keep me safe! Josh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pscandrett Posted March 4, 2018 Share Posted March 4, 2018 My favourite overreaction was a recent survey I went and did. Measuring up for a range of acoustic panels in an office building. Note, there were a range of office workers safely present within the space. We were required to wear boots, vest and hardhats. They relented on eye/ear protection after protest but wouldn't budge on the other ones. Did/could you ask for the risk assessment that suggests that this PPE was helpful in reducing the risk, and/or ask specifically which dangers the PPE was mitigating in this circumstance? I've asked before and people have clammed up... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunray Posted March 4, 2018 Share Posted March 4, 2018 I did a contract in a large building on the 'Aldwych D' and was informed I had to wear Hi Vis, boots and Hard hat at all times.Fair enough when I'm in the plant rooms and other hazardous areas where it was common sense to protect ones self but 25% of the work was in busy offices. I turned the rules back on them and insisted that when I'm doing my job, every one nearby had to be similarly protected and pointed at their rules which had been included in our contract that had been approved and signed by uncle Tom Cobbly and all. The authorised person was tasked with ensuring that every one was supplied with the relevant PPE and given the relevant instructions, it got dropped when they realised it amounted to hundreds of people and the rules were suddenly reassessed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seano Posted March 5, 2018 Share Posted March 5, 2018 had to wear Hi Vis, boots and Hard hat at all times.Fair enough when I'm in the plant rooms What risk is addressed by wearing hi viz in a plant room? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigclive Posted March 5, 2018 Share Posted March 5, 2018 What risk is addressed by wearing hi viz in a plant room? It's very important for fashion purposes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart91 Posted March 5, 2018 Share Posted March 5, 2018 What risk is addressed by wearing hi viz in a plant room? The risk of people not realising that you are a very important person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timsabre Posted March 5, 2018 Share Posted March 5, 2018 Hi viz is the new invisibility vest, it just makes you blend into the background as "a workman". Hi viz allows you to pass through any secure area with ease. My next door neighbours had their house burgled by 3 blokes wearing hi viz, nobody.took any notice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulears Posted March 5, 2018 Share Posted March 5, 2018 I needed to wear PPE for making a video in a factory being kitted out. Didn't;t seem unreasonable, but what made me smile was simply that with a hard hat and high viz, nobody asked questions and everybody went home leaving me the only person left on site - completely unsecured and full of amazingly expensive equipment, plus all the builders tools and kit. Even worse - the only contact number I had went to answerphone. I had a think. I c called the local Police and explained and as it was new, they didn't have a key holder either. Their unofficial solution was to set off the alarm which would then alert a security company first. I pressed random numbers into the keypad, and on the third false entry - off it went. Ten minutes later a security guard turned up, and after he made some phone calls, he believed I was who I said I was, and I went home, leaving him the problem. No idea how long he was there. Hi viz made me look like everyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junior8 Posted March 5, 2018 Share Posted March 5, 2018 Can anybody jog/confirm my memory but I am sure there was a programme on TV a few years ago about a shipyard where they'd abandoned everything referred to above and things like yellow lines on the works floor/safety notices telling all concerned that they damned well had to look out for themselves and the accident rate had plummeted? Does this ring a bell? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timsabre Posted March 5, 2018 Share Posted March 5, 2018 Can anybody jog/confirm my memory but I am sure there was a programme on TV a few years ago about a shipyard where they'd abandoned everything referred to above and things like yellow lines on the works floor/safety notices telling all concerned that they damned well had to look out for themselves and the accident rate had plummeted? Does this ring a bell? Sounds like France... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart91 Posted March 5, 2018 Share Posted March 5, 2018 There's a similar scheme in place, I think in the Netherlands, where an entire street is a "shared space" and all users (traffic, pedestrians, cyclists) have to look out for one another. (As opposed to assuming they have right of way because a sign or road marking says so) It seems to have a good track record, but a local council tried to introduce something similar in a town near me and there was quite a lot of local opposition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.