BristolUK

A string of four workplace accident deaths in the past two weeks and a farm fatality earlier this month has critics calling on the government to step up job-site inspections, and extend health and safety laws to farms and ranches.

Sam Fitzpatrick was crushed by a falling boulder at a worksite on Toba Inlet in 2009, in an incident that a Worksafe BC inspector said reflected "reckless and grossly negligent"

Traffic stops too dangerous for police cadets as they don't carry arms but not too dangerous for unarmed cops in the UK.

Workplace injuries are common, avoidable, and unacceptable. The Political Economy of Workplace Injury in Canada reveals how employers and governments engage in ineffective injury prevention efforts, intervening only when necessary to maintain the standard legitimacy. Dr. Bob Barnetson sheds light on this faulty system, highlighting the way in which employers create dangerous work environments

A Brantford woman who died in a fall through a skylight in 2012 while working with a roofing crew on a Mohawk Street warehouse was not wearing any fall protection gear, nor had she attended an earlier workplace safety training workshop, an inquest jury heard Thursday.
The inquest also heard that, on the day of the fall, there was evidence that guardrails had previously been set up along the perimeter of the building but had been removed and were sitting in piles as the roof work was almost complete and was moving to the stage of finishing the edges.
Three harnesses for ten people.

Four die, harnesses not secured among other things. The company admitts not ensuring that the scaffold was properly maintained.

Christ, you could spend days looking at roofer inquests

colchar

What do any of those have to do with health and safety rules preventing the emergency services from helping people as happened in the examples from the UK that I provided?

BristolUK

Nothing.

The original comment was the ludicrous assertion that there was too much H&S in the UK and that Canada was much more sensible in not bothering with such pesky rules.

colchar

Then why bother posting links that are irrelevant?


Wrong. The original comment was that the UK has gone over the top with its obsession with ridiculous health & safety regulations to the point that the emergency services are prevented from helping people because of those stupid rules.

Here is my original comment:
"As for Health & Safety in general - Canada is much more sensible in this regard than Britain is, where everything seems to be ridiculously over the top"

My next comment on that matter was (with examples included):
"That being said, at least here in Canada we do not let someone who has fallen down a shaft die because health & safety rules dictate that the safety equipment only be used to save firefighters, not members of the public:

Mineshaft death woman's family vow to continue fight for justice | Herald Scotland


Nor do we have 25 fire fighters being told that a three foot deep pond is too dangerous for them:

25 firefighters turn up to save drowning gull, but 3ft deep pond is deemed 'too dangerous' - London - News - London Evening Standard


And we don't have officers standing by while kids drown without at least trying to help:

Wigan boy drowned as police community support officers 'stood by' | UK news | The Guardian


We also don't call in specialist teams from miles away to go into a fifteen foot ditch while a man is drowning in the 18" if water at the bottom of it:

Policemen no longer need to be able to swim, inquest told - Telegraph "


You claimed that you could provide similar examples from Canada and, when challenged to do so, you gave examples of workplace deaths here in Canada which have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with ridiculous rules that prevent the emergency services from doing their jobs. As demonstrated in the linked stories, the rules in Britain have gone so far over the top that they prevent the emergency services from doing their jobs over the most minor of alleged dangers.

Canada is much more sensible in that our emergency services are allowed to do their jobs and save people's lives without having to undertake stupid risk assessments beforehand and without being told, for example, that situations such as three feet of stagnant water in a pond are too dangerous for them (a claim that was immediately disproved when a civilian just waded in and did their job for them without suffering any harm).

I still challenge you to post relevant examples from here in Canada.

colchar

No, I am suggesting that the regulations have gone over the top to the point of being ridiculous (ie. a fireman's equipment is to be used to ensure their safety, but not to rescue members of the public; three feet of stagnant water in a pond is too dangerous for firemen to venture into; etc.).

And it is not just those situations that are the issue - idiots and jobsworths have jumped on the health & safety bandwagon and use those regulations to justify the most moronic of decisions, some of which are detailed here on a government website:

http://www.hse.gov.uk/press/2012/hse-myth-busting.htm


Things have become so ridiculous that even the Employment Minister has had to address the issue:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...d-2342895.html

Almost Canadian

So you accept that, for example, the use of scaffolding during the construction of residential properties would likely reduce fatalities of construction workers?

Or not exempting farm workers from health and safety regulations would likely reduce fatalities of such workers?

I completely accept that morons will use legislation to further their own means.

Aviator

It has gone nuts here though. Telus installed a satellite dish on a flat roof, not 8' off the ground. To move it, now they cannot go on the flat roof they went on to install it for safety reasons, however they did ask if I would go up and get it!

Unfortunately one thing rules and legislation cannot fix is stupid and people do stupid things, which is why we get bogged down in rules that defy common sense.

BristolUK

They were relevant to the original point which you subsequently decided to change.

BristolUK

Yes, that's what I said the original comment was. Canada was supposedly more sensible in not bothering.

That's what you said.

scrubbedexpat091

Fall and hit the wrong part of the body and an 8 foot fall can be fatal.

Aviator

So can any fall, however where does one draw the line?

We had a contractor fall 2' off a ladder and nearly died, another fell 15' off a roof and was a bit bruised, but otherwise OK.

bats

Health and Safety is pretty lax in Canada. It starts at the design level, for example doors that open outwards onto corridors, doors that open into a stairwell right next to the stairs down. Stairs with no handrails, stairs with uneven riser amounts, public loos in restaurants where the loo is on a raised platform and there's little headroom. Parking lots with the route for the drive through running right through the middle. This seems to be a speciality of Tim Hortons.

Just a few examples that I've seen today.

Novocastrian

You've been to Tim Hortons' today?

Hmpph, I may never speak to you again.

Atlantic Xpat

Fred drifting slightly.....

I dunno about your part of Canada, but a depressingly familiar occurrence here is someone dying in a car accident that they'd've survived if only they were wearing their seatbelt. Having grown up in the era of 'clunk-click-every-trip' I can't fathom driving without one on. Clearly in some parts of Canada, the gene pool needs weeding out of people who are too stupid to be allowed into cars.

bats

Only for coffee, desperate times you see. I needed defrosting.