I’ve done bulk tippers…
Long time ago now mind.
The only thing I was told was ‘don’t lose the shovel’.
I didn’t need to be told the screamingly obvious.
Having said that, if you’ve destroyed your life by blowing your limbs off, all you can do is pursue someone for a cash payout wether that’s morally the right thing to do or not.
I thought the dcpc was s’posed to stop all this malarkey.
Never done tippers, but you’re dead right. Too much hand holding nowadays.
I did tipping tankers and liquid tankers, even putting a handrail up or climbing on top, you check what’s above you, the first time you crack your head on a sharp RSJ reminds you to wear a hard hat, they are more use than a hi viz vest in a cafe
Stanley Knife:
Rjan:
Well I didn’t want to put words in your mouth. And eventually in a discussion I tend to end up being right (in the sense of having a view with logical integrity) - because I never stay in the wrong, even if sometimes I start off being in the wrong.I often think people sometimes miss when I’ve changed my view - perhaps partly because I often notice when I’m wrong before they do, and perhaps partly because it gets lost amongst the number of points on which I’m right.
And the mask slips. An ability of a good troll is to keep his arrogance in check whilst being able to garner the attention he craves.
Credit where credit’s due you’re good, better than the vast majority of wasters who troll this forum (the left wing loony toon copy and paste nonsense was very good), but ultimately your house of cards is built on sand.
The thing is I’m not trolling you. I put a lot of effort into being in the right, and I have tens of thousands of hours under my belt talking, and reading, and indeed thinking, about these sorts of subjects, with hundreds if not thousands of other people before you. That’s not to say I’m always right, but it gives you an idea how seriously I’m taking it in trying to be right. And it gives you an idea of just how much context and background knowledge I have. It’s not arrogance and attention-seeking I suffer from, any more so than any other poster.
My main agenda when I post is twofold, firstly to share hard-won knowledge with those whose interests I’m sympathetic to, and secondly to seek any information which brings to my attention that I’m wrong - and if I find it, I’ll adapt my views and soon I’ll be back in the right again to the best of my ability to judge it. I don’t suffer from any arrogance that leads me to dismiss anyone’s opinion without consideration, or refuse to discuss those opinions, or suffer from any attention-seeking that leads me to take any wilfully provocative position without justification.
I’m not a policymaker in the field of health and safety. I’m not even a particular expert on it. Nor am I a PR man - I don’t claim to be a perfect or exceptionally skilled communicator. I’ve done little more in this thread than explain (as best as I can) what the law actually is, and try and explain why actual policymakers and acknowledged experts have come to the conclusion that the law needs to be as it is for the purposes of protecting workers in the workplace.
What I’m facing here is not the mask slipping on my alleged arrogance, but the arrogance and fury of those who claim they can’t be bothered to read probably no more than a few sides of A4 (in terms of my entire contribution on this thread across one or two dozen posts in response to several different posters), and can’t be bothered to address any point I’ve actually made, but who nevertheless think they’re the only ones here who have a decent handle on the entire subject (better even than solicitors, judges, and court staff, in your words).
Wheel Nut 3:
I did tipping tankers and liquid tankers, even putting a handrail up or climbing on top, you check what’s above you, the first time you crack your head on a sharp RSJ reminds you to wear a hard hat, they are more use than a hi viz vest in a cafe
But with overhead power lines, you don’t get a second chance to remind you - the damage is permanently done.
Rjan:
And it gives you an idea of just how much context and background knowledge I have.
When you write in your own hand instead of the copy and paste nonsense the similarities with your alter ego do slip through and show how much ‘context and background knowledge’ you do have.
The final paragraph is an art form and many would be suckered in and give you what you want. Makes a change to see a decent quality troll plying his trade on this forum, much better than the usual ill thought out nonsense we get from the amateurs.
Stanley Knife:
Rjan:
And it gives you an idea of just how much context and background knowledge I have.When you write in your own hand instead of the copy and paste nonsense the similarities with your alter ego do slip through and show how much ‘context and background knowledge’ you do have.
There is no copy and pasting in my posts, and if I quote anyone or anything it’s always made clear.
The final paragraph is an art form and many would be suckered in and give you what you want. Makes a change to see a decent quality troll plying his trade on this forum, much better than the usual ill thought out nonsense we get from the amateurs.
Well I’ll leave it to others to decide, and I suppose I’ll take what praise I can get. 
Rjan:
Wheel Nut 3:
I did tipping tankers and liquid tankers, even putting a handrail up or climbing on top, you check what’s above you, the first time you crack your head on a sharp RSJ reminds you to wear a hard hat, they are more use than a hi viz vest in a cafeBut with overhead power lines, you don’t get a second chance to remind you - the damage is permanently done.
Tipping Tankers, Tipping Trailers. Fork Lift Trucks, Car Transporters, John Cleese, even hydraulic Fifth Wheels are all the same, you check what’s above you,
Wheel Nut 3:
Rjan:
Wheel Nut 3:
I did tipping tankers and liquid tankers, even putting a handrail up or climbing on top, you check what’s above you, the first time you crack your head on a sharp RSJ reminds you to wear a hard hat, they are more use than a hi viz vest in a cafeBut with overhead power lines, you don’t get a second chance to remind you - the damage is permanently done.
Tipping Tankers, Tipping Trailers. Fork Lift Trucks, Car Transporters, John Cleese, even hydraulic Fifth Wheels are all the same, you check what’s above you,
Nobody is saying you don’t.
I’m struggling to see why we’re still talking at cross purposes on this. You might think you’re a brilliant lawyer, and that you’re going to go before a judge and say “aha, but the method of raising the tipper included a check that was overlooked, and therefore the accident arose because the safe method was not followed! The method is all here in writing! The guy accepts he should have looked up! Case closed, your honour!”.
But the judge is not bound to accept the assumption that the method was safe, simply because it would have been safe if it had been followed. The criteria for a safe method is not only whether it is safe if followed to the letter.
A method that is safe if followed may still be unsafe if it demands relentless perfection in order to be safe. A judge can hold that the method was not safe because it was vulnerable to catastrophic risks arising through small oversights and imperfections in execution. Another way of putting it is, does the method have a margin of error against human frailty?
Does a working method account for the fact that more than once in a career, a person may simply forget to do what they know ought to be done? Or may do it so badly in a passing moment of confusion or distraction, or in adverse or hurried circumstances, that it amounts to the same thing?
We’re at cross purposes because people have opinions, irrespective of what the law says, and this being a forum, surprise surprise, they recklessly express them.
If the method was safe but not followed because of human error (which happens to all of us), then the employer should not be liable.
I await 85 paragraphs of overly wordy arrogant condescension in reply.
albion:
I await 85 paragraphs of overly wordy arrogant condescension in reply.
Coming your way shortly by the way this thread has gone… 
albion:
We’re at cross purposes because people have opinions, irrespective of what the law says, and this being a forum, surprise surprise, they recklessly express them.If the method was safe but not followed because of human error (which happens to all of us), then the employer should not be liable.
I await 85 paragraphs of overly wordy arrogant condescension in reply.
Why do you think the employer should not be liable, when it is employers who determine the how the work is organised, and it could have been organised to be performed in a safer fashion?
I’ll hold the other 84 paragraphs until I’ve seen what you have to say.
Rjan:
albion:
We’re at cross purposes because people have opinions, irrespective of what the law says, and this being a forum, surprise surprise, they recklessly express them.If the method was safe but not followed because of human error (which happens to all of us), then the employer should not be liable.
I await 85 paragraphs of overly wordy arrogant condescension in reply.
Why do you think the employer should not be liable, when it is employers who determine the how the work is organised, and it could have been organised to be performed in a safer fashion?
I’ll hold the other 84 paragraphs until I’ve seen what you have to say.
YAWN
Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk