I'm suprised to find myself plugging an app for phones but eventually someone had to make something useful.

St John s have developed and made available an "app" for Smartphones and things - effectively a simple first aid manual for your phone.

Its available via iTunes or Google Play - and details can be found here http://www.stjohnwales.org.uk/store/first-aid-app

Definitely a useful little tool for First Aiders and Appointed Persons.

I'm not entirely convinced anyone's thought this through fully.

The International Organisation for Standards (ISO) are good at idealism - their new standard for developing countries and seismic assessment (will they survive an earthquake) I applaud for its aim but it does seem a touch of step with the underlying issues in the developing world.

Buildings are built to what we in the West would consider poor standards for a lot of reasons  - poverty, lack of effective regulation and given the huge issues facing the developing world earthquakes tend to  fall low down the list.

Charging for the standard somewhat ensures that it can't/won't get adopted by anyone but Western companies looking to make quick assessments on their buildings.

But its available through the ISO here.

A slightly odd little tale here. Quick read of the tabloids and the Coroners words and its all health and safety gone mad again; read a bit deeper and your sympathies shift.

In a nutshell three men managed to put their car upside down in a flooded ditch - 2 escaped relatively unhurt and one was injured. His friends got him out of the car but couldn't get him up the steep banks. When paramedics finally arrived - after long delays calling them - the crew "risk assessed" the situation and decided it was too dangerous to enter the ditch. A policeman arrived afterwards and came to a different decision diving in and helping get the injured man to the bank where the paramedics then treated him.

The coroner then made a number of statements - 

• "I will not say what I think of health and safety,” 
  
•  “I was brought up in a country where men risked their own lives to save others. That was a period in our history which has almost ceased.”
  

Now there have been some odd decisions made in the past - but strip this down a little. Its the middle of the night, the bank was so steep the police the following day had problems measuring its depth and unless you were there its hard to decide what you'd have done. The paramedics have not made any individual statements but have been backed by their employers. Equally the Coroner also stated he didn't know if the paramedics had come to a different decision they'd have been able to save him.

Paramedics normally rely on the Fire Brigade and Police in these situations so we're not talking a full rescue crew with ladders and ropes - we're talking two guys in the middle of nowhere with no rescue gear. Take away the words risk assessment and just say the two medics made a decision.

Oh and really minor point - the car was driven by a drunk driver who has since been prosecuted. So obviously lets blame the paramedics not the drunk driving ............ sorry but think you're aiming at the wrong target. If the dead man had been walking home and hit by the car it would be the drivers fault - but put your car and passengers upside down in a ditch its the medics fault...... of course it is.

You really do wonder sometimes.

A builder was prosecuted, July, by the HSE after not only being found working on an unsafe scaffold but also having his ten year old son on the scaffold with him. His son was seen shimmying along a narrow plank on the scaffolding, gripping to the frame to prevent him falling, as he made his way towards the top of a ladder where his dad was waiting for him. The ladder was not tall enough to reach the lowest working platform on the scaffolding - missing it by around 30cm. The builder therefore had to hold his son's ankles and place his feet onto the rungs of the ladder to make sure he did not fall or miss his footing.


There's a long list of issues with the scaffold so its an interesting approach to parenting shall we say.


Full story is here on the HSE website

During the heatwave of the last few days its just been reported that two Territorial Army members died of heat exhaustion whilst training on the Brecon Beacons over the weekend with a third ill in hospital. Full details have not yet been announced.
In some ways it seems surprising - heat stress normally shows early signs and after the last few decades the army would have generally been thought to be well aware of the risks.

Working in hot climates - normally outside the UK - does bring risks especially when combined with with physical exertion.

But anyone working outdoors especially in physical work should ensure they keep hydrated (at least 4 litres of water per day in this heat), try to reduce the caffeine intake and take the obvious precautions against sun burn. Most importantly listen to your body and keep an eye on those around you.

The NHS link below gives a good overview of the symptoms but keeping it simple:

• Thirst and dark urine - initial signs of dehydration - drink water and some dilute fruit juice.
• Dizziness - this is the first sign of heat exhaustion but also an indication that dehydration is getting more serious - find shade, use ice packs, cold water to get body temperature down and drink water.
• Increased heart rate - always a worrying sign. Rest, find shade and drink.
• Muscle Fatigue

Once you get beyond those symptoms the risks and effects start to jump quite quickly - confusion, increasingly poor co-ordination are the first signs obvious to others around you. 

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Heat-exhaustion-and-heatstroke/Pages/Symptoms.aspx

For anyone working outdoors whether in this heatwave or elsewhere in the world - drink water, keep your body salts topped up using fruit juice or energy drinks, find shade when you can and hats can help shade your scalp during peak temperatures - but most importantly listen to your body - the signs of both dehydration and heat stress can be felt at an early stage.

Draft/Consultation documents have been published by the HSE for proposed changes to asbestos regulations in the UK. Anyone interested can see the Consultation document here at the HSE web site or download a copy below

From October there'll be another revision to RIDDOR. After moving the goal posts last year - the old 3 days off work due to an accident became 7 days off work - they've now simplified (reduced) the number of Occupational Diseases that need reporting and also simplified the "major accidents" that need reporting.

On the whole probably a good thing - I will of course have one of my moments in 2 years time when the HSE/Government proclaim major improvements in safety because the number of reportable accidents is lower than in 2012 - cynic me?

In many ways RIDDOR was set in the past so simplification is good for us all - but I do recognise that any past statistics are of dubious value to compare going forwards.

You can download a free draft of the new Regs/Guidance here - HSE Downloads

In some ways it feels like beating a puppy .......... but I do have to say something. The HSE set up a myth busters panel a year or so back of the great and good to comment on the raft of "elf and safety stories" doing the rounds. It all sounds like a good idea but given in general you can look at the stories and sum up the response in a phrase involving sex and travel quite why it needs a panel of the great and good to state the obvious is beyond me.

Its just an expensive way of getting to they're an idiot - except at no point does anyone say someone was an over zealous muppet with no brains and a clip board. Or maybe that's why I never get asked for an opinion.

http://www.hse.gov.uk/news/judith-risk-assessment/myth-busting030413.htm

I know its well meant - but equally if you want to manage the press and their portrayal of health and safety the rather nice but dull output here is never going to make more than a paragraph near the end of the article. Come on I know the HSE are never going to say "which idiot came up with that" (now that would get a headline) but they really need to learn how the world and the press work.

The fatal accident data for 2012-2013 was released on 3rd July. In the last year 148 people were killed at work - a sobering figure but on a downward trend.
Considering that fatal road accidents in the UK account over 10 times that number (1901 in 2012) the numbers do show that most companies working in the right way.

Two thirds of the fatalities are linked to Falls from Height, Being Hit by a Vehicle, being struck by a moving object (it means either a machine or someone decided a Fork Lift was an object nor a vehicle).

Some industries will always have an element of risk - but falls from height are easily prevented and vehicle accidents again are preventable. 

Yes safety gets too OTT all too often, and everyone jumps around making soundbites to the press when a muppet with a clipboard departs from reality (oh pick any elf and safety story) - but sometimes the focus really ought to be on why people still die needlessly at work. The stupidity of banning doormats, hot cross buns, whatever is just dumb and funny - the sad truth is someone not going home after an accident at work maybe deserves a headline; and the condemnation maybe ought to be refocused a little to the rare instances of companies who do place their employees lives at risk.

Its more Deregulation......... or window dressing depending on your viewpoint. The safety community are no doubt making a lot of noise and the government is spinning it like they've re written the Magna Carta.

Now either I'm stupid or its a lot of noise about nothing. The whole draft of the Deregulation Bill can be found here.

It changes a few words with regards to section 3 of the Health and Safety at Work Act - I still fail to understand how that passes for Deregulation in real terms rather than simply a slight updating of the language. Small firms undertaking low risk work never had to create the mountains of paper that seem the norm for many now - mind you most the paper we seem to create was never legally required for larger companies either.

Low risk companies with less than 5 employees were exempt under the Law from having to create formal recorded risk assessments and policy. The fact is most of the demand for written safety records is driven by clients or Insurers (and given an Insurance Inspection is generally a cut and paste job ....... ooops cynical me). They still have a duty to ensure the safety of their operations - including their sub contractors.

Simple low risk work is just that and shouldn't need to be a burden - however do remember small companies can do higher risk work and will always need to be able to show they are safe and competent. Look at the number of prosecutions linked to people falling through roofs - its so often a small company.