Health and Safety?

[no step]

Having spent many enjoyable years maintaining the Tornado under RAF rule, it seems I have been blissfully unaware that it's a fair old way to fall off the top of one. Thankfully my new found BAe colleagues have shown me the light and kicked us off the job (their job, their profits, their shareholders, their problem? My soon to be working weekend!).

Plan to fix problem - constantly move staging (both small incorrect items) to where people are working at altitudes in excess of 5mm. In practice this allows for one person to be on the jet and the rest chasing below 'keystone cop style' with staging, periodically creating small dents here and there to be repaired at a later date (spares dependant) and forgetting the bolt they were tightening half an hour ago. Seems reasonable, making sure you can do the job and you have the equipment before signing the contract would after all, be crazy.

I hope 'they' think of something else for me to worry about soon, because I need MORE. Civilianization, production levels, KPI targets, underspends, overspends, time booking, QA, spares chasing, manpower, crap IT, no heating and everything else is not enough to stop me worrying about the quality of the workmanship on the jet that leaves the hangar...yet.

Anyone feel healthier or safer?

I hope this does not come across as bitter because i remember enjoying my job:{

[tonkabloke]

I too seem to remember those great days of enoying my job. Days when our management actually cared about what went on and supported us. The days when we were actually doing the job our post and/or rank permitted, instead of doing jobs below and above our positions. When we werent run by civilians who only have cost in mind, and seemingly going through the motions of safety. Supervision when deemed necessary as not to reduce production levels, leading back to cost again. I think i know where you work NO STEP.

Does anyone else?

[Miserable Old Git]

I remember falling off the cockpit sill of an F4,

Luckily there was no one else in the HAS to see me.:O

Luckily I didn’t hurt myself, because there was no one else in the HAS.

The point is that aircraft can be dangerous and people sue over the smallest things.

MOG

[airborne_artist]

Worth bearing in mind that 80% of the fatal (yes fatal) accidents in the building industry occur when the victim has fallen from a height of less than 10' AGL.

Was told that by the HSE lady who came to examine my house, the scene of a significant accident, when a roofer fell through an incomplete skylight to the concrete 9' below. He spent 12 days in hospital after cracking his pelvis.

[Onan the Clumsy]

Too bad that skylight wasn't a nob length higher then or he'd have been alright :confused:

[RileyDove]

I think the critical height is 6 feet and over in terms of fatalities.

[Jobza Guddun]

No step,

I guess you work in what is now the BAES empire in E Anglia where the RAF seems to be rolling over and letting civilian managers tell the blue suiters what to do. I don't envy you one bit, I think the best thing to be said for that place is the hours (usually anyway). Suffice to say, were I to be offered promotion into a job in that place in all probability I would turn it down.

The whole camp is becoming a pants place to be, and when all 4 tonka sqns are crammed into 2 HAS sites, that'll be the last straw. A shame a decent bloke like Baggers has to preside over this crap.

Heard the one about clothing stores going to Honington because BAES want the stores building for their own use?:yuk:

Jobza

[tonkabloke]

Some of you seem to have missed the point, agreed falls can happen and aircraft are dangerous. i think he was implying that should you be planning to take over the scheduled maintenance of fastjet aircraft facility, is it not unreasonable to get all the equipment/orders/practices in place or at least ready to go? why are we getting boll~cked for not using staging and ordered to stop work, when we havent got the staging? why are we working without terms of reference/orders? maybe thats because we are only 3 months into the project i guess. why do working practices change on a daily basis and by word of mouth depending on who you are talking to?


To what cost do we make a system work?

[Onan the Clumsy]

I think the critical height is 6 feet and over in terms of fatalities.Shouldn't that be six feet UNDER?

[A2QFI]

For good reason, there is a 2 day ladder at St Athan. There was a suggestion that ALL pilots would have to go on it as they use ladders as part of their work. Didn't happen but another nonsense was that we had to get some sort of dispensation so that we didn't have to provide disabled access to our simulator cockpit. AND I was told of for using the phrase 'disabled'; it is now, officially, 'Differently Abled"!

[L1A2 discharged]

There has been a change to the working at height regulations. The change was to remove the minimum height above surface level to which they applied.

A hangar near stonehenge has a ceiling mounted fall arrestor system which seemed to work ok. A bit fiddly to step over blades etc if working on the roof of a frame. Sackable offense to not use it.

[no step]

I should point out that I am a firm believer in health and safety, something in the past that the air force on many points has demonstrated blatant disregard for. My real concern is for the current system of 'can do make do' and ever increasing workaround practices.

The job is hard enough without the endless stream of sideline statisticians piling the pressure on and bleating about overspends and under achievment. I really don't care. My concern is the quality of the job at hand and the welfare of those around me. How much more pressure can the people on the shop floor handle before something breaks.

How many people are going to drag that incorrect staging out in the rain to do that egr leak check up top? I know I will be, but I can't speak for all the other folk who like me, have simply had enough.

[charliegolf]

Crippled is probably a real no-no then?









The BMAA's disabled pilots refer to their modified aircraft as those with a 'Cripp Conversion' Their term, they clearly don't appreciate PC bulldust.

CG

[BEagle]

Nor did the disabled bloke at the university I attended in the 1970s. He drove one of those single seat blue 'invalid carriages' that used to be seen in those days. One day I was driving to university in my MG Midget when he shot past in a haze of 2-stroke smoke, his vehicle proudly bearing the words 'SPASMOBILE TURBO' in big letters on the back!

[FJJP]

Aaaah Beags, those were the days when you were allowed to have a sense of humour and take the p*ss.

It's got to the stage now where the disabled can't take the michael out of other disabled because the abled may be offended!

[Blodwyn Pig]

i shouldn't worry about it too much, in the cutting edge aircraft repair facility that i work in we have been saddled with health and safety for the last few years. safety glasses, masks, gloves, safety harnesses, fall arrest systems (or a bit of stageing to land on if no fall arrest available).
you used to be able to use a band saw, but now you have to go on a course, you get a course telling you how to lift empty carboard boxes so you dont hurt your back, you name it, theres a course for it!
after a while you get used to it, and wonder how on earth you managed to stat alive day to day using the old , dangerous ways!

i'm sure if you want to make money on your demob, just become a health and safety 'consultant'!

and then if health and safety wasn't enough, they start introducing lean with all its management speak bull s**t (rolling out out ideas, blue sky thinking, cascading down, think out of the box, aaaa!)

[tonkabloke]

The point is not using staging and we are all happy to enforce health and safety aspects. I re-iterate again how can you be grilled for not using staging when there is insufficient available, and no room to constantly transfer it from one side to another every 10 minutes. then we get told we are overspending manhours on tasks as we are constantly having to make do!! statistics say the more movements carried out the more accidents will happen.

This is just another rant which has surface since bae reared their heads. no step and i can surely tell lots more!!!

[no step]

forgot to mention that the issues only apply on one half of the hangar. The lucky few not yet enslaved in the Royal Aerospace Force are merrily singing and dancing without a care in the world - make the most of it.

Like death DMS comes to us all.:sad:

[Chris Kebab]

Pardon me for being a bit dull here but how come a contractor led operation is liable to a HSE inspection and the RAF is not? I was under the impression that H&S rules applied accross the board these days. Or is it just the mood of the HSE man on the day?

[Krystal n chips]

Crippled is probably a real no-no then?
The BMAA's disabled pilots refer to their modified aircraft as those with a 'Cripp Conversion' Their term, they clearly don't appreciate PC bulldust.
CG

As heard in the Church during the funeral service for a friend of mine a couple of years ago at a certain East Anglian base currently under discussion here. A reference was made to the great work he did converting gliders for these people-----and the term used to describe the conversion?--- as above ----and the biggest cheer ? --from those at the rear who had been the recipients of his work. Had the added benefit of a "oh dear, what else can go wrong" moment as displayed on the face of the Padre at the time ! :ok: :E

[tonkabloke]

Your guess is as good as ours! yes believe it or not we do have double standards. well we dont but there is a divide in the hangar!

[no step]

how come a contractor led operation is liable to a HSE inspection and the RAF is not?

The RAF is liable just as it has always been however, the inspections were carried out by BAe SHE/QA so they can only apply it to aircraft and teams under their control. They say jump and that's what we do (providing it's safe and not detrimental to production)

[Klingon]

The relevant rules apply at heights of 1.2 mtrs, above which a fall arrest device is required in the form of staging,padding belts and pulleys, mates head etc.

Having been involved in Risk Management for the last ?? years I know how important H&S is, but only if you are going to use and apply it sensibly. Its like insurance, nobody wants it until something happens and like PC it is/can be interpretted stupidly by the stupid.

My experience of the military is that it is too often applied out of context by those who have insufficient knowledge of the subject. The RAF ditched its AP some years ago and now has a mandate to comply with the H&S act 1974 and all its Regulations; except where the SoS makes an active election not to comply.

"Wer'e military! It doesnt apply!"

If you think that going on operations excuses you, think again! It is still necessary for risks to be assessed and considered.

Whose responsible for all this?

WE ARE! Ambulance chasers are more than willing to submit vexatious claims unprecedented almost anywhere else but in the USA. The MOD allows uncontested payments in order to avoid lengthy court procedures and legal costs. So next time you have a gripe about H&S just give a thought as to why its become the bain of our lives.

I joined a service that had a "Can Do" spirit but that phrase was hijacked by a bunch of promotion seeking blunties to justify some fairly ill considered policies that served their own ends. If evidence of that is needed just look at the number of squadies being left out to dry by the senior staff.:cool:

[OIC CMMA]

The point is not using staging and we are all happy to enforce health and safety aspects. I re-iterate again how can you be grilled for not using staging when there is insufficient available, and no room to constantly transfer it from one side to another every 10 minutes. then we get told we are overspending manhours on tasks as we are constantly having to make do!! statistics say the more movements carried out the more accidents will happen.

This is just another rant which has surface since bae reared their heads. no step and i can surely tell lots more!!!

I totally agree Tonkabloke,this way of working is a complete joke,next we will have to account for our hours for each and every thing we do and log them on another computer system, just to make the figures look good. oh sorry i forgot we already do. Yet more time wasted sitting in front of a computer screen and not fixing planes.Let me tell thee now, this is just the tip of a mighty stinking iceberg!!!

[O.I.C Spreckley Hall]

Sounds like a spot of bother for you chaps, i say 'bout time you jolly well got a grip of it.

[Pontius Navigator]

I just read the Defence Environmental Safety Board minutes. Fascinating stuff. One aim is to address the military's propensity for working around H&S measures. They also address the issue of H&S in routine training. As far as possible the risks run in training should be no less than the risk on operations.

At least that is my take and it seems to echo that 'train as you expect to fight' rather than 'fight as you trained'.

[insty66]

Klingon,
If blokes like tonkatechie & tonkabloke follow that particular rule how the ferk do they strap a pilot in during a see off outside on the line?:ooh:

If PNs take on the documents he's read is correct that at least seems to me to be a sensible take on matters (gasp).

CK if you saw the way RAF maintenance was being eroded the way tonkabloke can ( I don't know him but I know where he works) you would have a very great fear for the future. I predict 3 or 4 years of OKish performance from the company, followed by a sharp increase in cost to the MOD and all the Technical skills we currently have will have been eroded.

On a personal level I object to working for the shareholders of BAE as most people in the Tornado fleet will very soon be.:mad:

[tonkatechie]

Klingon,
If blokes like tonkatechie & tonkabloke follow that particular rule how the ferk do they strap a pilot in during a see off outside on the line?:ooh:
Easy, we give them a new ejection seat with handy strap stowages that enable them to strap themselves in (then don't use them because the fuller-figured aircrew and groundcrew sit on the back pads and snap them).
Oh, and thanks for thinking about me, Klingon, (what a caring, sharing, airforce we're in) - I've only just caught up on this as I've been away:O
I seem to remember someone I know who works at that dreaded place beginning with 'M' saying that the solution for BAeS was to stick a RAF bloke on the job if the required saftey gear wasn't available - more expendable apparantly...:sad:

[A/C Plonk]

Worth bearing in mind that 80% of the fatal (yes fatal) accidents in the building industry occur when the victim has fallen from a height of less than 10' AGL.

Was told that by the HSE lady who came to examine my house, the scene of a significant accident, when a roofer fell through an incomplete skylight to the concrete 9' below. He spent 12 days in hospital after cracking his pelvis.

I managed to crush a vertabra falling from 4 ft. Actual no so much a fall as following the ladder down and landing with straight legs.

[pvr not dwr]

Health and safety is for audits and ticks in boxes. I work somewhere cold and getting darker and am aware of the lip service I should pay it but I have no time for H&S, 50hr min working week 20min lunch. I only get to go the gym for fatness test and they restrict that to once a year but it'll be my fault if I can't do the OP fit test. :{ It may be that it is a Tonka thing, I have already posted about the pressure to ignore mandatory MP's to get the job done and it seems the latest servicable green tile trick is just not to snag the fault, poor spares no manpower must get the green tiles (I know jets get signed up as a green knowing it will crew out/come back after one sortie) but its the stats that count. I'd suggest doing snap H&S audits/inspections like CDT and doing something with the management when they find stuff, yes i know it'll never happen.
Roll on tranche3.

[Pontius Navigator]

pvr not drt, your problem is recognised at the highest level. It is the propensity, particularly in the Army, to work around H&S issues and not work within them.

The issue of realistic training was raised by 2PUS and they will not reduce training value for H&S until so dictated by the DMB.

However they are trying to tackle needless H&S evasion by management. The paperwork is trickling down. How far your station cdr and execs care to trickly it is possibly an issue.

[teeteringhead]

The relevant rules apply at heights of 1.2 mtrs, above which a fall arrest device is required in the form of staging,padding belts and pulleys, mates head etc...... lucky the mighty Wessex wnet out of service then .... you'd have had to use all of the above to climb up the side.......:(

[SirPeterHardingsLovechild]

Ah yes, the Wessex

On 84 (Hoot & Roar!) we sprayed them with carcinogenic PX24 to keep them in tip top condition before we scrapped them. So if you didn't slip off the transdeck and break your neck, you could always look forward to cancer.

I fell off a transdeck once, but luckily I slowed my descent by catching my bollocks on the access step and then back flopping the mainwheel.

I filled out an accident report, but the Flt Sgt ripped it up after my back was turned.

Them were the days!

[Pontius Navigator]

Anybody remember the old, steel, GS step ladders? Weighed a ton and usually bent and distorted, would not fold and sods to move?

One day we got the brand new light weight aluminium model.

I was just about to put my feet on the top step of ladder as I exited the bombbay of the might V when - poof. A puff of wind, or the usual 20k venturi draft, whipped them up, blew them closed and tossed them casually to the aft of the aircraft. I narrowly avoided the 8 foot drop.

Or the rule that said you needed a safety harness working at height on the wing? Unfortunately stores did not have any sky hooks.

[Blacksheep]

Fascinating stuff. One aim is to address the military's propensity for working around H&S measures. This old blue-suiter has been (that's a good description, actually...) a civilian for quite a long time now. Being fully indoctrinated into the wonders of H & S, I wonder how many here are familiar with the stop order? In civilian life anyone can issue a work stop under H & S if the legal requirements aren't being met. Working around the rules with a "can-do" attitude, may meet a short-term objective but in the long run it increases down-time, increases costs and for civilian outfits, reduces profits. Improvisation in combat conditions is often the only way to continue operations but in normal circumstances the "can-do" culture is the worst possible way to run any organisation. Avoiding Capex seldom leads to improved cash flow...

So, don't mock the H & S rules chaps; like airworthiness regulations, they're based on actual experience. Following the rules can lead not only to safer working conditions but also increased efficiency and increased financial returns. I understand perfectly well that military personnel cannot simply down tools and refuse to operate unless they get everything thats called for under the rules but we were discussing civilian contractors working on military machines at the start of the topic.

Or the rule that said you needed a safety harness working at height on the wing? Unfortunately stores did not have any sky hooks.There were anchor points on the upper surface and the eye bolts to screw into them were in tool stores. It was simple machismo that stopped us using them. That and a "can-do" attitude. We had a safety equipment worker killed during my time on the line at Waddington. He wasn't using the harness that hung on the tool store wall either. I wonder how his widow is coping all these years later? And how did his two children get on? Its the management, or in the military case the commissioned officers, who are responsible not only for fulfilling the flying programme but also for the welfare and safety of their subordinates. What do you reckon? The guys got the aircraft away and met the flying programme but with no-one shooting at us, did OC Line Squadron do a good job?

[no step]

Working around the rules with a "can-do" attitude, may meet a short-term objective but in the long run it increases down-time, increases costs and for civilian outfits, reduces profits.....in normal circumstances the "can-do" culture is the worst possible way to run any organisation.



Makes sense to me.

Have the Forces been responsible for their own standards for too long ?

Perhaps the introduction of outside agencies like BAe is highlighting the shortfalls everyone just took for granted.

[endplay]

There is a lot of uninformed twaddle about H&S regulations and the majority of the "pain" associated with it comes from the misapplication of what is, generally, sound advice culled from experienced accident investigators. This is how the HSE defines working from height:

Regulation 2 A place is ‘at height’ if (unless these Regulations are followed) a person could be injured falling from it, even if it is at or below ground level.

In other words: Is there a risk of injury and if so what can be done to eliminate or lessen that risk?

When you're young you're invulnerable (or so you believe) which is why it is the responsibility of the older (certainly) and wiser (possibly) amongst us to ensure that sensible and prudent precautions are taken. If you've never lost a mate to what was an entirely avoidable incident then take my word for it, it sucks.

[DEL Mode]

So is the real issue: -

A. You do not like working for civies?
B. You do not want the civies looking after your H&S?
C. You wish that the civies had closed down the "factory", made you all redundent, and moved the work to Blackpool?

[tonkabloke]

So is the real issue: -
A. You do not like working for civies?
B. You do not want the civies looking after your H&S?
C. You wish that the civies had closed down the "factory", made you all redundent, and moved the work to Blackpool?


yes please do!!!!!!!!!

[pvr not dwr]

I dont work for civvies directly but I suppose that westminister is full of them. However I really dont think that growbags writing sengo's ojar is a good idea.

[insty66]

The answers to your questions are:
a True.
b Don't mind.
c You obviously havent seen how many techies have applied for redundancy.

Your question b is the issue at hand.
The solution is difficult but as Pontius said ""train as you expect to fight" rather than "fight as you trained"".
When the order comes to deploy to an austere base (that's how we excersise these days) There will not be technician arrester gear and a mass of staging will not be there.
So why not learn in a peacetime enviroment with proper supervision how to work safely without these things?
Military life is different (in case you never noticed:ok:) and whilst I would not advocate simply ignoring H&S it must be recognised that our needs are worlds away from the anodised factory work of other institutions.