Health & Safety High VIZ jkts

[Ken Wells]

http://www.healthandsafety-nuts.com

I am getting fed up of Health And Safety Fascists lording it about at regional airports and now airfileds.

Get a life!!

They behave like traffic Wardens with new hats

Shoreham before Christmas unbelievable.

Blackpool airport not allowed to walk to our aircraft with a bottle of water!!??

Enforcement of wearing high viz jackets to get to your aircraft.

Reminds me of the story about Government Information films of the 70's

"Wear something white at night", and a guy got knocked down by a snow plough

[exeng]

Yep, It drives us all mad but we just have to get on with it.

Sorry, but that is the silly life we have to lead now.


Regards
Exeng

[Human Factor]

Got a message at work the other week.....

"Crews have been seen on the ramp in Geneva without high viz jackets...."

So what's the problem then?

[llanfairpg]

Crews have been seen on the ramp in Geneva without high viz jackets

and with full uniform on in the hotel at breakfast

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Here is a picture of what I wore when I was flying in the Airshows in Europe as an air display pilot.....

Note that flight suit is blaze orange one of the most visible colors on the planet.....

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e3...ifiKate033.jpg

One day I had just finished flying my routine at an airshow and was walking across the ramp in my flight suit....some fu.kin moron ramp nazi came up to me and told me I was not allowed to walk unescorted on the ramp without a green hi viz vest.....

I'm so happy to be out of aviation, the inmates are now running the asylum in aviation.

[llanfairpg]

Chuck-which one is you?

[Chuck Ellsworth]

That is my wife in the high viz vest.

[Ranger 1]

Attending to someone who has been hit down without wearing a Hi Viz tabard on an airfield certainly changed my view many years ago on wearing hi viz. Although a degree of discression should be allowed such as when a group of crew walk across the apron with Hi Viz tabards on & one member in the middle has not got one on, as long as they stay close together, they will probably get away with it on this occaison, after all Pax supervised by Hi Viz Ramp agents don't have to wear them, crew are required to especially doing their walk around checks with equipment in use servicing their aircraft.
I frequently hear crew say "OK what have we done wrong now?" as I walk up the steps to speak to the them.
I agree there are some heavy handed Ramp safety teams around who tend to be over the top.

[llanfairpg]

after all Pax supervised by Hi Viz Ramp agents don't have to wear them,

That is because pax are generally walking on prescribed marked walkways.

You know at the end of the day flying is a discipline and some pilots just cannot comply with rules and regulations they do not agree with. If they replaced High Vis jackets with captains jackets and 4 gold stripes I wonder how many would complain then?

[172driver]

Attending to someone who has been hit down without wearing a Hi Viz tabard on an airfield certainly changed my view many years ago on wearing hi viz.

With this kind of logic, you would advocate the wearing of hi-viz vests on any public road then ?

Get a life (which is something the H&S morons obviously lack)

[Sedbergh]

Since I nearly took out a pedestrian wearing a black hat, black jacket and black trousers on an unlit country road the other night I don't think that's an entirely stupid suggestion!!!! - coz there are morons out there who seem to have forgotten the old "wear somthing light at night" adverts

[A and C]

HI-VIS

It is the usual nanny state thing produced by H&S experts and enforced by jobsworths.

This all comes about due to the state having to find employment for the people who can't do anything productive, H&S and Security are the easy place to put these pepole to keep them out of the unemployment statistics.

This would not be a problem if only they could see that we are being kind to them by giving them something to do all day. But NO they are so stupid that they have let the power go to the head and all become as my grandma would say "little Hitlers".

On a dark night on a busy ramp I can see the need for the Hi-VIS but on a summers day at Kemble ? I think not!!

[TheOddOne]

With this kind of logic, you would advocate the wearing of hi-viz vests on any public road then ?

Yes, I would! There was a lad tragically killed on the M40 last weekend. He stepped out of a car that had been involved in an accident and was struck by another passing vehicle. I believe it was dark at the time, stand to be corrected.

One of the more dangerous places to work on the planet is on the hard shoulder of a motorway. Formal work sites are now carefully segregated; you see signs saying 'lane closed for protection of workforce', but collecting and putting out road works signs kills workers every year. They reckon you've got about 20 mins on a motorway hard shoulder before your vehicle will be struck. That's why it's better to get out of the vehicle (nearside) and sit up the bank.

We kill more pedestrians on British roads than most other European contries, sadly many of them are children. Partly this is vehicle drivers going too fast for the conditions and partly pedestrians not taking due care for themselves. 'Wear something white at night' is STILL good advice, it doesn't snow very much any more!

There are only H&S 'morons' because the drivers of vehicles and planes are even more moronic. Like Ranger 1, I've had to attend serious injuries airside; it ain't pleasant and mostly caused by people failing to take good care. ANYTHING that can bring a pedestrian to a driver's attention is a good thing. The construction industry, after mining, used to be the most dangerous place to work in the UK. Decades of hard work by the H&S people have transformed it. You NEVER see someone working on a site now without a hard hat on. It's part of the culture; you don't hear the word 'moron' associated with H&S in the construction industry. The H&SE now deem working airside is more dangerous than working on a building site.

We like to thnk of ourselves as safety-conscious in aviation, what with our pre-flight checks and approved maintenance and all. We've a ways to go in cultural acceptance of basic safety outside the aircraft.

No, I don't wear a hi-viz at small grass airfields, but as soon as you move up to bigger places, on it goes. Perhaps we SHOULD all the time, everywhere, so it becomes as natural as breathing.

TheOddOne

[Whopity]

The dangers of Nylon Hi-Viz Jackets:

Unrecognized by propellers but strong enough to pull you into one if it gets caught!
Generates static electricity - ideal for use near AVGAS!
Highly flammable; would not be allowed in household furnishings because its not safe!
Fuses with skin when it burns!

Surely there is a case to conduct a Risk Assessment and have them banned from the vicinity of Propellers and Av Gas in the interest of Health and Safety!

[TheOddOne]

Surely there is a case to conduct a Risk Assessment and have them banned from the vicinity of Propellers and Av Gas in the interest of Health and Safety!

Whopity,

You're prejudging the outcome of the Risk Assessment, not a good frame of mind in which to conduct one!

You're absolutely right about the dangers of wearing clothing that isn't secure around moving machinery. ANY clothing, hi-viz or not, should be secured, especially around props. One Handling Agent at LGW makes it a disciplinary offence not to have a hi-viz tabard secured. Apart from being caught up in machinery, it makes the jacket much less visible if it's not done up properly at the front.

All AVGAS fuel deliveries to a/c should be conducted in accordance with standard safety measures, which includes bonding the a/c and the pump/vehicle to a common earth. If you're holding the nozzle, you will be at the same static level, surely? I see lots of man-made fibre clothing being worn by pilots; how about making a strict rule that the ONLY clothing, hi-viz or no, should be wool or cotton, including underwear (the RAF do, I believe)

TheOddOne

[skydriller]

The Hi Viz vest debate continues....

To the chaps saying they have attended rampside injuries I have some simple questions -was the unfortunate person hit by an aeroplane, or a vehicle? Was it at a GA aerodrome or a major airport? Was it a bright sunny day or miserable/dark?

Anyone with half a brain knows that common sense should prevail for the "do I wear a Hi-vis vest" question. You land at Gatwick/Manchester/Birmingham where there are probably more ramp vehicles than aeroplanes - putting on a vest might be a good idea when you dismount your steed!! White waltham, Barton, Shoreham maybe one vehicle (if any) airside and likely to be a bright red fire truck/landrover at that - not necessary!!

Even at the Regional airports like Blackpool or Norwich - just how many vehicles are there? I cant help but think that its more about separating commercial pax from airport autherised people.Remember, get a Hi-Vis vest and a clipboard and you will not be acosted for anything , anywhere.....

All I can add is thank god its not reached aerodromes here....yet!!

Regards, SD..

[A and C]

H & S No help at all!

I have to take issue with the odd one on the usefulness of the H&S industry within aviation industry.

Long before any one had invented the H&S executive the aviation industry had a very strong safety culture, in twenty years on the ramp at LHR I only enountered three seious injurys, none of these could have been prevented buy HI VIS or any of the H&S regulations. All the inccidents came down to the person who was injured doing something that was stupid and could not be legislated for.

After one innccident we had the H&S people all over the opperation making up rules and producing lots of paperwork, the problem was that filling out all the new forms was taking peoples minds off the job and increasing the risk not reducing it!

The contribution by H&S to my workplace in terms of safety has been negative, people have been lulled into a sence of security and distracted by the paperwork.

I made all the people in my team fully aware that it was down to them to keep themselfs and there workmates safe and no matter how much paperwork was heaped apon us to think first and do the H&S paperwork only when you were sure that it was safe to be distracted by nif-naff and trivia.

I can see the numptys with the clipboards squeeling at my attitude to them but the only think that I can say in my defence.............. in twenty years my team had a ZERO accident rate and only a few of the minor cuts and bumps that go with aircraft engineering in a ramp enviroment.

[172driver]

We've a ways to go in cultural acceptance of basic safety outside the aircraft.

Completely disagree. What we have to do is stand up to the 'Little Hitlers' who invent rule after rule to rule us at their whim.

You compare people working on a Motorway with the poor chap who got out of his car in an accident. Two different things, no ?

They reckon you've got about 20 mins on a motorway hard shoulder before your vehicle will be struck.

If that was the case, the world's freeways would be littered with smoldering wrecks, one every three miles or so.....

Nobody doubts the wisdom of hi-viz on a construction site (lots of machinery, heavy loads being moved around, etc) or in a mine. By the same token it makes sense to wear them on the ramp of a busy airport. On a GA field? Get real !

[michaelthewannabe]

@ various on this thread: put the ego down and step away.

I can't help recalling from my Human Performance studies that an anti-authority, anti-discipline, anti-rule attitude is not consistent with safe flying.

<go on, flame me>

It appears to me that many of these superficially unneccessary rules exist to save us from our own mistakes, and those of others: we're all fallible. Even me. I'm not advocating safety measures where they're clearly inappropriate or even counter-productive, but as TheOddOne explains, H&S stuff is generally there for good reason. Occasionally it gets applied absurdly by an individual of small brain: unless it causes dramatically counter-productive hazard, or is consistently mis-applied, I guess the only sane response is to be the bigger person and try to get over it.

[mm_flynn]

I big part of this debate is people responding emotionally or in fear of a negligence prosecution rather than rationally minimising risk.

Originally Posted by 172driver

If that was the case, the world's freeways would be littered with smoldering wrecks, one every three miles or so

For example, the above is emotional and while 20 minutes before an object on the motorway hard shoulder is hit is probably an exaggeration, my work experience suggests spending time in a car on the hard shoulder of a motorway is a great way to get killed (having seen this several times).

On the other hand, the High Viz at GA airport trend in the UK can not be addressing any realistic risk. Particularly relative to the risk of being hit in the airport's parking lot.

On the flip side, working near a large aircraft at night with half a dozen powered pieces of equipment, turbine noise, and heavy objects being lifted in the air does seem to have very real risks of deafness, being struck by a vehicle or having ones foot crushed by cargo, a bag, or a wheel - Hence high viz, ear defenders, and toetectors (and maybe even hard hats if there are things being handled above people).

I doubt anyone can come up with an example of a real safety issue at a GA airport where high viz would have made a difference