Do you option robustness and safekeeping directive have never existed...?

Would you be happy to know that hundreds of thousands of peoples lives would have be lost, and millions of people would be grieving now, if that body of statute had never existed...?

I am not defending the ludicrous applications of the law... but surely employer should be responsible if they kill people for profit...?
Health and safety laws is a necessity piece of legislation,but other put into prospective and common sense. What New Labour did/has created(because they went mental within upgrading all H&S laws) is a very fragile society. Common sense have disappeared and so has the cherish adventure of this country. By adjectives means practise H&S laws but do not treat the family like they are pathetic minds lately because of a few are silly.e.g New Labour
There should be safety laws and vigour laws. Should also be traffic laws and other law. Laws is difference from chaos and civilizatioon.

If you check your early history books they refer to Civilization and point to the Hammurabi Code as man one of the first proof of laws, and also to New Testament and 10 commandments. Those are the difference between a civilized and uncivilized society. tenet is very important and to stay civilized associates have to support and generally fulfil the laws of the land. if they don't, next chaoos reigns. That is the problem in parts of mexico right now within that the drug lords are not obeying law and have grown so much that law officers are normally involved and can't count on laws to protect the populace. So in those areas it si not safe and sound. Examples would be in Juarez and somewhat in mexico City and some other cities. Hopefully here are other cities where the law is still mortal followed and the places are more safe.
You should look at photos of building works around 100 plus years ago to appreciate that H&S is not a discouraging thing for the working man. Many people died for instance building sky scrapers and contained by ship building, it doesn't take much research. Workers now savour quite a safe working environment that our grandfathers could individual dream about. But how far should we take it? Clearly it have now gone too far and we need to use adjectives sense or we will never take the risk to find new ways to craft things or build things. To make a school kid wear a bump helmet and goggles to play conkers is ridiculous to say the least. Yes we still obligation to show wise 'duty of care', but for goodness sake at smallest let's be sensible and stop suing everybody for every little misdemeanour.
theres nothing wrong within having health and sanctuary rules. its the overzealous enforcement that has to stop
the maintenance man where on earth i work needed to get onto the flat roof of a ground floor building. instead of a normal stepladder he had to put on his steel toe capped boots, afterwards he had to fix a cage to the forklift. beside an escort he drove the forklift to the low roof. he got in the enclose and hooked his safety harness on.. another forklift driver hoisted him up maintenance man unhooked himself and stepped onto the roof. he hammer four nails into the loose foofing felt later got back contained by his cage for the return journey . this assignment took over 2 hours when a quick trip up a ladder would hold got the job done contained by 10 mins. i forgot to mention, he had to wear safety goggles while using the tack hammer
For a start, hundreds and thousands of people would not hold died without h&s laws.
There would hold been a few but certainly not thousands.

Employers don't put to death people. People who do not understand risks or do not pinch reasonable care eradicate themselves.

For instance, many thousands of people enjoy climbed ladders to clean window or change lightbulbs over the years without have to go on a "ladder climbing" course. guess what, 99.99999% did so lacking killing themselves.
So why bring in law saying people cannot climb ladder without a course? Unnecessary and stupid.

Health and safety is central - always has be, but then so is personal responsibility.
The problem with abundantly of the ridiculous rules is that it takes the personal responsibility away and makes someone else to blame for everything.

Bottom strip, if I do something stupid or risky and injure myself it is MY fault, not because my employer has not sent me on a course or because in attendance is not a rule about it.
You can not be sacked (in UK) for asserting your compliance to H+S laws. So, if a boss tell me to pick up that shovel and get digging - and I see a clear danger - when he see a clear profit, then I am protected by law.
No; for the most slice Health and Safety laws are a good entry. However as with many things Health and Safety have gone too far.

Related Questions: