Official Health/Safety response on clearing pavements

[Nero]

The issue of liability if somebody were to slip on a pavement that you have cleared is nothing to do with Health and Safety Law. Your newspaper reviewer (on 5 Live) has either misunderstood or misquoted the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health.

For many decades it has been a matter of common law negligence, established by the courts, that snow on the ground is a natural peril whereas a badly cleared pavement is the fault of the person who failed to clear it properly - hence they can be sued for negligence.

It is very difficult to clear snow effectively unless you have adequate salt and equipment. A badly cleared pavement is more slippery than one with snow on it. Therefore the advice not to attempt to clear it is both sensible and practical as well as being a matter of avoiding liability.

It is neither funny nor clever to keep criticising H&S which prevents many workplace accidents and deaths - this country is one of the very safest in the world.

Regards,

William Jackson Senior Health and Safety Consultant Chartered Member of The Institution of Occupational Safety and Health

[brum]

It appears that the view of this person is not to clear paths unless you have the right tools for the job. Very sensible however there is also the question over personal responsibility by the person who chooses to walk on the path. If the path wasn't cleared properly but the person still chose to walk on it and then slipped and fell, then surely liability would also fall upon the individual?

I tend to agree that health & safety sometimes is unfairly targetted however there are more issues with how H&S is abused by those who use it as an excuse to introduce a change for other reasons that aren't so compelling. Schools being closed due to snow could be seen as an example of this in some circumstances. As is often the case, it's not the legislation itself that is wrong, it's how it is interpretted and wrongly used that is the real problem here.

[ianr]

I don't know where you've copied the opinion from, and there's nothing I want to say against it, but it's a personal response isn't it, rather than an 'official' one.

[woofmarkthedog]

Look

Vanessa Feltz debunked this myth once and for all the otherday & as we all know she is the award winning.......

"BBC Speech Broadcaster of the year"

So move on now, nothing to see

W**F

[Nero]

It isn't a personal point of view. This man was speaking in an official capacity.

[ianr]

Nero Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It isn't a personal point of view. This man was

> speaking in an official capacity.

Which is what? Why not be explicit?

[ruffers]

Doesn't this bit at the bottom of the quote kinda answer that question?

"William Jackson Senior Health and Safety Consultant Chartered Member of The Institution of Occupational Safety and Health"

[ianr]

No, not at all.