Guys, don't get complacent out there!!!
- Thread starter blsnelling
- Start date
Help Support Arborist Forum:
Aha! :msp_biggrin: Safety guy in the woods?
stihlkicken
ArboristSite Operative
"I wouldna done it like that" said the safety guy from the office. if there is one guy on the crew that is always in the way,has no clue whats really goin on, why does he always end up the safety guy?
Dan_in_WI
Master rocket surgeon
Some safety guys are okay. I've worked with a few who really knew what they were doing. If they've had a legitimate working background in the field they usually have enough experience and common sense to do a decent job.
Most of them though remind me of the old war movies where guys would run out onto the battlefield after the shooting stopped and bayonet the wounded.
In case anyone thinks I am 'posing': I'm not a logger. I am not a faller. I don't have the knowledge, skills, or experience that a number of guys on this site have.
Now, will any of you guys admit that you are not safety engineers?
Philbert
Now, will any of you guys admit that you are not safety engineers?
Philbert
Mastermind
Work Saw Specialist
I just work on saws. :msp_wink:
My crew leader would always say "Just remember I told you to wear your gear" whenever I started cutting without it...which was always.
Of course, we rappelled in, so no chance of anyone stopping by to write us up...
homelitejim
Full of Scrap
I am no safety engineer but I do have a healthy fear of death from above, keeps me aleart and keeps me aware of my limitations. Problem is if the man upstairs wants to send you a message you will not forget or call you home, either way there is no controlling act of God.
lmbrman
stumped
StihlKiwi
ArboristSite Guru
That happens 'cos the more time he spends filling out paperwork, the less time he spends doing something that could hurt himself or others
Relax, nobody is calling you a poser.
And I readily admit I'm not a safety engineer. In the context of logging safety, what exactly are safety engineers doing to make things safer for us knuckle draggers out there in the woods?
Other than nagging us about our dented hardhats and writing up accident reports that usually blame whoever got injured or killed for the entire mishap, what exactly are your peers doing for us?
I'm not bagging on you here. I'm honestly curious about this.
No offense was taken. Just setting up for the next response, which is this. Just as most guys will recognize that having a chainsaw does not make me a logger, having a copy of OSHA regulations does not make one a safety expert.
I am not a logging safety expert; I am a general workplace safety engineer who happened to get involved with chainsaws and storm cleanup activities, and had to learn about them, including the safety issues. Without a doubt there are safety professionals with USFS, timber companies, etc. with more specific experience in this area. In our state, we have one OSHA consultation guy who works full time in this area.
Safety is about 'Risk'. Nothing is 'Safe' or 'Unsafe' in a clear, one-side-of-a-black-line-or-the-other sense. I know that some people will use these terms in different ways.
Here's some more 'flame-bait': How is that some 'safety guy' can think that he/she knows more about 'safety' that the guy/gal who does that job every day? Here's an example. I don't ride motorcycles. But I can look at motorcycle incident reports and know that helmets are protective. In fact, when I was working with some traffic data, it got to the point where I could look at just a couple of boxes (seatbelt use, alcohol consumption, helmet use, etc.) and predict what the rest of the report said with 80% accuracy. It might not tell me exactly what caused that specific motorist or motorcyclist to lose control, but I could identify key components that dramatically affected the outcome. We focus on those things.
Note that I said 'incident reports', not 'accident reports'. We don't like the term 'accident'. While an event may not have been 'intentional', it might be completely predictable when viewed from a larger perspective.
Back to trees. When I see a report in the news about a fatality and it describes a guy in cut-off shorts, open toed shoes, a consumer chainsaw, crying relatives, and something that went 'wrong', we both know that the words, 'accident', 'unpredictable', 'unforeseen', 'act of God', etc., are inappropriate. The event and consequences are entirely foreseeable when viewed from the larger perspective.
Back to 'risk'. I will use my friend Gary's (not an A.S. member) definition of 'safety' (my underlines):
One guy may have a personal definition of what 'acceptable level' means to him. If he is a young guy with limited experience, his definition is probably different than someone who has seen some scary or nasty things. A company may have another definition. In fact, many companies have multiple definitions: the one that they write down and the one they enforce. So when edisto comments on a supervisor who only gives lip service to the written definition (at least that is how I read the post) instead of telling him, ' You wear your PPE or you don't work here', it is not a surprise.
Since there is so much variation on what is acceptable, employers, associations, insurance companies, government agencies, etc. come up with general rules, regulations, guidelines, etc. to frame this. Like the regulations that your line level safety guys and supervisors nag you to follow, even when they don't seem so important to some guys.
Philbert
Eccentric
Mister Wizard
This is a very valuable thread here. Somebody should make it a 'stickie'.
bucknfeller
Opportunistic Hooligan
Seems to me it's been stickied atleast twice before, for some reason it gets unstuck every time.
I think the glue they are using is water soluble... :msp_sneaky:
I think the glue they are using is water soluble... :msp_sneaky:
bucknfeller
Opportunistic Hooligan
I'm not a safety engineer, and I'm not a logger. In my experience, with construction jobs and such, if there is a person on the job most likely to be injured, it is usually the safety guy. He's usually easy to pick out, he'll be the one wondering around aimlessly, not doing anything constructive, and in the way more often than not.
roundhead
ArboristSite Operative
wow Brad...thanks for sharing this. very easy to overlook these things. Please get a helmet because we need your brains here on the site. Big help to all of us. Glad you are ok
Stewart
Stewart
homelitejim
Full of Scrap
I don't remember if it were this thread or another on his adventures in finding a good hard hat. I used to cut with gloves and a good pair of steel toed boots, after reading this when it came out you will not see me standing under a tree of any size with a saw and no hard hat on. I have several to choose from and keep one in every vehicle so I have no excuse.
R1!
ArboristSite Operative
You guys are brutal.
Safety first is the motto in almost every industry, Aircraft to BBQs to Erasers.
I know that you are using an example that everyone can understand, but I don't think it gets your point across, because one doesn't need to look at accident reports to come to the realization that helmets and seatbelts are protective, and that consuming alcohol before driving is a bad idea.
I think that the problem that experienced people have with safety guys is that they don't get anything out of them that they don't already know, and that they tell you what an acceptable risk is based on averages (out of necessity) that tend not to apply to any individual on the job site. Those averages find the middle ground between the guys that would hurt themselves with a rubber ball, and the guys that can do the impossible every day without ever posing a danger to themselves or others.
That's why your interpretation:
Is off the mark. Our crew leader knew that I could get a helipad cut as fast as 2 other guys, without pinching a bar, burning a saw, or running back to him asking what to do about a tree that was hung up. The part I left out was that there were other guys on the crew that he wouldn't let anywhere near a saw without all of their gear. All he was doing was showing that he had confidence that I could determine what acceptable risk was for myself.
In the specific instance that spawned this Velcro thread (as has been pointed out previously) not having a helmet was not the issue, and concluding that wearing a helmet is the solution is, in my view, more dangerous than deciding not to wear a helmet.
That said, companies are responsible for creating a safe work environment, and the only way to do that is to look at the data, which means that requirements have to be based on the nonexistent "Joe Average". It's hard to argue against erring on the side of safety. Incident reports can be a gold mine...I'd often help our helicopter engineer, and finding out from him, and the reports he let me read, what failures led to a crash was invaluable information in terms of maintaining the machine. In an ideal world, we could share those reports, and let individuals decide how to use the information they contained. Of course, in an ideal world, we wouldn't have lawyers.
