Safety officer

[Tanker79]

Bro Welly,

The world we live in is not practicle most of the time. The client and main-con will always demand 100% safety which at times are not practicable given the constraints at site. We were taught to be, like wat you say, be reasonably preacticable. So demands coming from safety personnels demanding 100% safe while working ... really pissed me off. It goes to show the quality of safety personnel being churned out.

Anyway it's nice to know a reasonably practicable guy like you.

 

Bro FMC, I just started the course and far from finishing.

 

Before you argue or convey your point to your main con or your client. Read up and understand the term of "reasonably practicable". To break or even to deviate from any rules, you must know and understand the rules by hard first.

[Tanker79]

Bro Welly,

The world we live in is not practicle most of the time. The client and main-con will always demand 100% safety which at times are not practicable given the constraints at site. We were taught to be, like wat you say, be reasonably preacticable. So demands coming from safety personnels demanding 100% safe while working ... really pissed me off. It goes to show the quality of safety personnel being churned out.

Anyway it's nice to know a reasonably practicable guy like you.

 

Bro FMC, I just started the course and far from finishing.

 

Before you argue or convey your point to your main con or your client. Read up and understand the term of "reasonably practicable". To break or even to deviate from any rules, you must know and understand the rules by hard first.

[Tanker79]

Hi All,

 

I think to be 100% Safe in a site is practicable but not reasonable. I can be done, but the amount of time effort and $ spend to ensure 100% Safe in all works may be unreasonable.

 

e.g No amount of engineering work can prevent flood in spore - this statement is wrong. It's practicable, it can be done, engineers would not agree with this statement. Just that it might not be very reasonable to do it, e.g build gigantic underground drains, idling most of the time etc. Cheers.

 

Taking flooding on a site area as an example: At times, we could plan ahead especially for normal heavy rain but if the rain fall volume is like once every 20~30 yrs or any record high volume of rain, we could not plan for it. However, as a professional, we still need to plan for mitigation measures.

 

For example, my site could provide sufficient pumps at 4 collection point to pump out the water during heavy rain. But if the rain is disastrous and our pumps could not cater to the volume of the flood, all staffs should evacuate the site at "blah blah blah" water level. The pump attendants will keep the pump running but they will have to be provided with life jackets and they should be trained on how to put on. Life buoy will also be easily accessible at designated locations that are prominent if the a need to use one arise. If the flood reached alert level, all personnel including the pump attendant will evacuate and gather at the assembly area which is situated on a higher ground.

 

A lot of safety guys misinterpret the term reasonably practicable.....in actual fact this term protects the legislator instead of the common safety professional. For safety professional to prove "reasonably practicable" is not an easy task. Therefore I warn, know the rule before you break the rule.

[Tanker79]

Hi All,

 

I think to be 100% Safe in a site is practicable but not reasonable. I can be done, but the amount of time effort and $ spend to ensure 100% Safe in all works may be unreasonable.

 

e.g No amount of engineering work can prevent flood in spore - this statement is wrong. It's practicable, it can be done, engineers would not agree with this statement. Just that it might not be very reasonable to do it, e.g build gigantic underground drains, idling most of the time etc. Cheers.

 

Taking flooding on a site area as an example: At times, we could plan ahead especially for normal heavy rain but if the rain fall volume is like once every 20~30 yrs or any record high volume of rain, we could not plan for it. However, as a professional, we still need to plan for mitigation measures.

 

For example, my site could provide sufficient pumps at 4 collection point to pump out the water during heavy rain. But if the rain is disastrous and our pumps could not cater to the volume of the flood, all staffs should evacuate the site at "blah blah blah" water level. The pump attendants will keep the pump running but they will have to be provided with life jackets and they should be trained on how to put on. Life buoy will also be easily accessible at designated locations that are prominent if the a need to use one arise. If the flood reached alert level, all personnel including the pump attendant will evacuate and gather at the assembly area which is situated on a higher ground.

 

A lot of safety guys misinterpret the term reasonably practicable.....in actual fact this term protects the legislator instead of the common safety professional. For safety professional to prove "reasonably practicable" is not an easy task. Therefore I warn, know the rule before you break the rule.

[Guest aircraft]

I would say the rule is very simple when you have the basic concept. But knowing and complying is 2 different matter.

 

With the current technology, it is very easy to determine whether is it practicable. It's the reasonable that we have trouble with, in terms of compliance or justification when things go wrong.

[Tanker79]

I would say the rule is very simple when you have the basic concept. But knowing and complying is 2 different matter.

 

With the current technology, it is very easy to determine whether is it practicable. It's the reasonable that we have trouble with, in terms of compliance or justification when things go wrong.

 

Therefore, we have to ensure both criteria are met when trying to justify infront of the legislator or the court. It could be subjective or very biased towards the judge's perception and view of the case.

 

However, from experience I can say. If your side had a least done their very best in trying to prevent accident and accident still happens, it might still be fined or punish but less severe. Most of the time contractors that is fined heavily are not because they didn't do any reasonably practicable measures to prevent accidents.....they generally do "nothing" to prevent accidents.

[Guest aircraft]

Therefore, we have to ensure both criteria are met when trying to justify infront of the legislator or the court. It could be subjective or very biased towards the judge's perception and view of the case.

 

However, from experience I can say. If your side had a least done their very best in trying to prevent accident and accident still happens, it might still be fined or punish but less severe. Most of the time contractors that is fined heavily are not because they didn't do any reasonably practicable measures to prevent accidents.....they generally do "nothing" to prevent accidents.

 

 

Normally the judge will use previous similar cases to determine the outcome, this is the basis of their judgment.

[MSDS]

Bro Welly,

The world we live in is not practicle most of the time. The client and main-con will always demand 100% safety which at times are not practicable given the constraints at site. We were taught to be, like wat you say, be reasonably preacticable. So demands coming from safety personnels demanding 100% safe while working ... really pissed me off. It goes to show the quality of safety personnel being churned out.

Anyway it's nice to know a reasonably practicable guy like you.

 

Bro FMC, I just started the course and far from finishing.

 

Hi shchan03, I fully understand how u feel when you concluded ur statement... try talking to them before keeping everything to urself... if that MainCon safety of urs used to be a SubCon he shd be able to understand ur problem and render some help... Many at times the maincon safety can't see the facts and figures becos they are not expose to those data before for their entire career... Some have not even apply for EMA license nor engage hazardous material contractor to dispose waste for their project... they don't even know their own SMS leave alone CPs and regulations... but it's always good to have a friend then foe... becos most of the time it's more to who u know and not what u know... that's why they are there in the first place... As a subcon safety u are expose to everything from renting cranes to writing RA and SWP... Trust me, with patience and perseverance u will emerge to become a strong player ... I have walked this path... 4 years of subcon safety hardship is all worth while... I can understand the pressure my sub are facing and could tell why certain problem arise. Now I can say proudly that I guided my subcon well and I'm not the kind of demanding "as quoted by u unpractical" client.

[MSDS]

Suddenly I felt being talkative...

 

The clause shchan03 reasonably practicable mentioned here means,

 

Let me quote a real life example...

 

there's this once I have 30 drums of 200 liters each lube oil for equipment in the warehouse... the maincon wsho came rounding with the owner safety rep (can tell the young chap is a process team and kanna arrow to take some course and became safety for the company). The maincon wsho trying to impress the owner and said," U have all these chemicals storage here and no containment for spillage, I want ur company to built a chemical bund wall for these chemicals." I said, " Sure, what volume do u want it to be?" He said, " the total amount of these chemicals and plus 20%, this is the law requirement." I said, " please issue a FIN and I'll instruct my engineer to prepare the quotation for ur approval." He shock and said, " This is ur responsibility to ensure the chemicals are to be contained in the case of spillage!" I said, "The warehouse is urs, the chemicals belongs to the owner and we only install equipment but preservation of equipment using these chemicals are additional work, isn't erecting the bund wall additional which we could claim also? The bund wall need special grouting material and to built it, it shd cost nothing lesser than 150k but u could claim from the owner too since it belongs to them (the young owner chap eye widen)." He said, "Nvm, u couldn't make this decision at ur level of position in the company, I'll bring this up in the meeting and talk to ur management personally." I said, " Thanks for being so understanding, Sir."

 

As expected, the chemicals have no bund wall until the day I demobilized from the project and neither this issue was ever brought up in the meeting...

 

What everybody here is saying about "reasonably practicable" shd means

 

A worker fall from height and died... investigation shows that,

- Scaffold have be erected as per safety working condition

- All signage to remind workers to put on harness available

- Good secure anchorage point provided

- worker attended training

- hazards have been brief to worker before start of job

- Full time SV supervision available

Yet the worker want to sneak behind the SV and cross from platform to another without using the proper access and fall to his death... The company have taken all reasonably practical measures to prevent workers from falling and to his (director/project manager) best knowledge have did all that he can...

 

What I feel is that we are talking about totally 2 different things here...

[FMC]

Great sharing with your life experience.

[MSDS]

Thks... but everyone here will or have encountered these situation before... and just like everyone else, I have made really stupid mistakes before... LOL

 

I have been reading this thread for sometime and I was thinking of why not we broaden our network right now, right here...

 

U know, other than asking for job thru this channel we can always setup a help render center

 

Example

 

1) you are from Civil side and need a sample of SWP and RA of welding work, post for help here with ur email...

2) you over heard about a project coming up in thailand and you are interested but no contacts, post here maybe some could help

3) you need some CPs for your school or work, post here thou it is copyrights, I'll will send it to you by email... FREE

4) you saw your crawler crane balancer slanted 1 side and the supplier assured you it normal and u are not sure, post here I'm sure other or me could help

5) you have really lousy management and u can't stand it anymore... POST IT HERE so we can keep a look out on jobs for u and most importantly, our circles of friend can AVOID THIS COMPANY and they are left with no choice to either brush up their standard or employ a sub standard safety...

[welly]

Bro Welly,

The world we live in is not practicle most of the time. The client and main-con will always demand 100% safety which at times are not practicable given the constraints at site. We were taught to be, like wat you say, be reasonably preacticable. So demands coming from safety personnels demanding 100% safe while working ... really pissed me off. It goes to show the quality of safety personnel being churned out.

Anyway it's nice to know a reasonably practicable guy like you.

 

Bro FMC, I just started the course and far from finishing.

 

that's y i said REASONABLY PRACTICABLE.hope u knw what that means.n that term means logical yet safe.dun necessarily have to go by the book.different situations demand different solutions.

[welly]

Suddenly I felt being talkative...

 

The clause shchan03 reasonably practicable mentioned here means,

 

Let me quote a real life example...

 

there's this once I have 30 drums of 200 liters each lube oil for equipment in the warehouse... the maincon wsho came rounding with the owner safety rep (can tell the young chap is a process team and kanna arrow to take some course and became safety for the company). The maincon wsho trying to impress the owner and said," U have all these chemicals storage here and no containment for spillage, I want ur company to built a chemical bund wall for these chemicals." I said, " Sure, what volume do u want it to be?" He said, " the total amount of these chemicals and plus 20%, this is the law requirement." I said, " please issue a FIN and I'll instruct my engineer to prepare the quotation for ur approval." He shock and said, " This is ur responsibility to ensure the chemicals are to be contained in the case of spillage!" I said, "The warehouse is urs, the chemicals belongs to the owner and we only install equipment but preservation of equipment using these chemicals are additional work, isn't erecting the bund wall additional which we could claim also? The bund wall need special grouting material and to built it, it shd cost nothing lesser than 150k but u could claim from the owner too since it belongs to them (the young owner chap eye widen)." He said, "Nvm, u couldn't make this decision at ur level of position in the company, I'll bring this up in the meeting and talk to ur management personally." I said, " Thanks for being so understanding, Sir."

 

As expected, the chemicals have no bund wall until the day I demobilized from the project and neither this issue was ever brought up in the meeting...

 

What everybody here is saying about "reasonably practicable" shd means

 

A worker fall from height and died... investigation shows that,

- Scaffold have be erected as per safety working condition

- All signage to remind workers to put on harness available

- Good secure anchorage point provided

- worker attended training

- hazards have been brief to worker before start of job

- Full time SV supervision available

Yet the worker want to sneak behind the SV and cross from platform to another without using the proper access and fall to his death... The company have taken all reasonably practical measures to prevent workers from falling and to his (director/project manager) best knowledge have did all that he can...

 

What I feel is that we are talking about totally 2 different things here...

 

wonderful analogy..really can be frustrating at times dealing with such ppl

[MSDS]

that's y i said REASONABLY PRACTICABLE.hope u knw what that means.n that term means logical yet safe.dun necessarily have to go by the book.different situations demand different solutions.

 

Yes! hit the jackpot... We cannot apply the same solution into different situation and piss everybody off... Balance is the key!

[welly]

Yes! hit the jackpot... We cannot apply the same solution into different situation and piss everybody off... Balance is the key!

 

great minds think alike...

[MSDS]

Whao bro... I think u have greater mind... ur signature... "Do not trouble trouble unless trouble troubles you" send me scratching my head for few seconds before understanding the phrase... LOL

[welly]

Whao bro... I think u have greater mind... ur signature... "Do not trouble trouble unless trouble troubles you" send me scratching my head for few seconds before understanding the phrase... LOL

 

bigger LOL!!!

[Guest aircraft]

Hi All,

 

Does anyone knows that RSO is a professional certification or qualification ? Thanks.

[SanMarino]

Whatever it is a professional certification or qualification, it's still a piece of professional qualification. In my CV, i put it as professional qualification. Professional certification sounds abit odd.

 

but i think both are the same. you have the achievement.tt explains it.

 

Hi All,

 

Does anyone knows that RSO is a professional certification or qualification ? Thanks.

[Guest aircraft]

Whatever it is a professional certification or qualification, it's still a piece of professional qualification. In my CV, i put it as professional qualification. Professional certification sounds abit odd.

 

but i think both are the same. you have the achievement.tt explains it.

 

 

Thanks bro. Think I'll put as Professional certification, reason being the SDWSH is a qualification (from MOM flow chart) whereas RSO have certificate of registration, so I deduce is certification.

[FMC]

salute to all safety officer...

[SanMarino]

anyone knows or studying the human factor for the safety program in unisim? compared to the newcastle safety degree, which one is better?

 

please advise?im in a dilemma of what to take..

 

thanks alot..

[skazuz]

As promised..... to prevent any unhappiness....

 

cheers

skazuz

Edited February 15, 2011 by skazuz

[cstay66]

he O u $$ aarh?

 

Guys,

 

I need some help.

 

Any of u heard of this guy Mark chow. he claims he a safety manager for shimizu for SPT project in JI. and also a lead safety officer in sang yong during the MBS project, he is located at Tower 1 MBS during the project.

 

anyone has any info on him?

 

thanks

 

cheers

skazuz

[welly]

anyone knows or studying the human factor for the safety program in unisim? compared to the newcastle safety degree, which one is better?

 

please advise?im in a dilemma of what to take..

 

thanks alot..

 

go for the degree in EOHS from uni of newcastle as thats the more relevant if ur looking to go for higher positions in manufacturing coys, biotech firms, hospitals etc..im going for the EOHS degree too..