Ridiculous 'elf and safety excuses exposed by myth buster watchdog

Ten of the most ridiculous health and safety excuses of 2012 were exposed by a regulator recently. Bans on yo-yos in playgrounds, knives in kitchens and kettles in offices have all been wrongly blamed on workplace safety laws this year. The mis-uses of health and safety were spotted by the Health and Safety Executive's Myth Busters Challenge Panel, which was set up in earlier this year to challenge a stream of silly decisions wrongly blamed on health and safety. The panel has now responded to its hundredth case - helping the public to challenge unreasonable bans or restrictions and force people to honestly explain the real reason behind their decisions. Analysis of the cases dealt with so far shows that 38 were down to jobsworths making an excuse for an unpopular decision or simple poor customer service. Almost a quarter of the cases were found to involve over-interpretation of legitimate guidelines, leading to daft decisions being made - probably through fear of being sued. One sixth of all cases came from people who had been given advice that confused health and safety with other regulations or regulators. A similar amount was down to communication failures when explaining the reasons for a decision.

Employment minister, Mark Hoban, said: "It's so frustrating when people are stopped from doing perfectly sensible things on the false pretence of health and safety. The panel has now exploded 100 myths and is helping ordinary people fight back against the jobsworths."

Judith Hackitt, Chair of HSE and the Myth Busters panel, said: "It's really important that we are all ready to challenge stupid decisions made in the name of health and safety, and that we as the regulator give the public the confidence to do so. Not only do the jobsworths who make these ridiculous edicts waste time and money, and interfere needlessly with harmless activities, they also undermine our efforts to reduce the number of people made ill, injured or killed by their work. There's a lot myths about what health and safety requires, and a good deal of confusion. Getting the focus back on managing real risks in a sensible and proportionate way is a gift we could all enjoy."

If any of our readers has been on the end of a bogus health and safety decision, why not put it to the Panel here and get the confidence to challenge those using nonsense health and safety excuses rather than tell the truth behind unpopular decisions http://www.hse.gov.uk/contact/myth-busting.htm^[1]

Top 10 cases

1. Driver refused to allow customer on bus with hot drink because of health and safety

A bus driver refused to let a passenger on with a cup of hot coffee on "health and safety" grounds. Of course there is no occupational health and safety legislation stopping people with hot drinks onto a bus, and while the company is free to determine its own policies (maybe spillage or littering in this case), they should not then cop out and blame it on health and safety.

2. Bar refused to let customer carry tray of drinks because they had not been 'health and safety trained'

Tim Bannister, age35, from Hampshire thought the bartender of a local restaurant was having a laugh when he was told he couldn't have a tray to carry drinks from the bar to his table in a local pub. It turned out that the bar had brought in this daft rule as some bright spark thought only people with specialist training could possible grapple with the rigours of balancing a tray of drinks!

Occupation technical advisor, Tim told the Panel about this ridiculous rule and it agreed it was bizarre to suggest special training was needed for something the customer is likely to do regularly in their own home.

Speaking later, Tim said: "It's was embarrassing but also laughable to be told I wasn't to be trusted with a tray! I have a responsible job and don't appreciate being told I can't handle a tray without training. Of course I knew this was nothing to do with real health and safety which is why I approached the Panel. It seems to me these stupid decisions cause harm to the reputation of real health and safety which is about saving lives of people at work."

3. Charity shop has said that they cannot sell knitting needles for health and safety reasons

Maggie Croall, 57, from Homfirth was stunned when she went to her local charity shop to buy some knitting needles and was told the shop did not sell them for health and safety reasons! But the trained paediatric nurse smelled a rat and approached Myth Busters who confirmed no health and safety regulations apply to the sale of knitting needles and the panel saw no legitimate health and safety reason which could justify this decision. It urged the charity to reconsider its decision and at least come clean on the real reason for its decision.

Maggie said: "I know often shop assistants just fob you of with the health and safety excuse for everything, often they answer from the top of their heads without even thinking. Once the Myth Busters told me I was correct to doubt the reason I went back to the shop and passed the Myth Busters thoughts on. We shall see if they change their policy"

4. Public hall removed knives from kitchen on the grounds of health and safety

John Bull, 66, from Cambridgeshire knew a barmy decision when he spotted one when he discovered the local public hall did not allow knives in their kitchen! Most people agree that a knife is an essential kitchen tool, but someone at the hall obviously thought he knew better. John brought this daft decision to the attention of the Myth Busters who ruled that a knife ban in a kitchen was neither sensible nor proportionate, and certainly no laws existed banning them from their natural home!

John said: "I knew straight away it was a crackers decision, but I took it to the challenge panel who agreed with me. We see so many daft decisions being made in the name of health and safety I think more people should question these ridiculous decisions rather than just accepting them. I don't think people know what real health and safety is these days, with so many people hiding behind the phrase when these decisions are for other reasons entirely. If you are the victim of a crazy decision ask the challenge panel for their opinion. If more of us did this it would force decision makers think more carefully before making ridiculous rules".

5. Shop refused to put coffee in customer's own reusable cup on the grounds of health and safety

A coffee shop refused to fill a customer's own reusable cup with coffee, citing health and safety. The MBCP ruled there is no health and safety regulation preventing the use of reusable cups and advised the customer to ask the shop to explain the real reasons why his reusable cup remains empty.

6. Airline passenger told boiled sweets were no longer provided on the grounds of health and safety

Like most people Sandra Scott, 46, from Kingston finds sucking on a boiled sweet when flying relieves the air pressure in her ears during take-off. So she was unimpressed on one airline when she requested a sweet from a member of the cabin crew only to be told that boiled sweets were no longer provided on the grounds of health and safety because children could choke on them! The fact Sandra, is an adult didn't seem to matter and anyway, she knew the health and safety excuse was a load of nonsense. HSE's MBCP sided with Sandra and found the issue does not relate to health and safety legislation and even the Civil Aviation Authority do not prevent boiled sweets being given out on flights, so only the airline knows why it embarked on this flight of fancy.

Company director, Sandra said: "I couldn't believe what I was hearing when the cabin crew refused me a sweet. I thought the air pressure was playing tricks with my ears! I knew there was no way this was a decision based on any health and safety law. It may just be the airline just wanted to save money on sweets, but I went to the Panel to expose this nonsense and they agreed wholeheartedly with me. I'd now like the airline to tell me the real reason for this mean minded ban."

7. Hotel chain does not provide floor towels due to 'Health and Safety'

A hotel chain does not provide floor towels for stepping out of the bath/shower due to 'Health and Safety' as people "could slip over".

Of course there is no health and safety regulation which prevents hotels from providing bath mats or towels in bathrooms says the Panel. It would be much better if the hotel chain explained the real reasons for their decision, rather than pretending it is motivated by concerns about health and safety.

8. Fish & chip shop told customer he could not have 'batter scraps' for health and safety reasons

Aquatics development manager and part time lifeguard, Geoff Wade, originally from Whitley Bay, popped into a fish and chip shop after work in Dagenham where he now works for his traditional Friday night fish and chips. As is tradition in the North East, he asked for some extra fish batter scraps to complement his meal.

However, Geoff, 29, was left disappointed and bemused when the server denied him the tasty morsels for health and safety reasons. An unimpressed Geoff went straight to the Myth Busters to complain of this decision and the Panel agreed this was simply another case of health and safety being used as a casual excuse. They told Geoff that if the fish and chip shop owner has decided not to sell the batter scraps for whatever reason, then that was up to them, but health and safety was a lazy excuse.

Geoff said: "I've been served batter scraps from chip shops in the North all my life, but in Dagenham, despite the server sieving out fresh scraps from the same fryer the fish came out of, they wouldn't serve me them because of 'health and safety reasons', which is obviously ridiculous!"

Geoff, who will be taking part in the North Sea Volunteer Lifeguards' Boxing Day Swim (an annual event that not been cancelled due to bogus health and safety concerns), added "After jumping in the North Sea for the fish to nibble on my frozen bits, it’s comforting to know at Whitley Bay's sea front chippies I'll be able to nibble some fried bits without some jobsworth using non-existent health and safety rules!"

9. School bans yo-yos on health and safety grounds

A school has banned the use of yo-yos on health and safety grounds.

In exactly the same way as the now legendary conker myth, there is no health and safety law which bans yo-yos from schools. Like many toys, there will always be a risk of yo-yos causing minor injuries; it seems a bit over the top to ban them from the school though.

10 Office workers advised that kettles and microwaves were not allowed due to health and safety requirements

Office workers were advised that kettles and microwaves are not allowed due to health and safety requirements and that insurance would be needed at a cost to the employer. There is no health and safety law prohibiting the use of kettles and microwaves in the office. The office workers have been misinformed. It would be much better if their employer explained their real concerns about having this equipment in the office.

MOD ELC Deadline 31st March 2013

If you are in the forces or and are planning to leave the service (Service Leaver) in the next couple of years you are probably eligible for Enhanced Learning Credits (ELC)

The ELC scheme provides financial support in the form or a single up-front payment of £2000 per annum (1st April to 31st March- depending on length of service) in each of a maximum of three separate financial years. The Scheme is based on the principle that individuals will make a personal contribution towards the cost of their learning. The ELC contribution may be up to 80% of the gross course value. ELC funding is available only for courses that result in a nationally recognised qualification at level 3 or above.

If you have not yet used your ELC allowance for 2012/13 then you need to book and attend a course before the 31st March 2013 deadline, so as not to delay the start of your training and resettlement into civilian life. If you have already used your allowances for 2012/13 then now is a good time to take stock of what other courses will help you to secure employment and help with your career development for the 2013/14 year. You can book now and start courses from 1st April 2013. Take a look at our website www.mod.crsrisk.com or call Ros Stacey on 01283 509175 for more help and advice on our special reduced rate packages which will give you a good career start in civilian life.

Transocean agrees to pay $1.4B Deepwater Horizon Macondo settlement re BP spill

Zug, Switzerland, headquartered Transocean Ltd. (NYSE: RIG) (SIX: RIGN) reports that it has reached an agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice to resolve certain outstanding civil and potential criminal claims against the company arising from the April 20, 2010, accident involving the Deepwater Horizon in the Gulf of Mexico.  As might be expected, Transocean and the Department of Justice have put out slightly different reports on the agreement.

As part of this resolution, says Transocean, "a Transocean subsidiary has agreed to plead guilty to one misdemeanor violation of the Clean Water Act (CWA) for negligent discharge of oil into the Gulf of Mexico and pay $1.4 billion in fines, recoveries and penalties, excluding interest. This resolution will result in the Department of Justice concluding its criminal investigation of Transocean and settling its claims for civil penalties against the company relating to the spill from BP's Macondo well. The company intends to satisfy its payment obligations over a period of five years, using cash on hand and cash flow from operations. At September 30, 2012, Transocean had accrued an estimated loss contingency of $1.5 billion associated with claims made by the Department of Justice.  These important agreements, which the company believes to be in the best interest of its shareholders and employees, remove much of the uncertainty associated with the accident," continues Transocean. "This is a positive step forward, but it is also a time to reflect on the 11 men who lost their lives aboard the Deepwater Horizon. Their families continue to be in the thoughts and prayers of all of us at Transocean."

Terms of the Agreement

A Transocean subsidiary has agreed to plead guilty to a single misdemeanor violation of the CWA for negligent discharge of oil into the Gulf of Mexico. This violation pertains to well monitoring in connection with specific operations during the temporary abandonment procedure on April 20, 2010. Pursuant to the agreement, Transocean will pay a fine in the amount of $100 million within 60 days of this agreement receiving U.S. federal court approval. The Transocean subsidiary will also be subject to a statutory-maximum term of five years of probation.

Additionally, Transocean will pay $150 million to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) over a five-year period, and $150 million to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF) over a three-year period. The funds paid to the NAS will be for the purposes of oil spill prevention and response in the Gulf of Mexico; funds paid to the NFWF will be directed to natural resource restoration projects and coastal habitat restoration, including restoration of the barrier islands off the coast of Louisiana and diversion projects on the Mississippi and Atchafalaya Rivers.

To address the government’s pending civil claims, Transocean has agreed to pay $1 billion in CWA civil penalties over a period of three years. Additionally, the company has agreed to implement certain measures to prevent a recurrence of an uncontrolled discharge of hydrocarbons. Transocean has agreed to consult with the United States in preparing a performance plan for these improvement measures, which must be submitted for the government’s approval within 120 days of this agreement taking effect.

Any potential claims associated with the Natural Resources Damage Assessment (NRDA) process are excluded from the agreement with the Department of Justice. However, the district court previously held that Transocean is not liable under the Oil Pollution Act for damages caused by subsurface discharge from the Macondo well. Assuming that this ruling is upheld on appeal, Transocean's NRDA liability would be limited to any such damages arising from the above-surface discharge.

The Department of Justice has agreed that it will not pursue further prosecution of Transocean Ltd. and certain of its subsidiaries for any conduct regarding any matters under investigation by the Deepwater Horizon Task Force relating to or arising out of the Macondo well blowout, explosion, spill or response. Transocean has agreed to continue to operate with the Deepwater Horizon Task Force in any ongoing investigation related to or arising from the accident. The civil and criminal agreements are subject to court approval and, in the case of the civil agreement, public notice and comment.

Timing of Payments

Pursuant to the agreements, Transocean will pay fines, penalties and recoveries totaling $1.4 billion over a five-year period according to the following schedule:

2013 - payments totaling $560 million

2014 - payments totaling $460 million

2015 - payments totaling $260 million

2016 - payments totaling $60 million

2017 - payments totaling $60 million

In addition, civil penalties will bear interest from the date that the consent decree is lodged with the court. Neither settlement payments nor accrued interest are deductible for tax purposes.

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT STATEMENT

The Department of Justice says in its statement that Transocean Deepwater Inc. has agreed to plead guilty to violating the Clean Water Act (CWA) and to pay a total of $1.4 billion in civil and criminal fines and penalties, for its conduct in relation to the Deepwater Horizon disaster. The criminal information and a proposed partial civil consent decree to resolve the U.S. government's civil penalty claims against Transocean Deepwater Inc. and related entities were filed today in U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of Louisiana.

Transocean Deepwater Inc. has signed a cooperation and guilty plea agreement with the government, also filed today, admitting its criminal conduct. As part of the plea agreement, Transocean Deepwater Inc. has agreed, subject to the court's approval, to pay $400 million in criminal fines and penalties and to continue its on-going cooperation in the government's criminal investigation. In addition, pursuant to the terms of a proposed partial civil consent decree also lodged with the court today, Transocean Ocean Holdings LLC, Transocean Offshore Deepwater Drilling Inc., Transocean Deepwater Inc. and Triton Asset Leasing GMBH have agreed to pay an additional $1 billion to resolve federal Clean Water Act civil penalty claims for the massive, three-month-long oil spill at the Macondo Well and the Transocean drilling rig Deepwater Horizon. Under the civil settlement, the Transocean defendants also must implement court-enforceable measures to improve the operational safety and emergency response capabilities at all their drilling rigs working in waters of the United States.

"This resolution of criminal allegations and civil claims against Transocean brings us one significant step closer to justice for the human, environmental and economic devastation wrought by the Deepwater Horizon disaster," said Attorney General Eric Holder. "This agreement holds Transocean criminally accountable for its conduct and provides nearly a billion dollars in criminal and civil penalties for the benefit of the Gulf states. I am particularly grateful today to the many Justice Department personnel and federal investigative agency partners for the hard work that led to today's resolution and their continuing pursuit of justice for the people of the Gulf. Today’s announced settlement will aid the Gulf region's recovery from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill and require Transocean to take important steps that will help guard against such incidents happening in the future," said Acting Associate Attorney General Tony West. "This resolution is the culmination of the tremendous efforts of many attorneys and staff in the Justice Department’s Criminal, Civil and Environment and Natural Resources Divisions – dedicated public servants whose hard work continues on behalf of the American people."

"Transocean’s rig crew accepted the direction of BP well site leaders to proceed in the face of clear danger signs — at a tragic cost to many of them," said Lanny A. Breuer, Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department’s Criminal Division. "Transocean’s agreement to plead guilty to a federal crime, and to pay a total of $1.4 billion in criminal and civil penalties, appropriately reflects its role in the Deepwater Horizon disaster."

"The development and exploration of a domestic source of energy is vitally important, and it can and must be done in a responsible and sound manner. This unprecedented settlement under the Clean Water Act demonstrates that companies will be held fully accountable for their conduct and share responsibility for compliance with the laws that protect the public and the environment from harm," said Ignacia S. Moreno, Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division. "This settlement will provide immediate relief and benefits to the people of the five Gulf states, and requires Transocean to implement significant safety measures, as well as stringent auditing and monitoring to reduce the risk of any future disasters."

"Today’s settlement and plea agreement is an important step toward holding Transocean and those responsible for the Deepwater Horizon disaster accountable," said Cynthia Giles, Assistant Administrator for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. "EPA will continue to work with DOJ and its federal partners to vigorously pursue the government's claims against all responsible parties and ensure that we are taking every possible step to restore and protect the Gulf Coast ecosystem."

According to court documents, on April 20, 2010, while stationed at the Macondo well site in the Gulf of Mexico, the Deepwater Horizon rig experienced an uncontrolled blowout and related explosions and fire, which resulted in the deaths of 11 rig workers and the largest oil spill in U.S. history. In agreeing to plead guilty, Transocean Deepwater Inc. has admitted that members of its crew onboard the Deepwater Horizon, acting at the direction of BP's "Well Site Leaders" or "company men," were negligent in failing fully to investigate clear indications that the Macondo well was not secure and that oil and gas were flowing into the well.

The criminal resolution is structured to directly benefit the Gulf region. Under the order presented to the court, $150 million of the $400 million criminal recovery is dedicated to acquiring, restoring, preserving and conserving – in consultation with appropriate state and other resource managers – the marine and coastal environments, ecosystems and bird and wildlife habitat in the Gulf of Mexico and bordering states harmed by the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. This portion of the criminal recovery will also be directed to significant barrier island restoration and/or river diversion off the coast of Louisiana to further benefit and improve coastal wetlands affected by the oil spill. An additional $150 million will be used to fund improved oil spill prevention and response efforts in the Gulf through research, development, education and training.

The civil settlement secures $1 billion in civil penalties for violations of the CWA, a record amount that significantly exceeds last year's $70 million civil penalty paid by MOEX Offshore 2007 LLC, a 10 per cent partner with BP in the Macondo well venture. The unprecedented $1 billion civil penalty is subject to the Resources and Ecosystems Sustainability, Tourist Opportunities and Revived Economies of the Gulf Coast States Act of 2012 (Restore Act), which provides that 80 per cent of the penalty will be to be used to fund projects in and for the Gulf states for the environmental and economic benefit of the region. This civil resolution reserves claims for natural resource damages and clean-up costs.

Under the civil settlement, the Transocean defendants must also observe various court-enforceable strictures in its drilling operations, aimed at reducing the chances of another blowout and discharge of oil and at improving emergency response capabilities. Examples of these requirements include certifications of maintenance and repair of blowout preventers before each new drilling job, consideration of process safety risks, and personnel training related to oil spills and responses to other emergencies. These measures apply to all rigs operated or owned by the Transocean defendants in all U.S. waters and will be in place for at least five years.

The guilty plea agreement and criminal charge announced today are part of the ongoing criminal investigation by the Deepwater Horizon Task Force into matters related to the April 2010 Gulf oil spill. The Deepwater Horizon Task Force, based in New Orleans, is supervised by Assistant Attorney General Breuer and led by Deputy Assistant Attorney General John D. Buretta, who serves as the director of the task force. The task force includes prosecutors from the Criminal Division and the Environment and Natural Resources Division of the Department of Justice; the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Louisiana, as well as other U.S. Attorneys' Offices; and investigating agents from the FBI, EPA, Department of the Interior, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of Law Enforcement, U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality.

The civil resolution announced today is part of the ongoing litigation against defendants BP Exploration and Production Inc., the Transocean defendants, and Anadarko Petroleum Corporation (among others) for civil penalties, injunctive relief, and a declaration of unlimited liability for removal costs and damages under the Oil Pollution Act. The civil enforcement effort is supervised by Assistant Attorney General Moreno for the Environment and Natural Resources Division and Deputy Assistant Attorney General Brian Hauck of the Civil Division. Numerous federal agencies have contributed immeasurably to these enforcement and settlement efforts, including the EPA, the U.S. Coast Guard, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Department of the Interior and the Department of Agriculture.

The criminal case against Transocean is being prosecuted by Deepwater Horizon Task Force Deputy Directors Derek A. Cohen and Avi Gesser, and task force prosecutors Richard R. Pickens II, Scott M. Cullen, Colin Black and Rohan Virginkar. Numerous Environment Division and Civil Division lawyers are pursuing the civil enforcement action, led by Steve O'Rourke and R. Michael Underhill.

The proposed civil settlement is subject to a public comment period and final court approval. Information on submitting comment will be available at www.justice.gov/enrd/Consent_Decrees.html.

http://marinelog.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3411:transocean-agrees-to-pay-14-billion-deepwater-horizon-settlement&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=195

'No room for complacency' on offshore safety says Oil and Gas UK in its first ever safety report

Oil and Gas UK has produced its first ever annual safety report. The industry body said its study showed there was no room for complacency, despite major improvements to offshore safety. It says that oil and gas is the third safest industry in the UK for non-fatal accidents. The report also said that incidents such as the gas release from Total's Elgin platform earlier this year were at an all-time low. The publication is set to become an annual feature, providing a detailed summary of the industry's safety performance, an overview of on-going safety-related projects, and a look ahead to the future.

Oil and Gas UK's director of health and safety, Robert Paterson, said that despite some major oil and gas leaks making the headlines in the last few years, the UK's record on safety remained good. He added: "It also dispels a few myths around safety performance. Despite being a major hazard industry, the oil and gas sector is outperforming many other UK sectors in terms of non-fatal injuries to workers, with only education and finance doing better." This year's report said that major and significant hydrocarbon releases into the environment had been at an all-time low over the last year.

Oil and Gas UK has been lobbying ministers, asking them to resist attempts by the European Commission to introduce new regulation of offshore oil and gas health and safety. Mr Paterson said: "The report serves to underline the fact that the UK has one of the most robust offshore health and safety regimes in the world. The reason it is strong is because we're not complacent and we're always looking for ways to improve or to make things safer."

However, the RMT Union which represents Oil and Gas workers in the North Sea, urged caution when interpreting the statistics in the report. Regional organiser Jake Molloy said: "It would be more appropriate to have some reflection on the lagging indicators, as it were, as well as the leading indicators. Especially when you put the statistics into context, Elgin was only counted as one release, but it was one of the largest gas releases we've ever had. He also warned the workforce may see the report as papering over the cracks.”

CRS is the provider of health, safety and environmental training to PetroSkills, the world’s largest provider of petroleum training. Our program of HSE training is run at public venues around the world as well as in-company bespoke programs.  It includes HSE courses externally certificated by IEMA, IOSH, City & Guilds, and NEBOSH.

http://www.petroskills.com/matrix_healthsafety.aspx

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-18795505