H+S Electrician lone working

[Jinx]

Hi chaps,

Can anyone help me with regards to a problem i'm having at work?

We currently run a 4 shift rota of night and day shifts
In the past if anyone was ill or had any holiday then Overtime was made
available for the other shifts to cover it.
Now the company has decided they dont need to cover it at all and that the
lone electrician is safe to cover the plant on his own day or night. There
are no on site electrical help at the weekends or on nights other than a
phone call. we are argueing this issue but they are very firm with regards
to it.

Can anyone advise me on how i might argue this issue and where we stand
regarding our arguement.


Mark

 

[SQLit]

Hi chaps,

Can anyone help me with regards to a problem i'm having at work?

We currently run a 4 shift rota of night and day shifts
In the past if anyone was ill or had any holiday then Overtime was made
available for the other shifts to cover it.
Now the company has decided they dont need to cover it at all and that the
lone electrician is safe to cover the plant on his own day or night. There
are no on site electrical help at the weekends or on nights other than a
phone call. we are argueing this issue but they are very firm with regards
to it.

Can anyone advise me on how i might argue this issue and where we stand
regarding our arguement.


Mark

I worked for 2.5 years at a University doing trouble calls and electrical
maintenance alone. That was more than 5 years ago. It is called risk
management. They are betting that no one will make a serious mistake. Your
life and well being is a secondary consideration for most employers now. It
is the bottom line only, or the stock quote for the week.
My last employer an OEM of electrical products had me flying all over the
western US doing work, 90% was alone. Some facilities would assign a person
to be with me most would hand me the keys and a map, "go do your job".

Work safe and be aware that refusing to be a team player will probably cause
you to find the door and unemployment. If you think it is unsafe call some
one in to assist, I did.

One risk management guru convinced everyone that the tunnel system was not a
confined space. I took him into the tunnel, a dead end one, and hand cuffed
his legs together. I turned out the lights and walked away from him. Tunnel
was steam lines, water lines, medium voltage, low voltage and
communications. After the threats subsided he walked to the first junction
where the lights were on about 150 feet. I was sitting waiting for him. He
considered changing the tunnels and then decided that is was not to be.
Until a man got hurt and the fire department fined the place the tunnels and
vaults remained non-confined spaces.

Work safe and be careful

 

[Beachcomber]

Work safe and be aware that refusing to be a team player will probably cause
you to find the door and unemployment. If you think it is unsafe call some
one in to assist, I did.

It's funny how history repeats itself. This safety issue is precisely
what brought about the rise of electrical workers unions,
specifically, I.B.E.W. in the US and Canada, at least.

I used to work on high power UHF broadcast transmitter equipment.
Fortunately, there was a good union contract in place that required
that at least two people be present if the high voltage cabinets were
opened and if it was necessary to defeat the HV interlocks in any way.

In this city, every few years there were incidents of electrocutions,
always in non-union shops, where a transmitter technician was forced
to work alone and made a fatal mistake with no ready source of help
nearby.

During these times of high unemployment, there is an almost blind,
automatic anti-union sentiment among many individuals, but if you look
at the historical record, policing job-safety is one of the legitimate
and proper job functions that unions have traditionally done well.

 

[John Phillips]

But when something comes up, like
some work on a 480 volt bus, or a panel, or switchgear, then it is not safe
to work this alone. There may even be something in your contract to that
effect. Also, if there is machinery in the factory, sometimes it is safer
that two work on a project in an effort to promote the safe resolution of
the problem.

elingdago,

I am curious as to why two workers are safer than one? I do agree that
if a worker is untrained or careless and commits an unsafe act that
the second worker can assist in the first aid or rescue. But the fact
is that the first worker should not have performed the work in the
first place. The use of the second worker is called "feather bedding".



Regards,

John Phillips

 

[John Phillips]

It's funny how history repeats itself. This safety issue is precisely
what brought about the rise of electrical workers unions,
specifically, I.B.E.W. in the US and Canada, at least.

Sorry notreal,

The electrical workers union memberships have declined in the US on a
percentage basis as have the electrocution fatalities. I do not but
some might argue that this is cause and effect.


Regards,

John Phillips

 

[Beachcomber]

Sorry notreal,

The electrical workers union memberships have declined in the US on a
percentage basis as have the electrocution fatalities. I do not but
some might argue that this is cause and effect.

If that is not the point you are trying to make, then why bring it up.
Could it also be that fewer fatalities are due to other factors such
as a decline in manufacturing jobs, stricter codes, and new
technologies (GFCI's, for example, on construction sites).

The fact is that there are about 4,000 non-disabling and 3,600
disabling electrical contact injuries that occur annually in the
United States (OSHA statistics).

Accidents occur for all sorts of reasons and that there are specific
occasions in work rules that require an additional person for safety
reasons is an intelligent and economical application of resources when
considering the life and safety issues at stake. This is not
necessarily the "featherbeding" that you refer to in your earlier
comment.

From a historical perspective, the enforcement and necessity of these
safety work rules did arise largely as a result of the labor movement
in the electrical industry in the U.S. and Canada. In the early years
of the electrical age, to be a lineman was to be in one of the most
hazardous occupations known to man with a mortality rate similar to
being a bomber crewmember in the WWII RAF Bomber Command. Being "pro"
or "anti" union does not change this fact.

Beachcomber

 

[John Phillips]

In the early years
of the electrical age, to be a lineman was to be in one of the most
hazardous occupations known to man with a mortality rate similar to
being a bomber crewmember in the WWII RAF Bomber Command. Being "pro"
or "anti" union does not change this fact.

Beachcomber

This is an absolutely false comment. RAF losses were on the order of
one or more per cent per mission.

Regards,

John Phillips

 

[Beachcomber]

Beachcomber

This is an absolutely false comment. RAF losses were on the order of
one or more per cent per mission.

Regards,

John Phillips

Martin Middlebrook, who is considered something of an authority on the
subject states as follows in "The Bomber Command War Diaries" by
Martin Middlebrook and ChrisEveritt - published 1985.

...."Approximately 125,000 aircrew served in the squadrons and the
operational training units of Bomber Command during the war * Nearly
60% of Bomber Command Aircrew becaume casualties. Aprroximately 85%
of these casualties were suffered on operations and 15 per cent in
training and other accidents...

killed in action or died while prisoners of war 47268
killed in flying or ground accidents. 8195
killed in ground-battle action 37

Total fatal casualties to aircrew 55,500

The overall fatality rate was thus 44.4% for the war. The overall
loss rate (wounded + missing) was even higher.

*Mr. Middlebrook further goes on to state that that the figures are
quoted by Sir Arthur Harris from his book "Bomber Offensive".

 

[John Phillips]

Martin Middlebrook, who is considered something of an authority on the
subject states as follows in "The Bomber Command War Diaries" by
Martin Middlebrook and ChrisEveritt - published 1985.

..."Approximately 125,000 aircrew served in the squadrons and the
operational training units of Bomber Command during the war * Nearly
60% of Bomber Command Aircrew becaume casualties. Aprroximately 85%
of these casualties were suffered on operations and 15 per cent in
training and other accidents...

killed in action or died while prisoners of war 47268
killed in flying or ground accidents. 8195
killed in ground-battle action 37

Total fatal casualties to aircrew 55,500

The overall fatality rate was thus 44.4% for the war. The overall
loss rate (wounded + missing) was even higher.

*Mr. Middlebrook further goes on to state that that the figures are
quoted by Sir Arthur Harris from his book "Bomber Offensive".

Beachcomber,

Thank you for making my point. Now show me data that lineman
fatalities were 44% of those employed in any similar period. This was
your original argument.







Regards,

John Phillips

 

[Beachcomber]

Beachcomber,

Thank you for making my point. Now show me data that lineman
fatalities were 44% of those employed in any similar period. This was
your original argument.

Yes. You are correct. That was my original argument and I stand by
it. Here is a direct quote in reference to the period of the late
1800's when conditions were pretty dismal for the lineman at the time.


"There was no apprenticeship training, and safety standards were
nonexistent. In some areas the death rate for linemen was one out of
every two hired, and nationally the death rate for electrical workers
was twice that of the national average for all other industries."


reference: History of IBEW http://www.ibew136.com/his_bog.asp

 

[John Phillips]

Yes. You are correct. That was my original argument and I stand by
it. Here is a direct quote in reference to the period of the late
1800's when conditions were pretty dismal for the lineman at the time.


"There was no apprenticeship training, and safety standards were
nonexistent. In some areas the death rate for linemen was one out of
every two hired, and nationally the death rate for electrical workers
was twice that of the national average for all other industries."


reference: History of IBEW http://www.ibew136.com/his_bog.asp

Please quote a credible source.


Regards,

John Phillips

 

[Beachcomber]

Please quote a credible source.


Regards,

John Phillips

John:

You are certainly entitled to your opinion and I will let you have the
last word.

I believe I've made my point accurately and clearly, cited credible
sources, and made a reasonable argument to the contrary of your
points, all, which in my opinion, have been proven unfounded.

I respectfully rest my case.

Beachcomber

 

[Beachcomber]

You are talking of the here and now. Unions were organized for the safety
of the lineworkers in the late 1800's and early 1900's. The employers of
the time were much like the railroad employers: safety was not much of a
concern -- after all, you could always hire someone to replace a worker who
slipped under the wheels of a freight car, or fell from a high line pole
while working on an electrical line, or worse yet, became electrocuted and
burned to death from contact with a high line.
PLEASE SEND YOUR

Right! Back in those days there was no OSHA or workmans compensation.
There were no social security disability payments, no fines, no safety
rules, no economic incentive for a company to value a human life. If
the worker were lucky, his co-workers passed around a hat to collect
whatever they could for the man's widow and children.

If you can find it... there is an old Henry Fonda movie called "SLIM"
(1937) that accurately portrays the conditions that lineman faced
during the early years. It was said to be Henry Fonda's favorite
movie.

There are several accidents depicted in the movie. In one, an
unfortunate worker falls off a 100 ft. tower and is killed. There is
no investigation - his co-workers simply carry the body to the truck
and call it a day. The next man in seniority is promoted to his
position and a new grunt worker is hired to do the low level stuff.

In another incident, a lineworker questions the safety about working
on a "hotwire" substation operating at 88,000 volts. The lineworker
is instantly fired.

Overall though, the movie is a tribute to the bravery, dedication of
the linemen and the working conditions they had to work under.