History Of Working At Height Regulation Construction Essay

History Of Working At Height Regulation Construction Essay The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) reports that over 4,000 employees suffered a major injury because of a fall from height in 2008/09. The majority of injuries were caused by low falls www.hse.gov (see attached appendix) This figure is still far too high when we consider the working at height regulation2005 (WHAR) was passed into law almost six years ago. The reason WHAR became law was the alarming concern across Europe of fatalities and serious injury. The European parliaments passed the directive, wanted all members to implement, and have on their statute books by 2004. consultation started in the uk in 2001 .there was concerns raised over changes to be made to the 2meter rule, industry claimed they needed this kept as it would not be cost effective and jobs would be lost and certain contracts would not be worth tendering on if this rule was not kept . Before the regulation, there was various regulations that covered working at height with different rules one of the rules was the 2 meter rule this allowed working up to 2 meters height without any controls accidents. The majority of major injuries were caused by low falls. Again, a significant proportion of these were falls from ladders. www.hse.gov RIDDOR data It is now recognised in the duty that injury can occur from a fall of any height, not just from above say 2 metres. In addition, falling objects can cause injury from below a drop distance of 2 metres. Therefore guardrails and toe boards etc should be considered based on a suitable and sufficient risk assessment been made Elizabeth Gibby, Head of the Health and Safety Executives (HSEs) Injuries Reduction Programme, said: In 2003/4 falls from height accounted for 67 fatal accidents at work and nearly 4,000 major injuries. They remain the single biggest cause of workplace deaths and one of the biggest causes of major injury. Preventing falls from height is a central part of HSEs Injuries Reduction Programme and these Regulations will provide the cornerstone for this programme to improve standards for work at height and thereby reduce deaths and injuries. These Regulations set out a simple hierarchy for managing and selecting equipment for work at height. She added: The Regulations cover a wide range of industries and activities but we have developed some simple messages which we want to communicate to all industries. Our key messages are: those following good practice for work at height now should already be doing enough to comply with these Regulations; follow the risk assessments you have carried out for work at height activities and make sure all work at height is planned, organized and carried out by competent persons; follow the hierarchy for managing risks from work at height take steps to avoid, prevent or reduce risks; and choose the right work equipment and select collective measures to prevent falls (such as guardrails and working platforms) before other measures which may only mitigate the distance and consequences of a fall (such as nets or airbags) or which may only provide personal protection from a fall. Falls from height are the biggest work place killer. There were 35 fatalities in 2008/09. A significant proportion of these were falls from ladders. www.hse.gov Traditionally falls make up the second biggest cause of major accidents. There were over 4500 in 2008/09. The majority of major injuries were caused by low falls. Again, a significant proportion of these were falls from ladders. www.hse.gov RIDDOR data The Regulations were consulted upon during 2004 including a focused consultation on retaining the requirements for particular precautions for construction work at or above 2mtrs. (I have explained this rule further in legislation section) Working at Height is now governed by the Work at Height Regulations 2005 (WAHR). These regulations revoked the earlier construction regulations, which specified the 2 metre rule. We therefore do not have this threshold. The WAHR place a duty on the duty holder to avoid work at height where it is reasonably practicable to carry out this work safely otherwise than at height. Where work has to be carried out at height, then the duty holder shall take suitable and sufficient measures to prevent, so far as is reasonably practicable, any person falling a distance liable to cause personal injury. It is recognised in the duty that injury can occur from a fall of any height, not just from above say 2 metres. In addition, falling objects can cause injury from below a drop distance of 2 metres. Therefore guardrails and toe boards etc should be considered based on a suitable and sufficient risk assessment been made There is no recommended height now. The Regulations have a series of schedules that set out requirements for specific circumstances and schedule two sets out the requirements for guardrails, toe-boards, barriers, and similar collective means of protection. A link to the regulations is here: http://www.hse.gov.uk/falls/regulations.htm All forms of work access equipment for working at height come under the Regulations, which includes hop-ups. More information can be obtained from hse web site on construction and various platforms http://www.hse.gov.uk/construction/index.htm There was no transitional period as the regulations consolidate what should be existing good practice. However it is understood that industry need to familiarise themselves with the regulations and ensure that what they do is sufficient to comply. Also time to make sure companies do not over react, I have witnessed companies having simply refused stepladders coming on site with the claim HSE has banned them! This is totally UN true and led to total confusion within industry. Still does today. There is Approved Code of Practice (ACOP) produced for the Regulations and hse have produced INGD 401 and other literature for further guidance. Free download, is available from www.hse.gov.uk . In addition, working at height comes under other regulations i.e. Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 (HASAWA) Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 (MHSWR) Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 (PUWER 98) Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations 1998(LOLER HSE took a different approach to communicate the Regulations. This was based on A Brief Guide to the Regulations and promoting sector specific guidance. The hse ran media awareness campaigns to highlight the introduction of the new regulation and to make people aware that a fall from any height can be fatal this was called shattered lives this can be viewed on line www.hse.gov.uk I have examined statistics correlated by the health and safety executive reporting of injuries diseases dangerous occurrences (RIDDOR). Who have compiled a large amount of data on falls from height and it lays out the different types of falls and there consequences on the individual both physically and on their future employment within the industry. The full report is Attached (see appendix 2) but I have bullet pointed the main aspects concerning my report High falls (a fall from a height of at least 2 meters) (Low falls a fall from a height below 2 meters) (Unspecified height) The pie charts below show the breakdown of fatal, major, and over-3-day fall injuries by height of fall and whether the injured person fell from a ladder or something else. Typically, more than 70% of fatal fall injuries are from a height of more than two metres compared with 23% of major fall injuries and just 10% of over-3-day fall injuries. In each category, between 20% and 30% of the accidents reported are normally from ladders. In 2008/09, the proportion of injuries attributable to high falls fell to 15% of major fall injuries and just 5% of over-3-day fall injuries. This is because of the significant increase in the proportion of low and unspecified falls due to the reclassification of slips and trips on stairs as falls. Source (Injury analysis priority programmes: falls from height RIDDOR) www.hse.gov Fatal fall injuries to workers, 2008/09p Major fall injuries to workers, 2008/09p Over 3 day fall injuries to workers, 2008/09p Source www.hse.gov.uk

Factual reporting, interpretation and distortion Essay

How are distinctions made between factual reporting, interpretation and distortion? This essay is going to tell the differences between factual reporting, interpretation and distortion. Factual reporting means that an answer or a statement is based on facts that are true and proven. Interpretation is an individual’s opinion and appreciation about a subject. It is not based on facts but just on opinions and theories. Distortion is a way of delivering wrong information, twisted and wrongly explained information. It is based on facts but kind of turns them around. Factual reporting is the way of delivering an opinion/theory based on true facts. An example of this is an article I read in Metro today, which was about conspiracies. The one that caught my eye was one that stated that an airplane never crashed into the Pentagon. This theory was based on facts, which I never had heard of. For example, the surveillance camera of the Pentagon didn’t show an airplane but only a white line in the sky. Another thing was that the hole in the Pentagon was way too small to have been creased by an airplane. The write stated that the US Air force shot down flight 77, and to cover this up they blew up a part of the building without the workers knowing anything about it. Also no big wreck parts from the plane were found. This is a factual reporting as it’s based on true facts and it not created by opinions or own thoughts as in an interpretation. Also the moon landing is believed to be a fake. There are many facts that point against it. In a video ‘from the moon’ the flag that Neil Armstrong put up was waving in the wind. And there’s not supposed to be any wind on the moon. Also the shadows go in different directions and the shadow of the space shuttle should fall on Armstrong, a good example of factual reporting. A theory based on facts. Interpretation is a theory based an individual’s own opinion. A great example of this is racists. The Nazis believe that black or people with darker skin than westerners are worth less. This is a great example as this theory of theirs is based on their own opinions and have no actual facts to base it on. There is no proof that colored people are worth less than white people. This is why it’s an interpretation. No facts or proof are involved in the theory. Another example of interpretation is Bin Ladin. The US government doesn’t know that he’s alive. The videos that they got from him are old now and he could be dead already. The US government think that he is alive because of the videos, but they have been bombing caves, cities and other places in hope of killing him, so he could be dead. This is interpretation as they base it on what they believe. There is no proof that he’s alive. Distortion is when facts are wrong, twisted or inaccurate. Another definition is when two people disagree with one another. An example is if I say to Andreas, we have homework for tomorrow and he says we don’t. This is distortion in a way. Another example is all kinds of magazines and television shows as they tent not to show all of their footage information. They cut what they don’t want people to hear, which helps them things look negative and positive. This is a typical example of distortion as it twists the truth or the reality. Often when you experience something and they write about it the next day in a newspaper, it’s never the same. You always say to yourself, â€Å"That’s not exactly what happened.† Sometimes the media exaggerate to find a big audience. They do what I like to call, ‘Stretch reality.’ It’s a clear case of distortion because they twist the truth or give an inaccurate point of view. As a conclusion or to answer the question I would like to say that the difference or the distinctions between factual reporting, interpretation and distortion is the amount of facts they are based on. Factual reporting is based on only facts to make a clear image of a theory, event or opinion. Interpretation is based on opinions but no facts. Only the people who made the theory, it’s only based on things that are going on inside those people’s heads. Distortion is based on facts but mostly told the opposite way or twisted to change the way people think of it. It often tries to make the facts inaccurate.

Book Report The Pearl

Kink has more fears then he lets on. Kink, being the man of the house, must act strong and hide his fear, while his wife, Juan, expresses her fear in losing her child. The Doctor who â€Å"treated† Coyote also expresses fear in the loss Of his luxury and wealth. The Doctor indulges in his wealth and once Kink and Juan find the pearl, the Doctor heads over to their house to get what wealth he can get his hands on. The main protagonist of the book is Kink, who is the husband of Juan. Kink is shown as being a family man who maintains his life with Juan in the most dutiful and simplistic way.Kink finds â€Å"The Pearl of the World† and has visions of what his life will be like now that he has enough money to support his family. He would like to remarry his wife in a church, baptize his child, educate his child, etc. Kink can only imagine what he would do with all this money. With this, Kink fears the greed that comes with having wealth. Many people who come across this type of wealth forget where they come from. Kink doesn't want to be like that. He wants to spread his wealth with his neighbors and his relatives. He doesn't want to leave anybody behind.The novel states that, â€Å"Every man suddenly became related to Kink's pearl†¦ † (3. 30), which shows that the pearl isn't Kink's, but is the whole neighbor hood's pearl. Kink would share the wealth with his neighbors. Kink didn't want the pearl to change him as a person. As it says in the novel, â€Å"From now on they (neighbors) would watch Kink and Juan very closely to see whether riches turned their heads, as riches turn all people's heads. † (3. 46), which shows that the neighbors are watching whether Kink's greatest fear of greed will come back to haunt him.Kink's ability to maintain his composure through the novel shows that he is able to hide his fear very well. Whenever something evil or good happens, Kink has a theme music that plays in his head. Kink fears the evil music. As readers, we are aware of when the evil theme music is playing. While we know what music is playing Juan is unaware of how Kink is feeling. An example of when the evil music was playing was when they went to the pearl dealers, â€Å"He heard in his ears the evil music. And on the black velvet the great pearl glistened, so that the dealer could not keep his eyes from it. † (4. 42).Kink eared the evil music, but when the dealers rejected the pearl, he left with his head held strong. He showed Juan that they had nothing to fear, but he was really dying on the inside from the evil music. Although Kink had fears which were unknown to Juan, she had fears which she made aware to Kink. Juan repeated told Kink that she was afraid of losing Coyote, their son. Coyote was bitten by a scorpion and needed aid from a doctor. The doctor refused to see Coyote simply because they had no money. Once they found the pearl, the doctor came â€Å"willingly' (for the pearl) to help the boy who n eeded assistance.As we see Coyote health fluctuate from being healthy to being unwell, we see how Juan reacts. Once Coyote was bit, Juan was hysterically crying because she thought her worse fear was going to become a reality. Juan loved her son like any mother would, and the thought of losing him made her feel sick. Once she saw Coyote recover from the bite, she was ecstatic. She shared this excitement with Kink and the neighborhood. The town was talking about how the pearl saved the boy's life. Without the pearl, the doctor wouldn't have come. A minor character in this novel is the Doctor (no real name was given).The actor may be a minor character, but he played a role in the recovery Of Coyote. The only reason why the doctor went to Kink and Sauna's house to treat Coyote was because of the pearl. The pearl was of value and is known to be â€Å"The Pearl of the World†. If the Doctor treated Coyote, he could ask for the pearl as payment. By saying this, we know that the Doct ors biggest fear is the loss in his wealth and luxury. He sits around thinking about places in the world and all the money he has. He cannot live without his wealth. As it says in the novel, men Doctor, back in his house, settled into his chair and looked t his watch.His people (servants) brought him a little supper of chocolate and sweet cakes and fruit, and he stared at the food discontentedly. † (3. 49). The reason why the Doctor stared at the food â€Å"discontentedly' was because he was thinking of the pearl and all the money the pearl would bring him. Money is powerful, but the lack of it causes uncertainty in the future. In conclusion, each character is shown to be emotionally strong. The characters do not like to display their weakness. Fear could be considered a weakness. Kink and the Doctor choose to hide their fears, while Juan infidels her fear in Kink.

Dissociative Identity Disorder Of The Paleolithic Era

Dissociative Identity Disorder Jorge Marquez Abnormal Psychology Professor Mackenzie It is quite unfortunate that many psychological disorders are not known out there. Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID) being one of them. Of course, this disorder is said to have been discovered a long time ago. However, it was not seen as it is today. A few decades ago, most disorders were not even known how to be treated. Several before that, disorders weren’t even the first thing on people’s mind when they noticed some sort of abnormality in someone they’ve known or met. In fact, there is evidence that there are paintings that could potentially suggest DID was present in the Paleolithic era. The paintings consisted of shamans that changed into animal forms or spirits. It was also often confused with the idea that demonic possession was the most rational way to explain such an abnormal behavior (A History Of Dissociative Identity Disorder, p. 1). As time progresses, more and more information is being discovered about this interesting yet devastating disorder. So what is Dissociative Identity Disorder? According to the DSM V, Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID) is the disruption of identity characterized by two or more distinct personality states. It then states that â€Å"disruption in identity involves marked discontinuity in sense of self and sense of agency, accompanied by related alterations in affect, behavior, consciousness, memory, perception,Show MoreRelatedDissociative Identity Disorder ( Mpd )1170 Words   |  5 PagesDissociative Identity Disorder, commonly referred to as Multiple Personality Disorder, has been one of the more controversial diagnoses in psychology and psychiatry. On one side of the debate, many psychologists and psychiatrists believe the disorder to be an actual phenomenon that occurs in individuals that have suffered through some traumatic experience. On the other side of the debate, however, are the many psychologists and psychiatrists that believe the disorder is simply the result of a therapist’s Read MoreDissociative Identity Disorder And Multiple Personality Disorder1399 Words   |  6 Pages Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID), formerly known as Multiple Personality Disorder, is defined as â€Å"a severe condition in which two or more distinct identities, or personality states, are present in—and alternately take control of—an individual†. In 1994, the name of the disorder was changed to reflect a better understanding of the condition. DID is characterized by fragmentation, not by the growth of separate identities. DID is not a new disorder. However, it has been misunderstood for