Re: Another RSA worker killed

[Wallabz <wallaby@fl.net.au>]

Hiyas,

Aren't we forgetting that nobody has mentioned the exact circumstances
of this fatality?

This thread hasn't really moved away from the initial 'blame' on the
worker who was killed, then on to a number of assumptions about
irresponsible track workers.

It is within the rules for a person to be walking about on the tracks
without a lookout, even bending, inspecting and using "small test
intruments".

So if this person was a track walker, he was probably not disobeying any
safety rules.  The rule he may have disobeyed is the one which says that
you are not permitted to obstruct a train.

Nobody here seems to know whether the guy tripped and fell or whether he
simply walked into the path of a moving train.

How many of you have ever stepped out onto the road as a pedestrian
without having checked to see if it was safe first?

I've walked on train tracks in a lot of places in the Sydney Metro, most
of them I would say are quite dangerous, and there are more than a few
places where it is extremely dangerous to walk without a lookout or
more. 

I've had a couple of very near misses, because you get caught up in
fixing whatever it is you're out there to do.  And I would say that
other workers would have usually considered me especially careful and
paranoid.  So I guess people who might be less careful than me may be
*more* likely to have near misses.

Bill wrote:
> The point about hi-visibility vests is a good one. In my opinion
> they have never been of much use down the track, for exactly the
> reason you say: the train cannot swerve, or brake suddenly. OK, so

You see him earlier, and you have the opportunity to sound your horn a
little earlier.  It seems to me that for whatever reason, drivers are
not fond of the horn, because they rarely sound it.


> I used to be opposed to Police prosecutions for safety violations,
> but as I get older and more cynical, I wonder if the threat of
> fines and jail is the only way to sharpen attention to need to
> have safe workplaces.

Workcover is entitled to fine and the employer is certainly entitled to
discipline workers for failing to follow the safety rules.


> And to any track worker who is reading this: Hopping on and off
> the track without protection is a bloody stupid practice!

As I said above, the rules state that certain types of work do not
require any special protection besides the use of one's own eyes and
ears.  The person in charge of the work is not going to provide more
protection than the rules require if that means the work will not get
done.  So the worker who has minimal protection and is working within
the rules has no ability to demand more protection than is required
under the rules.

 
> Question: is any union interested in safety at present, or have
> the empllyers got the upper hand?

Matter of opinion.  I suppose the unions(at least the unions say this)
are fighting on so many fronts, that their resources are stretched. 
Don't the people in the workplace have a similar responsibility to
protect themselves?

In any case, to walk along the track for visual inspection or similar is
not inherently unsafe.  Of course, any one doing so needs to keep a good
lookout and not let themselves be distracted.  To change the rules so
that any kind of work required excessive protection(flagmen, detonators
or even possession) would cause track work to be slowed down a lot.