Fools, idiots and risk embracer's

I was camping near the Gold Coast a few months back and while sitting there writing a topic on safety, I noticed some hire bikes lapping around the car park area with fools of the male type on board.

They were doing all manner of stupid things. So I grabbed the camera to capture some images to remind me how we humans seem to have the need to do things we know we should not be doing...for fun. 

The sequence shots here show the '10 seconds of fame syndrome'...

"Watch me do a burn out and video record it...ahh hah...crash (laughing)...show me, show me....quick, put it on youtube and facebook for the world to see me acting stupid.."

Rio Tinto fined $70,000 over worker death - NOT MUCH OF A FINE for allowing untrained workers to work!

A RIO Tinto subsidiary has been fined $70,000 after a 27-year-old fitter died while working in 2011 at the Brockman 2 iron ore mine in Western Australia's Pilbara region. 

A killed worker and two other workers were conducting maintenance on a front end loader in the mine's workshop when a 1400kg tilt cylinder that was suspended from a crane slipped, falling and fatally striking the worker. 

The Department of Mines and Petroleum found that none of the workers held the appropriate rigging qualifications or were properly certified for high risk work. 

Pilbara Iron Company on Thursday pleaded guilty in the Perth Magistrates Court to failing to provide a safe working environment.

Here is their  safety attitude; http://www.riotinto.com/ourcommitment/safety-and-health-4792.aspx

Note this phase from site...in particular the last sentence!

Building a culture of safety

At Rio Tinto, safety is part of our DNA. 

Our safety culture is strong throughout our organisation. This means all employees and all contractors being dedicated to helping us achieve zero harm, and taking responsibility for working safely. Everyone knowing that they make a difference. And everyone having the knowledge, competence and desire to work safely

NOW...what happened to those who allowed untrained workers to work??????

OVER REACTION ....MAYBE

 

Story HERE

 

PANSW vice president Pat Gooley said, "We are working with government to secure urgently needed additional funding – it's time to protect those that protect the community." He said; "It is going to be an expensive process and that money has to come from somewhere,"

All this talk and reaction reminds me so much of workplace safety (more, more, more), although when a worker gets killed, they get no where near the publicity like those in the services who are in a high risk job. We see no state funerals or awards given to their services to society. As I have said before, workers just seem to be ignored as just workers!!!

 

In response to the reaction to add 'more' police/protection, I would have to ask, then who is going to protect those, who protect the police, who protect the community?

 

While I think the extra safety controls being discussed have some merit (as safety is paramount), are we really going to far trying to protect police. The worker killed was not a uniformed officer, so while police are now using this act to get extra funding to increase protection (a long running battle for those in uniform), are we going to have to pay for personal police escorts for all those (behind the scenes) who work for police while they travel to and from work or leave to go on lunch etc? 

 

Then we have a story like this link below and it really gets me thinking...who protects the public against police?

 

Police officers must personally pay for bashing and humiliating man

Coles, pushing truck drivers to work like slaves

I do not like graffiti...but I thought why not....break the law for awareness I say!!!  - I sprayed it on while hanging out the window doing 120kph!!!!...

Every day, Coles, gets away with pushing truck drivers to work for rock bottom rates while the drivers are forced to drive longer hours, faster and skip breaks...so much for the chain of responsibility Laws!!!

Check out their safety page HERE (At Coles, we’re committed to providing a safe and healthy environment for our team, customers, suppliers, contractors and visitors. To support our safety policy, we have a comprehensive safety management system called ‘SafetyCARE’.)

Is COLES any worse than this HERE (Trucking boss Peter Colbert jailed for more than 12 years over driver Robert Brimson's death)

WHAT IS GOING ON? we know about it and has been occurring for years, its a 'simple increase in products cost fix"! (so Coles won't loose their profit) Opps... I keep forgetting...we consumers don't want to pay for safety...imagine having to pay an extra 20% on all products to make our roads safer...that ludicrous!!! Bring on the safety Tax!!!

Report from ABC HERE

Open up full blog HERE

Company fined $90,000 after worker injury

A company has been fined $90,000 in a West Australian court after a worker was injured three years ago while unloading pipes from a truck.

In October 2012, Process Minerals International employee Meliton Garcia and another worker were rigging 20-metre polyethylene pipes to a crane before they were unloaded from the truck, when Mr Garcia was struck by a one-tonne pipe and fell four metres.

Process Minerals, which operates the Woodie Woodie fines treatment plant, pleaded guilty to two charges of failing to provide a safe working environment and was fined in Port Hedland Magistrates Court.

Department of Mines and Petroleum director of mines safety Andrew Chaplyn said on Monday that falls from heights were a major cause of death on mine sites despite being easily preventable.

"There was a genuine risk that workers could have been killed and it was only luck that the consequences were not much worse," he said. (note from me - there is that word 'luck' again...it was not luck but fate, as by this topic FATE)

"The workers were not provided with a safe system of work and were unnecessarily exposed to a serious hazard."

Mr Chaplyn said the decision sent an important message about ensuring safety on WA mine sites. 

The charges resulted after Process Minerals was found to have failed to provide a procedure for workers to safely unload the pipes.

Trucking boss Peter Colbert jailed for more than 12 years over driver Robert Brimson's death

Trucking boss Peter Colbert jailed for more than 12 years over driver Robert Brimson's death

The Supreme Court heard Colbert was repeatedly warned about the truck's faulty brakes. 

Justice David Peek said Colbert was a risk-taker on the road who thought he would have survived such a brake failure. 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-08-21/trucking-boss-peter-colbert-jailed-for-drivers-death/6714506

Many Still Think That Risk Homeostasis Is A Fallacy

I replied on LinkedIn (the post was taken off by the author as my view must to be true as why would you take it off...to stop people thinking! these people protect their views like a religious zealot)to this post HERE as it just shows again how people are trying to justify how a name in vented in hindsight and used in hindsight makes sense...I am saying so what!....what can you do to prevent it occurring...safety is about prevention

All I get from this post is a hindsighted (told you so) view to prove a term that can only be given in hindsight. Oh you say...this proves RHT exists...well not sure anyone is proving it does not exist, the issue is how could we know for sure that the lines did not do what they were hoped to do...that being to provide some sort of shared space on the road for cyclists.

So what you are saying is to not do anything or to try and improve safety as like you always say, there is always a trade off of an equal or worse risk (I think I have disproved this notion with the WAH harness argument you could not argue against). The article is about cycle lanes and that because drivers cross over onto white lines and that riders may take more risk, this proves we might as well do nothing...why am I stating this; you seem to jump up and act as (in your own words) "some sort safety person who relishes incidents (in his case a theory) so they (you) can step in and do their thing or spruik "I told you so"?" ...well this is what you have just done yourself.

You have also just used a safety initiative in a negative way...well done!...why cannot safety be a positive thing you ask?

So, can the author explain how we can control/mitigate RHT in a foresighted manner so we cannot make these "told you so" actions? I mean really, if we cannot know of a trade off result (and maybe the lines may have improved safety) until after the event/study/trial/ implementation what benefit can be gain learning about how we can tell everyone after the fact what they just did or implemented.

Maybe the fallacy is the thinking we can see into the future to predict the outcome of the thing we are putting in place to hopefully improve something...

And maybe can the author give his advice on how he would have made a space for cyclists on a road? what just had nothing....i wonder how many heavy vehicles would cross over a invisible line...I also wonder if a study will show how many vehicles enter into the 1.5 m gap....and i wonder if this also is a stupid "i told you so" rule? How about we rid all rules and be loose and let everyone manage their own risk as this is what the author supports...This thinking denies what is need to be a functioning society!

Once one commits to the illogical binary oppositional mindset, it all goes downhill from there and, there can certainly be no balance once one accepts an extremist absolute semiotic. This never shifts to one's private life of course, it is only applied to safety. It is also something one applies to other people, this absolutism and extremist sense of rule and power is never intended to be applied to self, its is something that is always good for 'other people'. Then when something doesn't suit the logic people resort to insult, abuse or personal attack and then complain of censorship, the same censorship they want applied to you. The logic is of course that their power is more important than your power and that dissent should be tolerated only when it suits them. Hence more binary polarization in the name of good. RL

Look at some of the bias replies

Rob Sams 

When all you have is process and engineering controls, well all you have is process and engineering controls....... Sad that our industry is so fixated on control, fear and 'fixing', seems not at all interested in 'living' and understanding. When your approach has this at it's basis every problem must be fixed. The trajectory is..... ? Certainly not being human or fallible
My comment; Psychology is a process. All studies follow what?  

Mark M. 

What I think is most important is that when looking at an accident and trying to put all of the pieces together, we should look at the individuals level of acceptable risk and not our own acceptable levels. They may have accepted an act because the amount of risk was comfortable to them and to attempt to change that level of comfort is about as easy as making the sun rise in the west.

What a stupid comment - its sying let workers choose what risk they want to take...I know, lets rid speed zones!!!! how bloody pathetic...

Rob Long 

The delusion is that engineering solutions and thinking 'control'.
A typical absolute reply from one who dislikes people talking in blank and white...There is no delusion that engineering controls people...