Page 10 of 22 FirstFirst ... 5678910111213141520 ... LastLast
Results 136 to 150 of 326
  1. #136
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    27,756

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mobyturns View Post
    Noise does not have to exceed a preset threshold to present a problem to individuals who have sensitivities. People with autism and similar conditions typically experience such sensitivities to sound "when the world won't shut up!"
    I must be one of those. My biggest chainsaw is 116 dB at operator level and exposure on a given day can run to hours (hence muffs and plugs) doesn't bother me as much as the 105 dB angle grinder.

    The issue of frequencies is interesting.

    The dBA weighting is the one used for OHS as this supposedly approximates the frequency response of the average human ear.
    However its relevance to the human ear is quite limited because it only approximates the ear's response at low volume.
    In terms of frequencies it does a fair job on constant pure tone frequencies between 1 and 10 kHz (i.e. the classic hearing test) but not so good for those frequencies outside this range especially above 10kHz and more importantly random noise around 6kHz.

    There is a newish response curve established by ISO (ISO 226:2003) that compares well to the 1 to 10 kHz dBA range. You might see this on very fancy SPL meters but the differences are not great enough at this stage to warrant the huge requirement to change all the legislation if this was to be implemented. The ISO 226 curve does emphasise frequencies around 2 - 5kHz (consonants sounds) which is what plagues people with hearing loss.

    dBC weightings are commonly found on SPL meters and on meters used for OHS it is a requirement that they be able to test this weighting, although few OHS regs require it..
    This weighting emphasises frequencies below 1kHz more and those above that less.

    The dBD weighting was established for use around air craft and takes into account the increased sensitivity to random noise around 6kHz.
    Some people are definitely more sensitive to the random noise around 6kHz effect than others. How it effects them in the long terms is unknown.
    dBD weight is also more applicable to assessment of SPL from loud music, but regs for loud music venues are still set using dBA - there's nothing wrong with doing this provided the levels are set accordingly.

  2. # ADS
    Google Adsense Advertisement
    Join Date
    Always
    Location
    Advertising world
    Posts
    Many





     
  3. #137
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    27,756

    Default

    Im pleased to report some safety progress at the mens shed.

    Following a shed meeting the following measures are being adopted.
    - The shed rules are being rewritten with safety rules becoming numbers 2 and 3 (instead of #5 and 6). Rule number one is "All members must sign in and out of the shed."
    - All machines (and eventually power tools) are being risk assessed and will be given a risk rating 1= dangerous through to 4 = Extremely dangerous.
    - The machine ratings determines which level of member (we have four levels of expertise) can use a machine, and which level can supervise use/training of a machine.
    - Each machine will also be provided with a Machine safety sheet which clearly outlines Risk/PPE/Safe Operations, hence they become a common basis on which to operate - same rules for each user, session and each supervisor.
    - Safety to become the top agenda item at each shed meeting

    Some of these may appear cosmetic but it's as much about setting expectations and a tone that we are serious about safety.
    I feel much more comfortable now this is happening.

  4. #138
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Horsham Victoria
    Posts
    5,713

    Default

    My woodworking club has a 'by tool' assesment.

    My concern is that a number rating may not really work unless you have some stand alone tools

    A buzzer may rate a 4 as would a spindle molder ahould your club have both yet the person using a buzzer may not be capable of using a spindle molder

    In my case I would likely use evrything your shed has to offer but our club has a lucas mill. On number I could use it. I have no doubt i could get up to speed un a short time but I have no place using without instruction though a number rating might say I can

    Dave TTC
    Turning Wood Into Art

  5. #139
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    27,756

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DaveTTC View Post
    My woodworking club has a 'by tool' assesment.

    My concern is that a number rating may not really work unless you have some stand alone tools

    A buzzer may rate a 4 as would a spindle molder ahould your club have both yet the person using a buzzer may not be capable of using a spindle moulder
    I agree and would also like to use a by tool/machine assessment.
    However, when I was asked if I would be prepared to assess 75 members for their individual tool/machine expertise I said no and so did every other supervisor.
    I hope we can eventually move to a by tool assessment but meanwhile I suggested we need to put something in place to keep the focus on safety.

    Our members are not classified by machine expertise but according to a generic competence. This includes disabilities although it's not stated explicitly in the example criteria.
    A number of our members are Green badged - they watch the other blokes, don't touch any tools and have a chat and a cuppa - thats fine with us.
    The Bronze guys get watched by the silver and gold, and the silvers get watched by the gold. That bit seems to work.

    Level Example requirements to meet level
    Green Completed induction
    Bronze - Safely operates most hand tools
    - Safely operates some power tools
    - Knows what some machinery does
    - Rarely uses or lacks confidence or has limited knowledge in safely using machinery
    Silver - Knows the purpose of most machinery and power tools
    - Confidently and safely operates basic machinery.
    - Demonstrates confidence and knowledge about safely operating some advanced machinery with assistance/guidance.
    - Limited experience in safely using advanced machinery but it was a long time ago
    Gold - Hands on trade/technical background/work experience
    - Safely operate a range of complex machinery
    - Demonstrates confidence, limitations, and knowledge regarding safely operating advanced machinery.
    - Able to fully assess risks in dealing with unfamiliar processes and machinery and seek expert advice

    Thus an INDIVIDUAL Gold badged member may not know how to safely operate a spindle moulder, however, we trust them to have enough sense and competence to find someone that does.

    The machine risk categories are as follows
    Label Danger Level Actions Prior to Operation
    Pre-use Ongoing Use
    1 red dot 1 Danger of causing injuries Review safety sheets before initial use Ask Gold or Silver badged member if you are uncertain
    2 red dot 2 High danger of causing injuries Arrange supervised practice until familiar Gold or Silver badged member to supervise the practice
    3 red dots 3 Very High danger of causing serious injuries Arrange supervised practice until familiar Gold badged member to supervise the initial practice
    4 red dots 4 Extremely High danger of causing severe injuries Extreme caution required. Arrange intensive practice until competent Gold Badged member to Supervise initial and subsequent use until he is satisfied with your standard of operation

  6. #140
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    5,105

    Default

    Nice progress, Bob.

    I am used to a system more like Dave's where you are inducted onto each machine, but I think either is far better than neither, and we must presume there is a little common sense around.


    Graeme

  7. #141
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Murray Bridge SA
    Posts
    3,339

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BobL View Post
    - Each machine will also be provided with a Machine safety sheet which clearly outlines Risk/PPE/Safe Operations, hence they become a common basis on which to operate - same rules for each user, session and each supervisor.
    - Safety to become the top agenda item at each shed meeting
    .
    Hi Bob,
    Glad to see that the committee has let common sense prevail, and done something about the situation that will take a lot of pressure off you.
    These sheets are call SOP Safe Operating Procedures, we have them for ALL powered tools, (hand drill, biscuit joiner, grinders, etc) not required for sharp tools at present, where I help out at the local Day Centre.
    At my Woodturning Club, people are authorised to use individual pieces of equipment that they have received training/assessment on. We run these on a regular basis every month.
    Kryn
    To grow old is mandatory, growing up is optional.

  8. #142
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Beerburrum Qld
    Posts
    122

    Default

    I think this is a very difficult situation because the general belief is that we are over-protected coupled with the Australian belief that nothing bad will happen to me.

    I think the committees running sheds need to get good advice about their responsibilities. As a retired barrister I can say that the rules do vary from State to State. In Queensland many volunteers are deemed to be employees even if they receive no pay or benefits. A shed's members do receive benefits. If after the event a member is deemed to be covered by Work Place Safety rules there is no avoiding the impact. It is not an excuse for an "employer" to say it was the operators fault. I was involved in 2 cases that demonstrate this. In one an "employee" a work experience person was given a safety briefing including an absolute ban on touching or operating saws and other equipment. He signed a form acknowledging he understood the rules. Whist his supervisor made a call of nature he tried to cut some timber and completely severed 3 fingers. He won compensation and the employer was fined more than $300,000
    In the second an "employer" provided safety straps for workers using stock picking machines. The company he bought the straps from wrongly packed 4 metre straps in packages marked 2 metres. A fellow fell of the picker and fell 2.5 metres to the ground breaking a leg and was then hit on the head by the adjuster causing facial injuries. The employer was held liable for compensation and fined for providing incorrect safety equipment.

    However there is also what is referred to as Common Law. This is that part of the law that is not directly created by government but has been accepted as law by the Courts. A good example of this is the doctrine of Negligence.

    Groups who organise activities and provide access to equipment will normally be deemed to have a duty of care. That is they will be expected to provide some degree of protection to the members including protection of the members from themselves. All that is needed is for someone to be injured and claim that the organiser should have protected them. The organiser may say but that person did a safety course. This may well be ignored by the court if the injured party said well lots of us did it that way and we were never stopped.

    I would suggest that the committee be encouraged to explain to the members that it is a group activity and safety is everyone's responsibility. Many even large organisations provide a culture that even the lowest person in the hierarchy can stop the production run if they detect a safety problem.

    Everyone who sees a breach of safety needs to point it out to the person ( it can be done without insult) and explain that we all suffer if there is a problem.

  9. #143
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    arthurs creek
    Posts
    24

    Default

    Well there you go. Better shut down every shed or business for matter. WHY if a person is schooled on a machine and signs that they are aware of said machine can they then sue the person who told him not to cut his fingers off. I despair at what the world has come to.

  10. #144
    Mobyturns's Avatar
    Mobyturns is offline In An Instant Your Life Can Change Forever
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    "Brownsville" Nth QLD
    Age
    66
    Posts
    4,413

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shedman View Post
    I think this is a very difficult situation because the general belief is that we are over-protected coupled with the Australian belief that nothing bad will happen to me.

    .......

    I would suggest that the committee be encouraged to explain to the members that it is a group activity and safety is everyone's responsibility. Many even large organisations provide a culture that even the lowest person in the hierarchy can stop the production run if they detect a safety problem.

    Everyone who sees a breach of safety needs to point it out to the person ( it can be done without insult) and explain that we all suffer if there is a problem.
    Thank you for posting this. I have been ostracised for many years for expressing my opinions which are almost identical to yours.

    The volunteer worker - say a workshop supervisor - is actually performing work as a duty holder and representative on behalf of the not for profit as a "person conducting a business or undertaking" imo. Where it gets real messy I believe is for clubs who "pay" a member to conduct lessons, train others, run beginners classes etc. Unfortunately in QLD the Civil Liabities Act didn't provide much reassurance either. A couple of proactive woodie clubs in QLD did a lot of work in the mid 2000's, including myself, to minimize risk, to provide a safer environment for members, and a measure of protection for their volunteers. Some succeeded with the implementation of SOP's etc others regressed to their old ways because the old guard's wanted it that way - scary stuff.

    The Townsville Gymnastics Club most regrettably found out the hard way about what their responsibilities and duties were as a "person conducting a business or undertaking" and as a "duty holder" under the act & regs after a gymnast died in a routine.

    Quote Originally Posted by gordo 350 View Post
    Well there you go. Better shut down every shed or business for matter. WHY if a person is schooled on a machine and signs that they are aware of said machine can they then sue the person who told him not to cut his fingers off. I despair at what the world has come to.
    You shouldn't despair - our sheds & community workshops are much safer then they were 30, 20 or even 10 years ago. The fact that there are cases where an obvioulsy negligent or "non-compliant" (PC at work again) person has successfully sought compensation means that duty holders must be aware of their duties and responsibilities, and the organization must do what is reasonable & practical to provide instruction, supervision and a "safe workplace" AND to support & protect its committee & volunteers.

    The organizations committee also must make it very clear that access to workshops, tools and machinery, comes with obligations and responsibilities. Membership is not a "right" it is a priveledge so if a member plays up or doesn't comply with safety then they have to be reigned in. Nobody wants to be the "safety police" but clubs / Mens Sheds can't escape their responsibilities and duties so it becomes a necessary evil if you want to enjoy the benefits & resources of clubs / Mens Sheds.

    One thing for sure is that IF a club has been proactive in providing a "safe environment" and in training members to opperate machinery etc with the means they have at their disposal then they are far more likely to avoid potential claims, and to succeed over being ignorant and possibly negligent should a claim arise.
    Mobyturns

    In An Instant Your Life CanChange Forever

  11. #145
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    arthurs creek
    Posts
    24

    Default

    So. You make your workplace (or shed) as safe as humanly possible and your reward is being dragged to court. Whats not to despair about

  12. #146
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    46

    Default

    Bob,
    Thanks for starting the thread, it has provided some interesting reading.

    I think the first principle to put in place with all members of the shed is that safety is a shared responsibility. All members are responsible to help manage their safety, the safety of others and the safety of the plant and equipment. If the member can't agree to this then they should not be a part of the shed. Even in an industrial environment with employees, getting compliance is very difficult...and the business has the ability to dismiss an employee if they repeatedly don't comply with safety requirements.

    As a second principle it is important that all members should help care for others and stop others who are performing dangerous behaviours. This is very difficult to implement but necessary to ensure that safety is built into the way the shed operates. Some of the workers in one place I worked called this "dobb in a mate". We had to work hard to implement it. It helps if more than one person helps discuss the issue with the person who is doing the wrong behaviour. Your tiered level of training system might help with this. Still difficult to get in place but rewarding when it works. There must be consequences for those who consistently ignore the safety rules.

    As a third principle you should set up safety walks/observations. All members should do them and operate off a checklist that they sign. Every day the shed is open their should be at least one safety walk involving 2-3 members. They are looking at behaviours, machinery (guarding etc) and the environment (to remove trip and other hazards). Usually best to pair experienced members with less experienced ones to help learning. The walk should be no more than 15 minutes and relatively easy to perform...though some training will be required.

    Your training and hazard identification processes are also key elements of success. As has been previously mentioned consistency is hard to get across multiple days, supervisors and people. However it is critical to the success of what you are doing.

    Hopefully the above is of some help. It has worked well in a number of industrial environments, but is probably harder to implement in a men's shed.
    Acer

  13. #147
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    27,756

    Default

    Hate to put it this way but it looks like I may not be supervising for much longer as they want me to concentrate on a specific project. I only go one day a week and I can't do everything.

  14. #148
    Mobyturns's Avatar
    Mobyturns is offline In An Instant Your Life Can Change Forever
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    "Brownsville" Nth QLD
    Age
    66
    Posts
    4,413

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BobL View Post
    Hate to put it this way but it looks like I may not be supervising for much longer as they want me to concentrate on a specific project. I only go one day a week and I can't do everything.
    Bob, I really feel for you as I have been there myself, it is a tough road, and there are those who will flog the willing volunteer. It can be very rewarding, frustrating and scary, sometimes all of those emotions present in the one session. Having the additional agenda of Mens Health makes it that bit tougher.

    Yes one can act responsibly doing everything humanly possible with the resources available, then at some point in the future others with 20 / 20 hindsight may think that was not good enough and attempt to hold that person or the organization to account for their actions / non-action for not preventing another from being injured. NFP's not having the resources to take out appropriate insurances makes it even harder. At some point the legislation and the legal system must take into account that we do not live in utopia. Most not for profits have limited resources, in terms of machinery, money and human resources with the talent, the skills, knowledge and experience to mange these very worthwhile community organizations.


    I wish there was a simpler way to support and protect "the Committee or authorised persons who establish and oversee shed operations and the members that supervise activities, (or) have a key role in requiring that safe practices are followed." Each group seems to have to interpret "what they must do to comply," they reinvent the wheel for each shed, with the human resources they have on hand.
    Mobyturns

    In An Instant Your Life CanChange Forever

  15. #149
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Bowral
    Posts
    837

    Default

    I hate that people can be sued even if they have done everything they possibly can to do the right thing. And I hate that there are more and more arsehats in the world every day that will sue even if something is their own stupid fault because of the prospect of getting some free money. Which is the main reason I don't join clubs anymore. Clubs are run by committees, and there is always someone on every committee who is a professional arsehat. I got sick of dealing with people like that. And accidents will happen regardless of safety rules (no one lives forever), and if a club I was in got sued in that kind of situation I'd just get very upset. So I buy my own tools, and work in my own shed. The only people allowed in my shed are my family, and they either abide by the rules or get forbidden from going in the shed. They can sue me if they want to because they're already getting everything I earn anyway!
    Bob C.

    Never give up.

  16. #150
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Beerburrum Qld
    Posts
    122

    Default

    So true I share your commiserations with Bob
    Quote Originally Posted by Mobyturns View Post
    Bob, I really feel for you as I have been there myself, it is a tough road, and there are those who will flog the willing volunteer. It can be very rewarding, frustrating and scary, sometimes all of those emotions present in the one session. Having the additional agenda of Mens Health makes it that bit tougher.

    Yes one can act responsibly doing everything humanly possible with the resources available, then at some point in the future others with 20 / 20 hindsight may think that was not good enough and attempt to hold that person or the organization to account for their actions / non-action for not preventing another from being injured. NFP's not having the resources to take out appropriate insurances makes it even harder. At some point the legislation and the legal system must take into account that we do not live in utopia. Most not for profits have limited resources, in terms of machinery, money and human resources with the talent, the skills, knowledge and experience to mange these very worthwhile community organizations.


    I wish there was a simpler way to support and protect "the Committee or authorised persons who establish and oversee shed operations and the members that supervise activities, (or) have a key role in requiring that safe practices are followed." Each group seems to have to interpret "what they must do to comply," they reinvent the wheel for each shed, with the human resources they have on hand.

Similar Threads

  1. Mens Shed Charter
    By MAPLEMAN in forum MEN'S SHEDS / MEN IN SHEDS
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 17th October 2015, 12:26 PM
  2. whyalla mens shed
    By kevinwhy in forum MEN'S SHEDS / MEN IN SHEDS
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 27th September 2015, 11:32 AM
  3. New Mens Shed
    By colbra in forum MEN'S SHEDS / MEN IN SHEDS
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 18th December 2011, 11:33 PM
  4. mens shed toy car
    By Hammo13 in forum MEN'S SHEDS / MEN IN SHEDS
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 25th November 2011, 02:51 PM
  5. mens shed toy car
    By underfoot in forum TOY MAKING
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: 28th April 2011, 10:32 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •