Suggested safety checklist

[JohnJ]

Wadidiz,
if you contact the UKPSF they have a risk assessment package that covers site safety and hopefully all your points.

Two problems are highlighted in your list and are at either end of the spectrum.
On the first point you state that Only competent, sober personnel shall host, instruct and supervise the rental customers -what is your definition of sober and competant. At the moment most sites do not have training for marshals and rely on the length of time a player has played. Sober - is this to the UK driving limit and if so how will you test it?

At the other end of the scale is the goggles. How do you check for significant weakness? Your wording would mean that every time a lens takes a direct hit would mean that the lens should be replaced. This simply won't happen but will automatically put site owners in a none complient situation because they don't do it.

All credit to you for putting your list together and I applaud anybody who puts safety as the highest priority anmd I hope I'm not putting a dampner on your efforts, I do this type of work for a living and I know how difficult it can be.

 

[JohnJ]

Just to add to my last post, the UKPSF are going to be holding an industry conference next year and I was looking for an angle on health and safety. Your pionts have confirmed my thoughts on basing it around risk assessments and accident/ incident reporting - no honestly it will be entertaining and informative
JJ

 

[Wadidiz]

Originally posted by JohnJ
Wadidiz,
if you contact the UKPSF they have a risk assessment package that covers site safety and hopefully all your points.

Two problems are highlighted in your list and are at either end of the spectrum.
On the first point you state that Only competent, sober personnel shall host, instruct and supervise the rental customers -what is your definition of sober and competant. At the moment most sites do not have training for marshals and rely on the length of time a player has played. Sober - is this to the UK driving limit and if so how will you test it?

At the other end of the scale is the goggles. How do you check for significant weakness? Your wording would mean that every time a lens takes a direct hit would mean that the lens should be replaced. This simply won't happen but will automatically put site owners in a none complient situation because they don't do it.

All credit to you for putting your list together and I applaud anybody who puts safety as the highest priority anmd I hope I'm not putting a dampner on your efforts, I do this type of work for a living and I know how difficult it can be.

I don't think we need to overdefine and overspecify or we will get to your point in your middle paragraph, non-compliance. The site operators will just think it's to much hassle to even read these guidelines.

The competent personnel is the least of my worries. The rule of reason can usually be applied here. Visibly drunk marshalls and drinking (or partaking in a spliff) before or on the job is definitely taboo.

The real difficulty is the goggles issue. You can read what Liz wrote a few posts back. How can we be realistic about this and still encourage (and I hope enforce) site safety?

On another forum a discussion came up about this specific point in connection with the rate of fire of tournament markers. A player pointed out this his goggles started to crack during a high ROF burst on him at close range with what seemed to have been a hot marker. So the possibility of structural weakening of lenses can be a reality.

What should be realistic guidelines? When it comes to tournaments, are we going to have to demand and enforce that players who get gogged go immediately and replace their lenses? Sorta gives a new connotation to the magazine named FACEFULL!

I personally think today's lenses can hold up to a copious quantity of direct hits, perhaps, however, from not such close range and not from hot markers.

We need some scientific investigations, facts and statistics. Until then what should be the wording to keep these rules from being totally ditched?

Steve