Health & Safety ??

kit3

Health & safety gone mad ?? What do ye think ?

http://corkrunning.blogspot.ie/2016/10/esb-bans-recreational-jogging-at.html?m=1

Chivito550

It only states recreational running, jogging and walking. So that leaves a window of opportunity for the competitive 1500m runner who wants to squeeze in a sneaky session during lunch break.

Macy0161

Give them a builders jacket - isn't that the answer to every road safety question?

ThisRegard

Why doesn't the blog actually use a photo of Moneypoint for the story?

Anyway, it's a bit ridiculous as according to the story there's never been an accident, nor does there seem like there's any construction going on which would bring increased construction traffic, hazards etc.

They really should be more interested in the health of their employees rather than insisting they remain at their desks or canteen.

average_runner

Chivito550 wrote: »

It only states recreational running, jogging and walking. So that leaves a window of opportunity for the competitive 1500m runner who wants to squeeze in a sneaky session during lunch break.

So how do they get from the car park to the building?

ger664

ThisRegard wrote: »

Why doesn't the blog actually use a photo of Moneypoint for the story?

That is Moneypoint or it is now.

cjt156

This is nuts. Obviously its not clever to be doing fartleks amongst heavy plant machinery but you can't lock everyone in the canteen to munch on breakfast rolls all day either.
Quite a few companies with large campuses (campii, whatever) have walking trails for staff, surely the ESB could do the same - from that photo it looks like a great place for a scenic run to clear the head.

ThisRegard

ger664 wrote: »

That is Moneypoint or it is now.

They must have realised their mistake, it was Poolbeg yesterday.

LiamaDelta

It's a pretty simple case of being risk averse. The company has looked at the issue of having employees jogging/walking on site and the levels of traffic and they have decided that they can reduce the risk of an accident by removing the number of people from the roads.

Musketeer4

I'd say the employees are probably at greater risk from the toxic shíte belching out from the stacks than from getting run over while jogging. How this place is still operating is beyond belief.

They are dead right to go out on the protest runs at lunch time. They should keep that up until management at this plant cop themselves on.

The reality here is that management banned jogging, not because of a risk of being run over, but just in case someone sprains an ankle and decides to sue.
Just like a lot of H&S culture, it's just more insurance related arse cover.

walshb

These running activities here are probably alright when kept to a minimum. I reckon it's a bit of a hassle and danger and that is why they brought in the rules. Probably some people pushing the boundaries spoiling it for everyone else. The article is very sparse.

ThisRegard

LiamaDelta wrote: »

It's a pretty simple case of being risk averse. The company has looked at the issue of having employees jogging/walking on site and the levels of traffic and they have decided that they can reduce the risk of an accident by removing the number of people from the roads.

They can reduce the risk by having no employees too, both ideas are equally as stupid.

Neady83

Musketeer4 wrote: »

I'd say the employees are probably at greater risk from the toxic shíte belching out from the stacks than from getting run over while jogging. How this place is still operating is beyond belief.

They only release the toxic stuff into the air at about 3 o clock in the morning when everyone is tucked up in bed. Can never see it during the day but always see it streaking across the sky at night.

walshb wrote: »

These running activities here are probably alright when kept to a minimum. I reckon it's a bit of a hassle and danger and that is why they brought in the rules. Probably some people pushing the boundaries spoiling it for everyone else. The article is very sparse.

The article is sparse. Most of the lorries enter and exit at a back entrance and the guys and gals don't (didn't) usually run on those roads (I used to work & run there).

As far as I know, there are windmills being erected at the moment, along the road where the workers enter and and exit the plant and where people usually jog. My guess is that these H&S issues are being enforced now because of increased traffic and works on all of the roads around the plant.

walshb

Neady83 wrote: »

As far as I know, there are windmills being erected at the moment, along the road where the workers enter and and exit the plant and where people usually jog. My guess is that these H&S issues are being enforced now because of increased traffic and works on all of the roads around the plant.

Sounds about right. I wouldn't fault the firm/authorities here. They are thinking about people's safety.

ThisRegard

walshb wrote: »

They are thinking about people's safety.

Well, they could have at least allowed the men to run around the trails there.

LiamaDelta

ThisRegard wrote: »

They can reduce the risk by having no employees too, both ideas are equally as stupid.

Equally?

Singer

As it happens I work in a building co-habited by some ESB employees, the place is swarming with kind of over the top safety signs on the stairs, in the car-park etc. I guess working with electricity creates a very safety orientated culture.

ThisRegard

Yeah, I used to share a building with ESB too, exactly as you say, signs all over the place, even in the shared carparks which nobody else took a blind bit of notice, or were straightforward common sense anyway.

PaulieC

ThisRegard wrote: »

Well, they could have at least allowed the men to run around the trails there.

They definitely could let the men, but not the ladies.

Enduro

PaulieC wrote: »

They definitely could let the men, but not the ladies.

What if their husbands allow them to run?

PaulieC

Grey area. The law should be absolutely clear on this: as a lady, either you're allowed to run or you're doing the housework. That way there is no confusion.

kit3

PaulieC wrote: »

Grey area. The law should be absolutely clear on this: as a lady, either you're allowed to run or you're doing the housework. That way there is no confusion.

Sounds good to me - I'm definitely taking the running option

HS3

Enduro wrote: »

PaulieC wrote: »

They definitely could let the men, but not the ladies.

What if their husbands allow them to run?

Thats fine then...but only if under the crippling fear that someone could jump out at them ghost train styliee at any point in the run :pac: