HSA tractor inspections

emaherx

Anyone had one yet?
HSA are to perform 500 farm inspections in month of May with particular focus on Tractors.

http://www.farmersjournal.ie/what-the-hsa-will-be-looking-for-on-tractor-inspections-274263

I've heard from one local farmer that they were told to put the doors back on a 35! Seems a bit much as it is essentially a footplate tractor.

_Brian

Much of what they are saying in the article makes sense, hopefully lads are careful.

I doubt any inspection team will leave a yard without pointing out something, being told to put the doors on a 35 is a good sign there was damn all else wrong, I did safety inspections for years, there's never nothing to say.

However, an article on the journal referring to bagged silage would concern me, was it written in 1985 ??, seriously though, to get respect they at least need to use the correct terminology. With farmers nothing will loose respect quicker than "townies" out doing inspections calling wrapped silage "bagged" or my pet hate, not knowing the difference in hay, straw and silage !!

emaherx

_Brian wrote: »

Much of what they are saying in the article makes sense, hopefully lads are careful.

I doubt any inspection team will leave a yard without pointing out something, being told to put the doors on a 35 is a good sign there was damn all else wrong, I did safety inspections for years, there's never nothing to say.

However, an article on the journal referring to bagged silage would concern me, was it written in 1985 ??, seriously though, to get respect they at least need to use the correct terminology. With farmers nothing will loose respect quicker than "townies" out doing inspections calling wrapped silage "bagged" or my pet hate, not knowing the difference in hay, straw and silage !!

Of coarse I didn't hear the conversation myself, if it was a recommendation fair enough but from what I was told "would have to be put back on" is a bit much. Cabs for a start were optional accessories for these tractors and most were designed with lift off doors for the good weather and small/medium sized foot plate tractors are still available.

_Brian

Sitting doing risk assessment and safety statement update at the moment, looking out at last sunny day.

For real job not farm.

oldsmokey

It'll be like most other things in this country - doe's, nct, training a football team, running a small business, or pretty much any activity outside of dressing yourself, common sense will go out the window, the clipboards appear and the letter of the law will apply, pissing off everyone. We don't seem to 'get ' the middle ground.

_Brian

oldsmokey wrote: »

It'll be like most other things in this country - doe's, nct, training a football team, running a small business, or pretty much any activity outside of dressing yourself, common sense will go out the window, the clipboards appear and the letter of the law will apply, pissing off everyone. We don't seem to 'get ' the middle ground.

Well, I'll come out and say I'm often the fella with the clipboard!

However, let me ask you this.
If your responsibility is to walk into a workplace and it's your job to identify the hazards and bad practices that exist that could hurt or kill someone, are you going to do a half job or what ??
Do you turn a blind eye to something because it may inconvenience the lads operating equipment, yes they don't like wearing eye protection, but have you ever had steel surgically removed from your eye ? I have and it's not nice.
It needs to be remembered that they are there to keep people in one piece and alive. To point out the unseen, or ignored dangers.
I've had employees hospitalised because they didn't follow procedure, I've had to strip them and throw them into freezing cold showers because they didn't purge lines before opening (emergency showers are chilled as the cold water closes pores and reduces absorption via the skin)
Inspections and implementation of findings save lives, keep people safe and home to their families in the evening.

So, would you do a half job because it's popular with the farmers, or genuinely help them see just how many dangers are out there. ?

emaherx

_Brian wrote: »

Well, I'll come out and say I'm often the fella with the clipboard!

However, let me ask you this.
If your responsibility is to walk into a workplace and it's your job to identify the hazards and bad practices that exist that could hurt or kill someone, are you going to do a half job or what ??
Do you turn a blind eye to something because it may inconvenience the lads operating equipment, yes they don't like wearing eye protection, but have you ever had steel surgically removed from your eye ? I have and it's not nice.
It needs to be remembered that they are there to keep people in one piece and alive. To point out the unseen, or ignored dangers.
I've had employees hospitalised because they didn't follow procedure, I've had to strip them and throw them into freezing cold showers because they didn't purge lines before opening (emergency showers are chilled as the cold water closes pores and reduces absorption via the skin)
Inspections and implementation of findings save lives, keep people safe and home to their families in the evening.

So, would you do a half job because it's popular with the farmers, or genuinely help them see just how many dangers are out there. ?

Safety is very important but I can't understand that a 35 is perfectly acceptable to use with just a roll bar but not with a cab with no doors.

_Brian

emaherx wrote: »

Safety is very important but I can't understand that a 35 is perfectly acceptable to use with just a roll bar but not with a cab with no doors.

I don't disagree.
There is however a perspective that if machinery has covers, doors, panels etc that they should all be fitted and working correctly.

ganmo

_Brian wrote: »

I don't disagree.
There is however a perspective that if machinery has covers, doors, panels etc that they should all be fitted and working correctly.

And if the doors aren't in good nick the right thing to do was to remove them

emaherx

_Brian wrote: »

I don't disagree.
There is however a perspective that if machinery has covers, doors, panels etc that they should all be fitted and working correctly.

But in a tiny cab with no air-con and not Even a fan built in it is much healthier for the operator to take off the doors (as they were designed to do by the manufacturer) in warm weather

_Brian

emaherx wrote: »

But in a tiny cab with no air-con and not Even a fan built in it is much healthier for the operator to take off the doors (as they were designed to do by the manufacturer) in warm weather

Like I said, I don't disagree..

The theory is that if lads get in the habbit of always replacing stuff when machines are worked on then its much much more likely that safety guards will be replaced and respected..

Anywhere I've seen maintenance lads leave off covers and doors you can be dead sure there were safety guards left off too..

Its not a case that the lad with the clipboard is out to make life difficult, sometimes he sees things differently because his responsibilities are different, although sometimes when you meet a complete tool - you just want to make their life hell

lakill Farm

just querying now, not saying anything against HSA

If they arrive can you refuse allowing them onto your property?

emaherx

_Brian wrote: »

Like I said, I don't disagree..

The theory is that if lads get in the habbit of always replacing stuff when machines are worked on then its much much more likely that safety guards will be replaced and respected..

Anywhere I've seen maintenance lads leave off covers and doors you can be dead sure there were safety guards left off too..

That's a big assumption..... I used to take doors off my 135 for the whole summer and put them back on in winter. Eventually I removed the cab altogether and put on a roll bar. Nothing to do with lads not replacing safety guards just too hot plus better visibility for mowing lawns and working on the farmer tan.

ganmo

I remember a story that came out of America where they brought in compulsory roll bars as a result of the amount of ppl dying from rolling tractors...low and behold the deaths didn't reduce significantly because they didn't look at why they were rolling.

A box ticked satisfies the clipboard but it mightn't solve the problem

_Brian

lakill Farm wrote: »

just querying now, not saying anything against HSA

If they arrive can you refuse allowing them onto your property?

Interesting question.
In industry no they cannot be refused access and will get guards to gain access.

_Brian

emaherx wrote: »

That's a big assumption..... I used to take doors off my 135 for the whole summer and put them back on in winter. Eventually I removed the cab altogether and put on a roll bar. Nothing to do with lads not replacing safety guards just too hot plus better visibility for mowing lawns and working on the farmer tan.

That's one specific incident , the principal of operation is designed to be effective in the long run where there are multiple operators assembling and disassembling equipment for a variety of reasons. Where the dictate is taken to replace every cover and door every time the machines are more likely to be safer.

lakill Farm

_Brian wrote: »

Interesting question.
In industry no they cannot be refused access and will get guards to gain access.

start looking for method statements off them, their insurance, safety statement, site assessment. see is all their injections up to date

and then put them through a 3 hour site induction in a tiny room.

Then ask them to put on all bio security cloths and footwear after they had showers that they must provide on site

Be some looking at you

Username John

I assume the HSA give you a list of things to make you aware of them - they have no real powers to do anything?

I am ok with the idea, the implementation of course is where it could all fall down...

I only have a 135, so it's easy for me to talk I suppose

Bass Reeves

I have to disagree with you Brian. This is another box ticking exercise. It just another attempt by the HSA to say they are doing something about farm safety. It a bit like Shane Ross and his changing the drink driving law.

Let look at farm accident statistics. Where are people generally killed or hurt. Trying to remember off hand. But I think it accidents with machinery, mostly crushing type accidents, falling from heights and livestock.maybe they taught that the MF 35 was an animal, or that you put the doors on from the roof. Maybe you could have a falling from height accident out through the open door or get crushed by the ground when you fall. It back to common sense not being that common

_Brian

Bass Reeves wrote: »

I have to disagree with you Brian. This is another box ticking exercise. It just another attempt by the HSA to say they are doing something about farm safety. It a bit like Shane Ross and his changing the drink driving law.

Let look at farm accident statistics. Where are people generally killed or hurt. Trying to remember off hand. But I think it accidents with machinery, mostly crushing type accidents, falling from heights and livestock.maybe they taught that the MF 35 was an animal, or that you put the doors on from the roof. Maybe you could have a falling from height accident out through the open door or get crushed by the ground when you fall. It back to common sense not being that common

Maybe it is, maybe it's not.
But I wouldn't go throwing the baby out with the bath water either.

I'd squirm a fair bit if we had an inspection, but you need to be open minded too. So far we've heard one second or third hand story about a tractor door and everyone thinks the whole thing is a sham.

Inspections focus people on something no matter if they enjoy nor agree with the process. No different on the factory floor lads say all the same things, box ticking, jobs for the boys, whatever your favourite quip may be.

But, numbers have shown over and over that the current methods employed in safety management have improved accident numbers and reduced casualties across all workplaces. Farming is currently deemed the most dangerous workplace on the country, the numbers are there to back up that inditement. So like it or not that's where the focus will come.

I'm greatly surprised that the insurance companies haven't stepped in and dictated some basic training and level of audits for farms on the back of the statistics, it would lessen the risk they are being exposed to.

I know in my current work they specify manual handling, safepass and one in twenty needs basic first aid, these are mandatory for the insurance policy. They insist on safety statements and risk assessments on activities.

Buford T. Justice XIX

Username John wrote: »

I assume the HSA give you a list of things to make you aware of them - they have no real powers to do anything?

I am ok with the idea, the implementation of course is where it could all fall down...

I only have a 135, so it's easy for me to talk I suppose

I had one a good few years back. The first time he came, there were lads putting up a shed and concrete trucks coming and going so he went away and came back a few months later.

We had a chat and a cup of tea and walked around the yard and he pointed out things that should be done like loaders left on the ground when stopped and cutoff switches on tractors and ladders stored on their side, not upright. Simple things which made sense when I was told but I'd never thought about them before.

All PTO shafts were good and that is the number one thing they will look for, I was told. If the PTO shafts are good, they reckon they will have little trouble with the rest of the inspection. Like Brian said, it shows that some thought goes into safety if PTO shafts are good. If they are bad, them they view it as not much emphasis going on safety.

_Brian

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

I had one a good few years back. The first time he came, there were lads putting up a shed and concrete trucks coming and going so he went away and came back a few months later.

We had a chat and a cup of tea and walked around the yard and he pointed out things that should be done like loaders left on the ground when stopped and cutoff switches on tractors and ladders stored on their side, not upright. Simple things which made sense when I was told but I'd never thought about them before.

All PTO shafts were good and that is the number one thing they will look for, I was told. If the PTO shafts are good, they reckon they will have little trouble with the rest of the inspection. Like Brian said, it shows that some thought goes into safety if PTO shafts are good. If they are bad, them they view it as not much emphasis going on safety.

Being safe working is a mindset, its a process you develop. The process I was describing earlier, being pedantic about covers and doors etc builds the trait of a person who finishes a job well and restores equipment to a fully working safe state.. Its about building safe habits. An assessor won't see everything dangerous on your farm, but by getting you going on basics the hope is people will learn to work safely, think safety when doing most jobs.. It wont happen straight away but its the start of a process.

emaherx

_Brian wrote: »

Maybe it is, maybe it's not.
But I wouldn't go throwing the baby out with the bath water either.

I'd squirm a fair bit if we had an inspection, but you need to be open minded too. So far we've heard one second or third hand story about a tractor door and everyone thinks the whole thing is a sham.

Actually _Brian someone needs to play devils advocate in these discussions so fair play to you. And I agree with you some form of inspections are required and I started this thread based on a second hand story. But common sense is required and from my own experience of our last HSA inspection which went fine for us, but I felt the inspector had no idea about what she was looking at. She looked at all of our machines and said they were fine and truth be told they were far from it, if I was the inspector in that case I would of had quite a few recommendations from it.

One tractor had a damaged U-Gaurd, she checked it and I surely thought she would have something to say but no, it was there but was missing at least a third of it.

All of our PTO shafts had covers but there were a few which were not running on their bearings or had missing/ damaged chains but again she looked and noted how they all had PTO covers! :eek:

So it sounds like I'm contradicting myself but my concern is.... are the inspectors qualified to make their recommendations or do they just make it up as they go?

The inspector who allegedly pointed out the missing door as needing sorting, did he check for the dynamo cover that nearly every 35 in the country is missing.

_Brian wrote: »

Inspections focus people on something no matter if they enjoy nor agree with the process. No different on the factory floor lads say all the same things, box ticking, jobs for the boys, whatever your favourite quip may be.

But, numbers have shown over and over that the current methods employed in safety management have improved accident numbers and reduced casualties across all workplaces. Farming is currently deemed the most dangerous workplace on the country, the numbers are there to back up that inditement. So like it or not that's where the focus will come.

I'm greatly surprised that the insurance companies haven't stepped in and dictated some basic training and level of audits for farms on the back of the statistics, it would lessen the risk they are being exposed to.

I know in my current work they specify manual handling, safepass and one in twenty needs basic first aid, these are mandatory for the insurance policy. They insist on safety statements and risk assessments on activities.

Lies Damn Lies and statistics..... well not quite but it is not the same thing, don't get me wrong safety is important but every farmer who has a trip or fall in what is essentially their back garden (Big back Gardens I know) is counted as a work place accident no matter the time of day or if they are actually engaged in a farming activity at the time. Idiots fall of ladders or hurt themselves in all kinds of weird and wonderful DIY accidents in their own homes all over the country but are not measured as work accidents. The Farmer is essentially always at their work place so statistics are skewed somewhat.

Bullocks

Maybe I'm getting too used to it from work but I'd agree with everything Brian is saying and one huge point he made was how are the insurance companies not making some form for training mandatory to issue some policies . Only reason I can think of is that the farmers must not be claiming as much as other policy holders or they would be .

As far as I know the HSA cant really penalise or close down the farmers only give recomendations on what to improve so I wouldnt get too worried about a visit for the time being especially with the lack of HSA auditors on the ground with a rake of stuff to try and cover

emaherx

Bullocks wrote: »

. Only reason I can think of is that the farmers must not be claiming as much as other policy holders or they would be .

Probably very true, I'd imagine most farms don't have employees who are not family, so they would only be claiming against their own policies.

emaherx

Bullocks wrote: »

.
As far as I know the HSA cant really penalise or close down the farmers only give recomendations on what to improve so I wouldnt get too worried about a visit for the time being especially with the lack of HSA auditors on the ground with a rake of stuff to try and cover

I'm not so sure,
http://www.hsa.ie/eng/Your_Industry/Agriculture_Forestry/Overview/Legislation_Enforcement/

HSA Website wrote:

In 2011 the HSA carried out 3,000 farm inspections. During those inspections Notices were issued.

An Improvement Notice is a legal directive from an Inspector requiring that certain improvements be carried out in a specified time-frame
A Prohibition Notice is a legal instruction directing that a specified work activity be stopped due to the level of danger

Bullocks

emaherx wrote: »

I'm not so sure,
http://www.hsa.ie/eng/Your_Industry/Agriculture_Forestry/Overview/Legislation_Enforcement/

How many prohibition notices were issued I wonder?

mf240

Let the dog deal with them.

J.O. Farmer

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

I had one a good few years back. The first time he came, there were lads putting up a shed and concrete trucks coming and going so he went away and came back a few months later.

We had a chat and a cup of tea and walked around the yard and he pointed out things that should be done like loaders left on the ground when stopped and cutoff switches on tractors and ladders stored on their side, not upright. Simple things which made sense when I was told but I'd never thought about them before.

All PTO shafts were good and that is the number one thing they will look for, I was told. If the PTO shafts are good, they reckon they will have little trouble with the rest of the inspection. Like Brian said, it shows that some thought goes into safety if PTO shafts are good. If they are bad, them they view it as not much emphasis going on safety.

Pretty much my experience of a HSA audit. His opinion was if I got killed he couldn't prosecute a dead man and if it was a family member I'd have suffered more than anything he could do to me anyway.
We'd a walk round the farm without him looking too closely at anything but sharing stories of deaths he'd investigated.
It was far more effective than if he'd came in read the riot act and threatened to jail me for not wearing steel toe cap boots.

einn32

_Brian wrote: »

Interesting question.
In industry no they cannot be refused access and will get guards to gain access.

No I don't think they need a warrant to come on to your premises of business. The guards do.

Bullocks

J.O. Farmer wrote: »

Pretty much my experience of a HSA audit. His opinion was if I got killed he couldn't prosecute a dead man and if it was a family member I'd have suffered more than anything he could do to me anyway.
We'd a walk round the farm without him looking too closely at anything but sharing stories of deaths he'd investigated.
It was far more effective than if he'd came in read the riot act and threatened to jail me for not wearing steel toe cap boots.

Any of them I've met are alright to deal with and give more advice than warnings really . I've seen them met with hostility and that's never going to run smoothly after