|
|
Post by melikepie on Aug 14, 2013 21:07:50 GMT
Earlier there was an event organised by the London Transport Museum which would explore the history of Aldwych but this was canceled for "unforeseen technical restrictions"? Why?
|
|
|
|
Post by phillw48 on Aug 14, 2013 21:47:32 GMT
Apparently Tfl have refused to allow the event for 'health and safety' reasons.
|
|
|
|
Post by southfieldschris on Aug 15, 2013 7:08:45 GMT
Apparently Tfl have refused to allow the event for 'health and safety' reasons. Very good. Does anyone know what the real reasons are? |
|
|
|
Post by phillw48 on Aug 15, 2013 16:53:32 GMT
My local model railway club has a small Underground layout that had been invited to be displayed there. We received notification from the LTM that TfL had cancelled the display.
|
|
|
|
Post by phillw48 on Aug 18, 2013 21:57:44 GMT
Further to the above, I have been informed that the cancellation of this event and of the Neasden open day for 'health and safety' reasons is the result of an incident involving a sign falling on a visitor at an event. Apparently TfL is now insisting on a full health and safety audit before such events take place, and these are time consuming and expensive. My informant speculated that even the open days at the Acton Museum depot could be affected.
|
|
|
|
Post by rsdworker on Aug 19, 2013 0:02:10 GMT
well signs should be secured - same in shops - when signs fall - its quickly removed and its safe but i don't believe cancelations that but i believe if sign is loose due old signs - then means no where to do events - in old days - health and safety wasn't important - if sign fell down and people hurt then people won't have problem dealing with it means events would be still on but i think tfl gone too far on health and safety - too many rules and so
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2013 6:12:17 GMT
Except that a pedestrian was killed relatively recently when a sign fell on her in the street. I agree that some things done in the name of health and safety are ridiculous however ensuring that objects won't fall on visitors is not something I would place in that category.
|
|
|
|
Post by southfieldschris on Aug 19, 2013 7:29:42 GMT
Except that a pedestrian was killed relatively recently when a sign fell on her in the street. I agree that some things done in the name of health and safety are ridiculous however ensuring that objects won't fall on visitors is not something I would place in that category. And 2 months ago a mirror fell on a small boy in a shop in Bicester and killed him. I agree, making sure things won't fall on people is a good thing to do before you let folk in to somewhere. Having said that, "cancelled for health & safety reasons" is a bit mealy-mouthed. "Cancelled because we aren't willing to run a safety audit of the site" would be more honest - if more contentious...after all, some of these places are operational worksites and should be safety-checked anyhow for the good of the people who work there. |
|
|
|
Post by phillw48 on Aug 19, 2013 8:10:43 GMT
Not so much "can't be bothered" as can't afford it. If Boris held back on some of his 'vanity' projects such as the cable car and Borismaster there might be some money available.
|
|
|
|
Post by southfieldschris on Aug 19, 2013 8:16:42 GMT
Not so much "can't be bothered" as can't afford it. If Boris held back on some of his 'vanity' projects such as the cable car and Borismaster there might be some money available. My point is that if these are operating workplaces there should be routine safety audits going on anyhow, so the extra cost of doing one before a public event should be nil. |
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Aug 19, 2013 9:01:20 GMT
Yes, but the staff who work there would have received safety briefings (or similar) to help minimise risk, for example "This is an inspection pit. Do not fall into it, go around it". It can be long and time consuming to brief staff on this, and so trying to do it all for a large group of people, all arriving at different times, for one day, makes it impractical and expensive.
|
|
|
|
Post by southfieldschris on Aug 19, 2013 11:30:02 GMT
Yes, but the staff who work there would have received safety briefings (or similar) to help minimise risk, for example "This is an inspection pit. Do not fall into it, go around it". It can be long and time consuming to brief staff on this, and so trying to do it all for a large group of people, all arriving at different times, for one day, makes it impractical and expensive. Agreed, but the reason Phillw48 gave was "Apparently TfL is now insisting on a full health and safety audit before such events take place, and these are time consuming and expensive". Safety briefings for day visitors, whilst also time-consuming and expensive, are not the same thing. Sorry to pick nits but it is distressing to see these things called out at the level of rumour. |
|
|
|
Post by compsci on Aug 19, 2013 11:53:59 GMT
Before the rumour mill goes out of control on this one, the explanation I've had (on the museum's internal channels) is "logistical issues". That's not the same thing as H&S. What was proposed involved a significant quantity of AV equipment, so it's likely that the organisers had second thoughts when they realised that the lifts are rather permanently out of service.
I have also been asked to assist with guided tours (similar format to last year) in November as a replacement event. So Aldwych is certainly not being wrapped in cotton wool and sealed off, never mind Acton.
|
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Aug 19, 2013 12:22:30 GMT
Yes, but the staff who work there would have received safety briefings (or similar) to help minimise risk, for example "This is an inspection pit. Do not fall into it, go around it". It can be long and time consuming to brief staff on this, and so trying to do it all for a large group of people, all arriving at different times, for one day, makes it impractical and expensive. Agreed, but the reason Phillw48 gave was "Apparently TfL is now insisting on a full health and safety audit before such events take place, and these are time consuming and expensive". Safety briefings for day visitors, whilst also time-consuming and expensive, are not the same thing. Sorry to pick nits but it is distressing to see these things called out at the level of rumour. I was more looking at the aspect of Neasden depot, rather than Aldwych, which I wouldn't exactly describe as an "operating workplace" |
|
|
|
Post by southfieldschris on Aug 20, 2013 9:11:14 GMT
Agreed, but the reason Phillw48 gave was "Apparently TfL is now insisting on a full health and safety audit before such events take place, and these are time consuming and expensive". Safety briefings for day visitors, whilst also time-consuming and expensive, are not the same thing. Sorry to pick nits but it is distressing to see these things called out at the level of rumour. I was more looking at the aspect of Neasden depot, rather than Aldwych, which I wouldn't exactly describe as an "operating workplace" Fair point. |
|
