Balancing health & safety
by Bernard McGrath, Inspection Validation Centre

I would like to minimise the number of embarrassing incidents that I admit to, so suffice to say that a couple of years ago I altered my intermittent fitness regime to include exercises that would reverse the deterioration in my balancing ability. And it has worked. Whilst walking over an ice-covered pavement in front of some shops the other day, my foot started to go from under me but I was able to make the necessary adjustments and remain upright. I was quite proud of my achievement until an old lady, making her way gingerly past me, told me to be careful, and a second younger lady grinned and said "that would have been funny!".

With all the ice and snow, the issue of health and safety has come to the fore, both for individuals deciding how to get around and for organisations on how to respond to the impact of the weather. Despite what the old lady said, I had been careful: avoiding driving, wearing walking trainers with proper grip, and, except for the aforementioned trip from the car to the shop, using a walking pole – much to the amusement of my offspring and probably a lot of others if I had made an effort to look, rather than keeping my head down to see where to place my feet.

There are many lessons to be learned from this latest incidence of 'extreme weather', as it was described when used as an explanation for why a train was 30 minutes late! Do we leave things as they are? Then, if any accidents do occur, it can be put down to the individual making the wrong choice or to an Act of God. Or, do we act to try and make things safer? At the risk of leaving ourselves open to being sued because by acting we are deemed to have responsibility for the subsequent condition of whatever we have acted on and hence its affect on others. How good are plans and processes to deal with possible adverse conditions? Do they actually work?

There have been many examples of successes and failures: communities working together to clear streets and paths, to get schools open and to deliver assistance to those who need it; councils mobilising staff to get bins emptied. On the flip-side there has been a lack of communication, failure to learn lessons from previous failure of processes when they needed to be implemented, crisis meetings held as a substitute for action and an attitude of 'wait until it thaws and then we will catch up'. The key lesson from all this was summed up by a teacher commenting on the prevarication on whether the January exams would go ahead: "Difficult circumstances demand difficult decisions". And decisions lead to actions and, as the saying goes, actions speak louder than words, or policies or crisis meetings or emergency plans or risk assessments. Actions prove that safety is a high priority and people are an important asset.

Safety regularly demands difficult decisions. Often, these decisions have to be taken without the benefit of having something as definitive as ice and snow to act upon. If these decisions are successful, accidents will be avoided and, as nothing happens, nobody knows they were the correct decisions. As safety avoidance costs money, the successful decision may even be seen as an unnecessary expenditure. In addition, if the incorrect decision is made or even no decision made, an accident, which by definition is a probabilistic event, may not occur and these options are then seen as successful and used as a yardstick for the future. That is until the wrong decision results in a catastrophe, then suddenly 20:20 hindsight applies.

NDT is a safety activity and requires difficult decisions: calling an indication as a defect; highlighting deficient techniques and procedures; providing sufficient training; demanding sufficient time, access and surface preparation; insisting on actually doing inspection. These decisions need to be made by individuals and organisations need to support these individuals as well as checking that the decisions are being made.

Last year, information came out regarding two catastrophes which offer powerful lessons in the importance of safety, the need for action and the impact of individuals like you and me. Whether you agree or disagree with my views above, go and have a look at the Nimrod report which can be obtained from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/28_10_09_nimrod.pdf and read about the Air France crash in June 2009 (See Sunday Times Magazine, 15th November 2009 at http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article6914870.ece). Let me or the editor know what you think.

Please note that the views expressed in this column are the author’s own personal ramblings for the purpose of encouraging discussion within the NDT Newspaper. They do not represent the views of the IVC, Serco Assurance or the HSE who funded the PANI projects.

Letters can be mailed to The Editor, NDT News, Newton Building, St George's Avenue, Northampton NN2 6JB. Fax: 01604 89 3861; Email: ndtnews@bindt.org or email Bernard McGrath direct at Bernard.McGrath@sercoassurance.com