We know that falls from height are regularly one of the biggest killers in the demolition and construction industry. But we continue to insist that men and women work at height.
We know that workers are injured, maimed and killed by heavy equipment. Yet we still plan projects in a way in that requires men and machines to work in dangerously close proximity.
We know that working on demolition sites requires a certain degree of competence. But we continually forego real competence and replace it with a plastic card that proves someone can pass a test in a classroom.
So, with all that being said, just how committed are we to the safety of those working on our sites?
I ask this for a very specific reason, which I will get to in just a moment. But first, think about your car for just a second. You have seatbelts, airbags, ABS braking, impact protection and a whole host of other features designed to keep you and your passengers safe. You didn’t ask for those features; and there was no option to have them removed.
On the road, safety features are not an option; they are a legal requirement. Off-road and on demolition and construction sites, however, it seems that every safety feature is “offered” as an option.
And it is down to the owner of the machine - Does he want to pay extra to ensure the safety of the person driving the machine and those around him? Or would he prefer to keep the money in his pocket and his fingers crossed in the hope that nothing untoward happens?
This thought was triggered by the IntelliSense system that I saw up at JCB just last week. I have done a podcast on it so I won’t bore you with the details. But it is basically a set of AI-powered cameras that provide the operator with pretty much 360-degree division; warnings of encroachment by pedestrians or fellow workers; and the ability to record, store and analyse near-miss date.
This is “offered” as a factory-fit option. Now I don’t know how much the IntelliSense system costs. Frankly, it shouldn’t matter. Even it was thousands of pounds, it is still far less than the cost of a human life. But while there will be some companies out there that embrace IntelliSense and other systems like it, most will choose the bottom line over another line of safety.
Should they even have a choice?
There are some Tier 1 contractors that are mandating the use of reversing cameras, pedestrian warning systems and human form recognition technology. But the UK construction equipment industry is still dominated by plant hire and rental companies. Those companies can’t charge more for the presence of these safety systems so they don’t specify them. And while rental equipment accounts for 80 or 90 percent of all the plant on UK demolition and construction sites, that means that the take-up of these potentially life-saving systems is - at best - negligible.
Now we could wait for Government and legislators to demand the adoption of any and all available safety systems. But we know they move at a snail’s pace - How many construction workers will die before the Government gets around to mandating these things?
You might argue that the manufacturers should just commit, fit these systems whether they’re requested or not and just charge the customer accordingly. But you know full well there will be other manufacturers out there that would be only too happy to sell a stripped down, safety-optional piece of kit.
Ultimately, this surely comes down to the owners of the equipment to step up, grab the bull by the horns, and just make everyone as safe as possible.
You wouldn’t shop around to identify the least safe car on the road, just to save a few quid. So why do we continue to do it when specifying demolition and construction equipment?
This topic was the subject of an in-depth discussion on today's after show chat. You can listen to the resulting podcast here.