Health and Safety. Bandied about far too freely?

[Segilla]

The Housing Assn I am under is far too dictatorial, working to a master and servant relationship, whereas they are our managers.

Yet another recent change, clearing all personal property from the common parts of the buildings has been backed up by 'a requirement of Health and Safety. In part, this is most unreasoanble.

I think that any such use of the words can only be justified following the compilation of a safety assessment.
Any comments please.

[cassa333]

Not knowing what your work environment is like I cannot comment on the specifics but tend to agree that H&S is overused

It gets used a lot when 'someone' wants to change things but can't think of a proper justification for doing so.

What reason is there for personal belongings to be in common parts of the building? Does this mean your normal working desk or the corridor leading to it?

I had heard a while back of a council changed everything so that everyone worked in the open and even did not have designated desks so could be sent to work at any area to do their job.

Didn't go down to well with the workforce but haven't hear how it got on.

[bigbadmarty]

I work in construction and you may think I'd appreciate anyone trying to improve the safety of my workplace . The reality is that a semi-educated group of sycophants are deliberately using H&S as a tool to install some form of pecking order on the bigger jobsites . These are the same individuals who weren't up to scratch on the tools or made too many errors in management - and they are making their own cosy little industry out of it .

[mike11111]

It's not Anchor is it, by any chance? I live in one of their schemes and they are Health and Safety daft.

[Segilla]

The blocks here of four flats each are inhabited by owner-occupiers, nobody under 60, many in their late eighties.
We are trouble free to our mangers. I doubt if anyone here is late paying the service charge, create noise or row with neighbours and we are certainly not into the territory described in the letter we had which included removing blood and syringes!

Moving into smaller accommodation, many of us have bookcases on the landings, the odd small chair, umbrella stands and so on, but nothing impeding access, although I can understand that there could be a possibilty of a problem in a few rare cases.

The perception is that instead of considering us, the Assn is concerned about their own back and any possibility of anything which could give rise to any kind of problem for them has to be tackled, for fear of a claim.
Bugger the Assn. What about us!
They should be considering individual cases, not imposing a blanket ban and hiding behind H&S.

[tenrec]

Segilla, this is just a scenario, but what if, there were a fire and the firemen could not see on the landings the objects you have said are there? Would they be able to carry out there job as efficiently if it were pitch black and full of smoke?

[Segilla]

Not Anchor, Mike11111, Places for People - but they are all as bad as each other, instead of being caring organisations they are simply big business and beyond control
The Govt cuts down the money they give to Councils - who reduce staff.
Private industry trims staff to ensure the health of the business.
But housing Assns are free to do as they choose.

[bednobs]

the action taken by the housing association seems very reasonable to me. ok so syringes might not apply in your block but it would be completely unweildy to have different policies in different blocks. if i paid to live in an appartment and had to look at other's junk in the common parts, i'd be annoyed. i would have thought elderly people were more at risk of tripping over stuff than other people so it makes absolute sense to me to have clear common parts - it's absolutely a health and safety issue

[Segilla]

A good point tenrec which is why individual cases do need to be considered, but in some cases the furniture is in dead-end places where nobody would want to go or could get to.

[tenrec]

I see.

[karenmac60]

Couldn't such items be a fire risk? I know my LA reminds us every so often not to leave furniture in the common close because unfortunately there are idiots about who like to set fire to such things - placing us in danger. Maybe your HA are just looking out for your health and your safety....

[Segilla]

I was not asking for special treatment bednobs, simply trying to emphasise the sort of trouble-free, responsible people here.

The items I speak of are not 'junk'.

If obstructive, yes they should be moved but not a blanket ban.

But nobody has cited what I wanted to know. What legal basis is there for H&S and what does any Act say about a safety assessment or whatever the term is.

[bednobs]

a housing association cannot really consider individual circumstances - imagine how many properties they have!

[bednobs]

i can't see why they must have the law behind them to quote something is for health and safety reasons - it is patently a health and safety issue to keep common parts clear. have you asked them if they have done a risk assessment? they may well have done

[woofgang]

the problem is you can't say "Ms Jones in x block can do such and such my Mr Smith in Y block can't. I would say that the relationship you have is a tenant landlord one.

[woofgang]

sorry i hit enter too soon. As a tenant you agree to abide by the landlord's rules. If they are having problems at an area then they are entitled to emphasise existing rules and expect people to comply with what they agreed to when they moved in.

[vulcan]

If it's a Housing association property then the Fire Service will have carried out their own assessment, If they're happy then that should be sufficient.

[EDDIE51]

I have worked in a home such as you describe . All personal belongings have to be kept in the individual flats, no items can be left on landings or in corridors.
You say ''dead end'' places are used for storage but who is to decide what is and what is not a ''dead end'' and how much can be stored?
Sorry but I agree with the Housing association , access areas must be free of all personal objects. In the event of a fire you just can not be too care full , an umbrella stand or bookcase in an unexpected place could cause a trip or fall in a smoke filled building. Such a fall could be fatal , with care of the elderly I am afraid Health and safety has to be to overall priority.
Basically if you allow just one resident to store one item in a corridor or landing you have opened the floodgates so it is better to have one rule for all and that has to be '' NO personal belongings in access areas''

[Segilla]

If you go back to my question, it is about dictatorial treatment; what any Health and Safety act may say and a safety assessment.
All other points may well be relevant - but basics first.

I don't want to ask them anything; I want to tell 'em, speak to them in the same way as they speak to me. It is for that reason that I seek and have failed to find answers - so far!

[EDDIE51]

Vulcan, in the home I worked in it was the fire service who said that NO personal items could be left in access areas . In such cases the fire service word is LAW !
We had automatic doors which closed in the event of a fire alarm sounding, we were not even allowed to wedge the doors open while we were cleaning in case there was an alarm ! Just imagine if a resident had put a bookcase or umbrell stand against a door ! As I said in the care home industry, Health and safety is the number 1 consideration every thing eles is secondary.

[bednobs]

they do not have to have the law on their side - they are providing you a service (somewhere to rent) and they are free to set their own rules over what can and can't go on there. For example, they may say "no visitors can stay for more than a week". That does not have to be enshrined in law - it's simply their choice to impose that restriction. same with "no personal belongings in common parts to protect your health and safety " - no law needed just their conditions