The detectors are there as a control - so if you take that away (ie: put caps on it) we would need to replace that control. Some places I have worked at had a fire impairment certificate that was required by the insurance companies when this took place. If hot work was taking place while the detectors were capped we would need a hot work certificate with fire watch etc. all risk based

Gosh this one is a goodie. I have worked for some different companies that have taken quite different approaches. One company's Board of Directors could not and would not condone speeding of any type and it was very difficult for the managers to manage when one of their staff went over the speed limit - even by 5km/h. Others have taken a more pragmatic approach and set triggers and dealt with serious breaches. There are some fantastic methods of monitoring out there that now show the footage. The footage shows the 'what happened' and 'why' quite clearly. I think the company's that use this information for coaching and changing behaviors - rather than straight to discipline will do well. Harsh breaking for example could come about for a number of reasons and there are times where you wouldn't want to discourage that. I have a device in my car that annoys me, but it has changed my behaviors when I drive. But there have been times when someone brakes suddenly in front and I need to do the same - does that mean I have broken a rule?? The way I look at the information now is on two fronts - what can i use to proactively coach people, and what was serious that could have resulted in serious harm. The important part is the procedures and triggers you set up. Change happened for us when I started to report the data we were getting monthly. Once it is visible and measured - things will happen. What you can't do is collect data and do nothing with it!!

good on you for helping make a difference to this persons life. He has probably been beaten by systems for a while. This needs to be risk based. Ie: what are the risks if he is behind the tractor? I would break down each part of his expected duties - identify any risks and put controls in place. This takes some time but will be worth it. Making sure that people around them know and there are some really cool tools now with geotec. All the best with this one

This is an interesting one and one that I have an interest in. I attended a 'Fleet day' run by Eroad in CHCH yesterday and there were a number of great speakers. One was an insurance company and they talked about the stats that they have collected from accidents. A big part of the day was about EV's and how people adapt to some of the built in safety features. Often people turn them off as they don't understand them. I tried a number of different EV's and it is not easy. From getting the car to go - to knowing it is going!!! - to driving. All very different. The insurance presenter talked about the way to use your reversing camera and what the lines mean. He learnt the hard way, by just watching a reversing camera while backing and hitting a Lexus. he couldn't understand why it wasn't on his camera. So much to learn and i am certainly going to make some changes in how we let our people loose with a company vehicle. Just checking they have a licence is just not enough and old school people like me need to first learn - then teach. I feel a lot of companies are dishing out vehicles (pool vehicles / tool of trade etc) and I compare the way we do that to the old days where you were given a grinder and told to cut stuff with no other training at all.

I agree with everyone - but really ... We still have trouble getting people to understand the difference between a hazard and risk. We do ask and expect a lot from people that are struggling with safety. My approach with teams in the field is still "what will hurt you today" closely followed by "what do we need to do to make sure that doesn't happen - or if it does, how do we make sure it won't kill you"? All the other terminology is great for trained safety professions but doesn't create a burning bridge for many.

This is always a tough one. We are having some trouble getting people to distinguish between being tired and being fatigued. There is quite a difference and everyone has different tolerance levels - so that makes it hard to manage via a policy. Secondary employment is often signed off by the primary employer, so it is out in the open and good support can be given if required (and acceptable to both parties). I think there needs to be some flexibility in this space as the cost of living goes up and more people may need some secondary employment. When looking if fatigue was an issue for us - I realised that we had policies / procedures, but some people just needed the extra hours to be able to support their families and they coped well. But others can hardly stay awake doing normal hours. We manage it case by case

I think both are related to and affected by what is going on around us. We are still learning to live with things like COVID, inflation, cost of living and the number of natural events we are being exposed to. Sometimes the unplanned events lead to Pessimism, but when they are under control people become Optimism. People bring those roller coasters into the workplace and they create different additional roller coasters for those that become unwilling stakeholders. That brings challenges - but also opportunity. A different sort of response to the question :-)

A couple to add from me:
1. What do you think might hurt you and what can we do to make sure that doesn't happen?
2. What could make your work easier - normally easier means safer ....
Regards
Wayne

Thanks for starting this chat. A really important point that will affect more and more businesses in due time. Loving the dialogue. For me it goes back to the basics - what is the risk? And what do we need to do to mitigate the risk? This won't be a 'one glove fits all' but not one that can be swept under the mat either. Look forward to following this one - thanks again