I agree. We aren't the target audience. I think it has already worked in terms of getting people talking about it :)
If people don't agree with the message and have a conversation that's still a good thing isn't it?

We haven't quite been able to abandon it as many clients ask for it. However, we're actively trying to shift the focus from TRIFR (where a broken leg counts the same as a fatality) to severity where we focus on high risk events. When comparing benchmarks just be careful of the calculations - we divide by 1 million but some places divide by 200,00. There's some good info on the business leaders forum

I've used a similar tactic to Mark and / or asked about the example they're setting to younger / less experienced workers. Like "I know you might be OK doing that but what about the young guy over there. He'll follow what you do; how do we set him up not to get hurt"

The WHO mythbusters page confirms that people can be contagious way before they develop a fever. I'd be worried that we get complacent about handwashing & good hygiene techniques if we think everyone is OK because they didn't have a temperature
https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/advice-for-public/myth-busters

I would recommend going on a standard work at height course with some of your workers and then follow up with a bit more research. That way, you know what they (should) know and you're all using the same language. I've always found you get quite a lot of kudos from the team by doing that too.

My friends have been known to physically step back & hold their breath if someone tells me something can't be done because of "health and safety"! I will always ask why, on what grounds, where is the risk assessment etc. I hate that phrase being used as a management cop-out.
I don't know about the detail in your post but am sympathetic to the sentiment.

You can contact SpecSavers for a company discount too, they offer some really good deals. I hate wearing over glasses, they make me feel seasick which creates a different risk!

I think its very exciting that our Regulator has appointed someone so well recognised in the Safety II space. It may allow us to be more innovative and move from always chasing the AU or UK processes