|
|
Post by equivocal on May 8, 2024 17:11:52 GMT
I have to say if I saw a mouse in my kitchen, I'd be looking for professional assistance. I don't think I'd eat anywhere with traps or evidence of even professional intervention for a rodent infestation. A mouse in your kitchen is not a rodent infestation, its a mouse that got into your kitchen. Do you hire a professional if you get a bird in your house? What about a fly, they're really dirty. And yet somehow they've managed it for years without incident. But I expect the safety course will seriously reduce the number of accidents. Oh wait... And 40 on dual carriageways, yes I agree. Personally I think all cars should be limited to 40mph Oh and heart disease is by far our biggest killer, so compulsory £300 courses on keeping fit and eating properly are a very good idea. What do you think? It is a possibility that a mouse could have wandered in from outside. Generally, if you spot a mouse or a rat, you have a problem.
They may not have had an accident (not sure about Ms Manders in your link - she certainly appears to have had a problem with electricity), but you know one of our own contributors lost one of his nine thanks to trained contractors.
I know you believe people should be 'encouraged' to eat the right thing and fined if they do not. I don't happen to share that view.
On the other hand, I think there should be standards applied on the public highway or in public places. I also think that employers who instruct their employees or vendors who sell to the public should have to comply with safety standards. Do I think this could be managed by the application of common sense? maybe in your case, generally, I very much doubt it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zany on May 8, 2024 17:18:56 GMT
A mouse in your kitchen is not a rodent infestation, its a mouse that got into your kitchen. Do you hire a professional if you get a bird in your house? What about a fly, they're really dirty. And yet somehow they've managed it for years without incident. But I expect the safety course will seriously reduce the number of accidents. Oh wait... And 40 on dual carriageways, yes I agree. Personally I think all cars should be limited to 40mph Oh and heart disease is by far our biggest killer, so compulsory £300 courses on keeping fit and eating properly are a very good idea. What do you think? It is a possibility that a mouse could have wandered in from outside. Generally, if you spot a mouse or a rat, you have a problem.
They may not have had an accident (not sure about Ms Manders in your link - she certainly appears to have had a problem with electricity), but you know one of our own contributors lost one of his nine thanks to trained contractors.
I know you believe people should be 'encouraged' to eat the right thing and fined if they do not. I don't happen to share that view.
On the other hand, I think there should be standards applied on the public highway or in public places. I also think that employers who instruct their employees or vendors who sell to the public should have to comply with safety standards. Do I think this could be managed by the application of common sense? maybe in your case, generally, I very much doubt it.
You appear to think only people working should be kept safe and trained how to keep safe. You are not bothered if someone dies climbing a ladder at home? Why is that? Oh and I hope you don't see a mouse in your home it costs about £3,600 to get rid of it.  |
|
|
|
Post by montegriffo on May 8, 2024 17:20:22 GMT
So health and safety regulations kept cases of Hantavirus down to 7 for the year? With a 40% fatality rate that's a good thing surely? You assume the 7 a year are reduced by such extreme measures, that's where I think the gap comes. Empirical evidence then safety cost please. I think it's more logical than assuming slacking off health and safety regulations won't increase cases. |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on May 8, 2024 17:27:05 GMT
Zany, you seem to be getting very angry in your old age but making little sense as a result.
It does seem you are outraged that the authorities have any control over your business whether in planning terms as to where you build or now in fire safety even though your building is used by staff and the public. Sorry I disagree. While you may be the epitome of responsibility (although your antipathy towards spending money on fire extinguishers for example or safety training makes me wonder in truth ) but I don’t trust all business owners to be optimum , whether consciously to save money or simply by error or lack of knowledge, and the public are not able to protect themselves so it feels reasonable for the Government to lay down minimum standards for fire safety and to inspect to make sure business owners are complying.
Do I think we should take care to ensure a hanging basket, a heavy object , “living” at height often in a public area is hung safely - yes.
|
|
|
|
Post by equivocal on May 8, 2024 17:28:32 GMT
It is a possibility that a mouse could have wandered in from outside. Generally, if you spot a mouse or a rat, you have a problem.
They may not have had an accident (not sure about Ms Manders in your link - she certainly appears to have had a problem with electricity), but you know one of our own contributors lost one of his nine thanks to trained contractors.
I know you believe people should be 'encouraged' to eat the right thing and fined if they do not. I don't happen to share that view.
On the other hand, I think there should be standards applied on the public highway or in public places. I also think that employers who instruct their employees or vendors who sell to the public should have to comply with safety standards. Do I think this could be managed by the application of common sense? maybe in your case, generally, I very much doubt it.
You appear to think only people working should be kept safe and trained how to keep safe. You are not bothered if someone dies climbing a ladder at home? Why is that? Oh and I hope you don't see a mouse in your home it costs about £3,600 to get rid of it. If someone wants to climb a ladder to, say, clean their windows, then they can be fairly said to be voluntarily taking the risk. If an employer instructs an employee to climb a ladder, then the act is not voluntary. I think it's reasonable to require the employer to make the activity as safe as reasonably possible.
It cost my middle daughter around £250 when she saw a mouse in the house she'd just bought.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zany on May 8, 2024 17:37:36 GMT
You assume the 7 a year are reduced by such extreme measures, that's where I think the gap comes. Empirical evidence then safety cost please. I think it's more logical than assuming slacking off health and safety regulations won't increase cases. Evermore safety then. I hope it starts knocking on more peoples doors instead of just business, then maybe they will get more selective as to which safety they want. There are plenty of things far more dangerous than mice, but so long as they happen at home they need not be enforced. Lets hope that changes and you gladly pay the costs of more "safety" Still struggling with the idea that non safety at home is OK. No one has responded to that bit. |
|
|
|
Post by Zany on May 8, 2024 17:41:13 GMT
Zany, you seem to be getting very angry in your old age but making little sense as a result. It does seem you are outraged that the authorities have any control over your business whether in planning terms as to where you build or now in fire safety even though your building is used by staff and the public. Sorry I disagree. While you may be the epitome of responsibility (although your antipathy towards spending money on fire extinguishers for example or safety training makes me wonder in truth ) but I don’t trust all business owners to be optimum , whether consciously to save money or simply by error or lack of knowledge, and the public are not able to protect themselves so it feels reasonable for the Government to lay down minimum standards for fire safety and to inspect to make sure business owners are complying. Do I think we should take care to ensure a hanging basket, a heavy object , “living” at height often in a public area is hung safely - yes. Dappy you don't run a business and you have no idea. But I guess you as a person are entitled to moan whereas I as a business should be stoic. And sadly your ability to comprehend sentences seems to be diminishing with every post you reply to, so I think I'll leave it there. |
|
|
|
Post by montegriffo on May 8, 2024 17:43:13 GMT
I think it's more logical than assuming slacking off health and safety regulations won't increase cases. Still struggling with the idea that non safety at home is OK. No one has responded to that bit. No one says it's OK. It's just harder to enforce. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on May 8, 2024 17:45:56 GMT
Zany senses he is being conned. He is correct.
|
|
|
|
Post by dappy on May 8, 2024 17:50:11 GMT
Zany, you seem to be getting very angry in your old age but making little sense as a result. It does seem you are outraged that the authorities have any control over your business whether in planning terms as to where you build or now in fire safety even though your building is used by staff and the public. Sorry I disagree. While you may be the epitome of responsibility (although your antipathy towards spending money on fire extinguishers for example or safety training makes me wonder in truth ) but I don’t trust all business owners to be optimum , whether consciously to save money or simply by error or lack of knowledge, and the public are not able to protect themselves so it feels reasonable for the Government to lay down minimum standards for fire safety and to inspect to make sure business owners are complying. Do I think we should take care to ensure a hanging basket, a heavy object , “living” at height often in a public area is hung safely - yes. Dappy you don't run a business and you have no idea. But I guess you as a person are entitled to moan whereas I as a business should be stoic. And sadly your ability to comprehend sentences seems to be diminishing with every post you reply to, so I think I'll leave it there. You don’t know whether or not I run a business. I do comprehend sentences very well - even angry incoherent ones - and I have explained very clearly why in a publicly accessible space it is reasonable to legislate and inspect fire safety. Frankly as a responsible business owner you should value their second pair of eyes and expertise. |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on May 8, 2024 17:54:51 GMT
I think it's more logical than assuming slacking off health and safety regulations won't increase cases. Evermore safety then. I hope it starts knocking on more peoples doors instead of just business, then maybe they will get more selective as to which safety they want. There are plenty of things far more dangerous than mice, but so long as they happen at home they need not be enforced. Lets hope that changes and you gladly pay the costs of more "safety" Still struggling with the idea that non safety at home is OK. No one has responded to that bit. Lots of people have explained the difference. You just seem not to want to hear it. A homeowner is in a position to control his risk and he pays the price if he gets it wrong. A business owner is responsible for the safety of employees and (often) the public who are not in a osition to protect themselves. Hence why the state as our representatives seeks to protect us from uncaring or unknowledgable businessmen. |
|
|
|
Post by Zany on May 8, 2024 18:38:20 GMT
Dappy you don't run a business and you have no idea. But I guess you as a person are entitled to moan whereas I as a business should be stoic. And sadly your ability to comprehend sentences seems to be diminishing with every post you reply to, so I think I'll leave it there. You don’t know whether or not I run a business. I do comprehend sentences very well - even angry incoherent ones - and I have explained very clearly why in a publicly accessible space it is reasonable to legislate and inspect fire safety. Frankly as a responsible business owner you should value their second pair of eyes and expertise. Your comprehension of simple sentences is lamentable. I say we are told we must have two fire extinguishers but we are not allowed to use them. You say I am against having fire extinguishers. You clearly do not run a business nor have any idea what running one means. |
|
|
|
Post by Zany on May 8, 2024 18:46:16 GMT
Evermore safety then. I hope it starts knocking on more peoples doors instead of just business, then maybe they will get more selective as to which safety they want. There are plenty of things far more dangerous than mice, but so long as they happen at home they need not be enforced. Lets hope that changes and you gladly pay the costs of more "safety" Still struggling with the idea that non safety at home is OK. No one has responded to that bit. Lots of people have explained the difference. You just seem not to want to hear it. A homeowner is in a position to control his risk and he pays the price if he gets it wrong. A business owner is responsible for the safety of employees and (often) the public who are not in a osition to protect themselves. Hence why the state as our representatives seeks to protect us from uncaring or unknowledgable businessmen. Someone climbing a ladder in his job is just as capable of controlling his risk as he is climbing the same ladder at home. Why is the business owner responsible for the stupid actions of an employee who is quite capable of considering those actions at home? Truth is he's not, all the safety courses do is protect the employer by giving proof the employee isn't completely stupid and knows how to climb a ladder. Its terrifying to think I am responsible for an employee who thinks fork truck racing when the boss is not around is good fun. That I have to get them to sign off on a course saying its not OK just to protect myself from prosecution. (No I don't have fork trucks in my business) But I know a guy who has. |
|
|
|
Post by Zany on May 8, 2024 18:57:38 GMT
I have a long running joke conversation with a few business friends of mine who claim the public are totally ignorant of how business works. I say people don't know but we could tell them, they laugh and pour me another drink.
I am a heart on my sleeve kind of guy and over the years I have tried on and off to explain to people how it works.
I have fielded everything from how much tax businesses really pay, to "They just put their prices up" lol.
This evening I give in. They are right. The ignorance and bigotry about bosses in this country vies with the ignorance others have towards Muslims or Gays.
Ask about profit, they quote Shell
Ask about employment, they quote Sports direct.
No more. I join the rest of the business community. No wonder so many say you deserve to be poor. You have no clue how hard running a business is and no sympathy or desire to be educated.
|
|
|
|
Post by dappy on May 8, 2024 19:02:52 GMT
I imagine the advice from the Fire Service is “only fight the fire if you can do so without endangering yourself or others” and “if in doubt, get out”. Certainly that is the standard advice. As I hope you are aware, different types of fires need different extinguishers.
Frankly , with the greatest respect Zany, any business owner who resents the basics of fire safety like fire extinguishers and why your premises license requires fire safety checks probably shouldn’t be allowed to operate a consumer facing business. I’m a little surprised at what you are posting tbh.
|
|
