We had a coal delivery today - our normal 3 x 50kg sacks.

As usual, it arrived on a flatbed truck, driven by one guy, who lugged each
bag on his back round to the back of our house and deposited it in the
bunker.

Poor bugger looked absolutely knackered; I was wondering - isn't that sort
of lifting way outside the current elfin safety guidelines? It's a well-
known, long established firm,so I'd be surprised if they just brazenly
flouted the rules, but...?

--
David

"Lobster" wrote in message
. 236...
We had a coal delivery today - our normal 3 x 50kg sacks.

As usual, it arrived on a flatbed truck, driven by one guy, who lugged each
bag on his back round to the back of our house and deposited it in the
bunker.

Poor bugger looked absolutely knackered; I was wondering - isn't that sort
of lifting way outside the current elfin safety guidelines? It's a well-
known, long established firm,so I'd be surprised if they just brazenly
flouted the rules, but...?


If he was taking them onto his shoulder and the floor of
the lorry was level with his shoulder then maybe technically
he wasn't lifting them, but simply allowing them to drop
onto his shoulder and then carrying them.


michael adams

....

On 01/04/2015 20:44, michael adams wrote:
"Lobster" wrote in message
. 236...
We had a coal delivery today - our normal 3 x 50kg sacks.

As usual, it arrived on a flatbed truck, driven by one guy, who lugged each
bag on his back round to the back of our house and deposited it in the
bunker.

Poor bugger looked absolutely knackered; I was wondering - isn't that sort
of lifting way outside the current elfin safety guidelines? It's a well-
known, long established firm,so I'd be surprised if they just brazenly
flouted the rules, but...?


If he was taking them onto his shoulder and the floor of
the lorry was level with his shoulder then maybe technically
he wasn't lifting them, but simply allowing them to drop
onto his shoulder and then carrying them.


michael adams

...




There's a video somewhere (1930's?) showing an American worker taking 2
cwt sacks of flour or grain off a conveyor belt at shoulder height, and
walking them to a truck or some such. It was a big, fit-looking bloke,
but he was shifting one every five seconds or so. I've often wondered
how many he moved in a shift, or what breaks he took.

ISTR that cement came in 1 cwt bags when I was a lad, not 25 kg.

In France, the largest permitted beer-barrel size is the metric
equivalent of 5 gallons; in the UK the smallest normally used
commercially is 9.

On 01/04/2015 20:31, Lobster wrote:
We had a coal delivery today - our normal 3 x 50kg sacks.

As usual, it arrived on a flatbed truck, driven by one guy, who lugged each
bag on his back round to the back of our house and deposited it in the
bunker.

Poor bugger looked absolutely knackered; I was wondering - isn't that sort
of lifting way outside the current elfin safety guidelines? It's a well-
known, long established firm,so I'd be surprised if they just brazenly
flouted the rules, but...?

ISTR there is a recognised industrial injury that comes from repeatedly
carrying coal sacks on the shoulder. Coalman's hump or coalman's
shoulder, or something like that.

It doesn't really sound as though they have carried out a proper risk
assessment of the job. I would have thought that they should, at a
minimum, have provided him with a sack truck. A small crane or tail
lift, to get the sacks off the lorry, as well would be even better.


--
Colin Bignell

On 01/04/2015 20:31, Lobster wrote:
We had a coal delivery today - our normal 3 x 50kg sacks.

As usual, it arrived on a flatbed truck, driven by one guy, who lugged each
bag on his back round to the back of our house and deposited it in the
bunker.

Poor bugger looked absolutely knackered; I was wondering - isn't that sort
of lifting way outside the current elfin safety guidelines? It's a well-
known, long established firm,so I'd be surprised if they just brazenly
flouted the rules, but...?


Dunno. It's how we always got our coal when I was a kid. And they were 1
cwt bags - which were slightly heavier than 50 Kg!
--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

"Nightjar .me.uk" "cpb"@ insert my surname here wrote in message
...
On 01/04/2015 20:31, Lobster wrote:
We had a coal delivery today - our normal 3 x 50kg sacks.

As usual, it arrived on a flatbed truck, driven by one guy, who lugged each
bag on his back round to the back of our house and deposited it in the
bunker.

Poor bugger looked absolutely knackered; I was wondering - isn't that sort
of lifting way outside the current elfin safety guidelines? It's a well-
known, long established firm,so I'd be surprised if they just brazenly
flouted the rules, but...?

ISTR there is a recognised industrial injury that comes from repeatedly carrying coal
sacks on the shoulder. Coalman's hump or coalman's shoulder, or something like that.

Without knowing for certain I'd imagine that could be
alleviated to some extent by alternating shoulders.
Carrying a heavy weight on the same shoulder all the time
can't be doing your spine much good. Its possible to feel
the effect of that with just a loaded rucksack slung from
the one shoulder for a bit too long.



It doesn't really sound as though they have carried out a proper risk assessment of the
job. I would have thought that they should, at a minimum, have provided him with a sack
truck. A small crane or tail lift, to get the sacks off the lorry, as well would be
even better.


The problem with that would be if he had to tip the sacks down a coal
hole or over the edge of a coal bin. He'd then have to lift the
bottom of the sack which unless he bent his knees in exactly the
right way could cause back injuries.


michael adams

....

"Roger Mills" wrote in message
...
On 01/04/2015 20:31, Lobster wrote:
We had a coal delivery today - our normal 3 x 50kg sacks.

As usual, it arrived on a flatbed truck, driven by one guy, who lugged each
bag on his back round to the back of our house and deposited it in the
bunker.

Poor bugger looked absolutely knackered;

I'll bet he saves a fortune on gym memberships though.


michael adams

....

On 01/04/2015 21:17, michael adams wrote:
"Nightjar .me.uk" "cpb"@ insert my surname here wrote in message
...
....
It doesn't really sound as though they have carried out a proper risk assessment of the
job. I would have thought that they should, at a minimum, have provided him with a sack
truck. A small crane or tail lift, to get the sacks off the lorry, as well would be
even better.


The problem with that would be if he had to tip the sacks down a coal
hole or over the edge of a coal bin. He'd then have to lift the
bottom of the sack which unless he bent his knees in exactly the
right way could cause back injuries.

I did say, at a minimum. A risk assessment might show a need for a sack
truck with a lifting platform, to avoid that problem.

--
Colin Bignell

"Nightjar .me.uk" "cpb"@ insert my surname here wrote in message
...
On 01/04/2015 21:17, michael adams wrote:
"Nightjar .me.uk" "cpb"@ insert my surname here wrote in message
...
...
It doesn't really sound as though they have carried out a proper risk assessment of
the
job. I would have thought that they should, at a minimum, have provided him with a
sack
truck. A small crane or tail lift, to get the sacks off the lorry, as well would be
even better.


The problem with that would be if he had to tip the sacks down a coal
hole or over the edge of a coal bin. He'd then have to lift the
bottom of the sack which unless he bent his knees in exactly the
right way could cause back injuries.

I did say, at a minimum. A risk assessment might show a need for a sack truck with a
lifting platform, to avoid that problem.


And the coalman will probably start gaining a 1b in weight per week,
as it's unlikely he's going to change his eating habits. Almost
4 stones weight gain per year, plus a reduction in cardiovascular
exercise as its unlikely he's going to sign up for a gym.



michael adams

....

On 01/04/2015 20:54, Nightjar "cpb"@ wrote:

It doesn't really sound as though they have carried out a proper risk
assessment of the job. I would have thought that they should, at a
minimum, have provided him with a sack truck. A small crane or tail
lift, to get the sacks off the lorry, as well would be even better.

But the sack would then be near ground level when he got to the bunker
and would need to be lifted up by hand before it could be tipped into it.

--
Mike Clarke

On Wed, 01 Apr 2015 22:53:10 +0100, Mike Clarke wrote:

On 01/04/2015 20:54, Nightjar "cpb"@ wrote:

It doesn't really sound as though they have carried out a proper risk
assessment of the job. I would have thought that they should, at a
minimum, have provided him with a sack truck. A small crane or tail
lift, to get the sacks off the lorry, as well would be even better.

But the sack would then be near ground level when he got to the bunker
and would need to be lifted up by hand before it could be tipped into
it.

OK for a coal hole though.



--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £30a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

On 01/04/15 20:44, michael adams wrote:
"Lobster" wrote in message
. 236...
We had a coal delivery today - our normal 3 x 50kg sacks.

As usual, it arrived on a flatbed truck, driven by one guy, who lugged each
bag on his back round to the back of our house and deposited it in the
bunker.

Poor bugger looked absolutely knackered; I was wondering - isn't that sort
of lifting way outside the current elfin safety guidelines? It's a well-
known, long established firm,so I'd be surprised if they just brazenly
flouted the rules, but...?


If he was taking them onto his shoulder and the floor of
the lorry was level with his shoulder then maybe technically
he wasn't lifting them, but simply allowing them to drop
onto his shoulder and then carrying them.


In fact the bags uses - 1 cwt - are around 50kg and the max weight you
are allowed to lift is now 35kg IIRC so yes, 1 cwt is now against H & S
rules.

I can just about lift that weight.


michael adams

...






--
Everything you read in newspapers is absolutely true, except for the
rare story of which you happen to have first-hand knowledge. €“ Erwin Knoll

On 02/04/2015 00:26, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
....
In fact the bags uses - 1 cwt - are around 50kg and the max weight you
are allowed to lift is now 35kg IIRC...

It depends upon the height of the lift and extension of your arms. The
maximum is 25kgs at knuckle height and close to the body, reducing to
5kgs at shoulder height with arms outstretched. That is for men. For
women it is 16kgs - 3kgs.


--
Colin Bignell

On 01/04/2015 22:53, Mike Clarke wrote:
On 01/04/2015 20:54, Nightjar "cpb"@ wrote:

It doesn't really sound as though they have carried out a proper risk
assessment of the job. I would have thought that they should, at a
minimum, have provided him with a sack truck. A small crane or tail
lift, to get the sacks off the lorry, as well would be even better.

But the sack would then be near ground level when he got to the bunker
and would need to be lifted up by hand before it could be tipped into it.

By hand operated winch, if he had a lifting sack truck.

--
Colin Bignell

On 01/04/2015 20:54, Nightjar cpb@ wrote:
On 01/04/2015 20:31, Lobster wrote:
We had a coal delivery today - our normal 3 x 50kg sacks.

As usual, it arrived on a flatbed truck, driven by one guy, who lugged
each
bag on his back round to the back of our house and deposited it in the
bunker.

Poor bugger looked absolutely knackered; I was wondering - isn't that
sort
of lifting way outside the current elfin safety guidelines? It's a well-
known, long established firm,so I'd be surprised if they just brazenly
flouted the rules, but...?

ISTR there is a recognised industrial injury that comes from repeatedly
carrying coal sacks on the shoulder. Coalman's hump or coalman's
shoulder, or something like that.

It doesn't really sound as though they have carried out a proper risk
assessment of the job. I would have thought that they should, at a
minimum, have provided him with a sack truck. A small crane or tail
lift, to get the sacks off the lorry, as well would be even better.

Our coal man does the same - bag starts on pickup, moved to man's back
without a drop, then deposited - so no lifting. Probably a case of
"that's the way it's always been done".

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 01/04/15 20:44, michael adams wrote:
"Lobster" wrote in message
. 236...
We had a coal delivery today - our normal 3 x 50kg sacks.

As usual, it arrived on a flatbed truck, driven by one guy, who lugged
each
bag on his back round to the back of our house and deposited it in the
bunker.

Poor bugger looked absolutely knackered; I was wondering - isn't that
sort
of lifting way outside the current elfin safety guidelines? It's a
well-
known, long established firm,so I'd be surprised if they just brazenly
flouted the rules, but...?


If he was taking them onto his shoulder and the floor of
the lorry was level with his shoulder then maybe technically
he wasn't lifting them, but simply allowing them to drop
onto his shoulder and then carrying them.


In fact the bags uses - 1 cwt - are around 50kg and the max weight you are
allowed to lift is now 35kg IIRC so yes, 1 cwt is now against H & S rules.

But he isn't lifting it, just carrying it.

I can just about lift that weight.

In message , Lobster
writes
We had a coal delivery today - our normal 3 x 50kg sacks.

As usual, it arrived on a flatbed truck, driven by one guy, who lugged each
bag on his back round to the back of our house and deposited it in the
bunker.

That is exactly as ours is delivered. We normally have four sacks at a
time, and the guy just takes them from his flatbed to shoulder, through
the garden and into the bunker. He normally has a full load in the
morning, so presumably carries sacks like that all day. He cannot be
younger than late 50s. Perhaps he is 25 and just looks older :-)

Currently paying £18 a sack for grade A coal (inc VAT).
--
Graeme, Scotland

In message , Nightjar
writes
On 01/04/2015 20:31, Lobster wrote:
We had a coal delivery today - our normal 3 x 50kg sacks.

As usual, it arrived on a flatbed truck, driven by one guy, who lugged each
bag on his back round to the back of our house and deposited it in the
bunker.

Poor bugger looked absolutely knackered; I was wondering - isn't that sort
of lifting way outside the current elfin safety guidelines? It's a well-
known, long established firm,so I'd be surprised if they just brazenly
flouted the rules, but...?

ISTR there is a recognised industrial injury that comes from repeatedly
carrying coal sacks on the shoulder. Coalman's hump or coalman's
shoulder, or something like that.

It doesn't really sound as though they have carried out a proper risk
assessment of the job. I would have thought that they should, at a
minimum, have provided him with a sack truck. A small crane or tail
lift, to get the sacks off the lorry, as well would be even better.

Too late!

Back in the '50's big excitement on the farm when the threshing drum
arrived. Sacks were hired from the local railway which weighed 2.25 cwt.
when filled with Wheat.

A *sack lifter* was used to get them up to shoulder height so it was
only carrying/lowering which caused problems. As a young teenager it was
hard to resist the challenge and I have Schmorl's nodes as a possible
consequence.



--
Tim Lamb

On 02/04/2015 04:48, john james wrote:
....
But he isn't lifting it, just carrying it...

The same guidelines apply to handling as well as to lifting. Once you
start moving weights like that around manually, there is a high risk of
injury.


--
Colin Bignell

On Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 9:04:28 PM UTC+1, Roger Mills wrote:
On 01/04/2015 20:31, Lobster wrote:
We had a coal delivery today - our normal 3 x 50kg sacks.

As usual, it arrived on a flatbed truck, driven by one guy, who lugged each
bag on his back round to the back of our house and deposited it in the
bunker.

Poor bugger looked absolutely knackered; I was wondering - isn't that sort
of lifting way outside the current elfin safety guidelines? It's a well-
known, long established firm,so I'd be surprised if they just brazenly
flouted the rules, but...?


Dunno. It's how we always got our coal when I was a kid. And they were 1
cwt bags - which were slightly heavier than 50 Kg!


Yes, and I remember 20 of them (i.e 1 ton) being delivered and shoulder carried from lorry to coal hole. As a kid my job was to be seen to be counting them.


1 cwt is indeed slightly heavier than 50kg, but only by a tiny bit. A (long) ton is 20 cwt =2240 lbs; a metric tonne is 1000kg ~= 2204 lbs.

Robert

Lobster scribbled


We had a coal delivery today - our normal 3 x 50kg sacks.

As usual, it arrived on a flatbed truck, driven by one guy, who lugged each
bag on his back round to the back of our house and deposited it in the
bunker.

Poor bugger looked absolutely knackered; I was wondering - isn't that sort
of lifting way outside the current elfin safety guidelines? It's a well-
known, long established firm,so I'd be surprised if they just brazenly
flouted the rules, but...?


Did he try as hard as these blokes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yeFKb1nq2c

"Nightjar.me.uk" "cpb"@ insert my surname here wrote in message
...
On 02/04/2015 04:48, john james wrote:
...
But he isn't lifting it, just carrying it...

The same guidelines apply to handling as well as to lifting.

No.

Once you start moving weights like that around manually, there is a high
risk of injury.

Separate matter entirely.

On 02/04/2015 10:35, john james wrote:


"Nightjar.me.uk" "cpb"@ insert my surname here wrote in message
...
On 02/04/2015 04:48, john james wrote:
...
But he isn't lifting it, just carrying it...

The same guidelines apply to handling as well as to lifting.

No.

That will come as something of a surprise to the Health and Safety
Executive, who publish them.

Once you start moving weights like that around manually, there is a
high risk of injury.

Separate matter entirely.

Not at all. It is all part of the question of manual handling of loads.


--
Colin Bignell

On Thu, 2 Apr 2015 08:01:10 +0100, News wrote:

That is exactly as ours is delivered. We normally have four sacks at a
time, and the guy just takes them from his flatbed to shoulder, through
the garden and into the bunker.

Thats how it was done 50 years ago when I was a lad before central
heating. ISTR we had twenty 1 cwt bags at a time though but the
"bunker" wasn't one of those tiddly modern boxes. It was a brick
outhouse about 4' wide and 10' deep, door at one narrow end. Thick
planks were fitted across the door way to a height of about 3'. Coal
would be 5 to 6' deep at the back down to the top of the planks after
a delivery. Around 6 cu yards...

He normally has a full load in the morning, so presumably carries sacks
like that all day. He cannot be younger than late 50s. Perhaps he is
25 and just looks older :-)

Our local coal merchant is an old chap, again carries sacks from back
of flatbed to where ever, I have a feeling the sign on the truck says
25 kg though. Family business so his sons also work with him but I
don't think any "yoof of today" would even consider it. They probably
couldn't carry a bag in the first place, let alone a couple of lorry
loads and it's a filthy job.

--
Cheers
Dave.

"Nightjar.me.uk" "cpb"@ insert my surname here wrote in message
...
On 02/04/2015 10:35, john james wrote:


"Nightjar.me.uk" "cpb"@ insert my surname here wrote in message
...
On 02/04/2015 04:48, john james wrote:
...
But he isn't lifting it, just carrying it...

The same guidelines apply to handling as well as to lifting.

No.

That will come as something of a surprise to the Health and Safety
Executive, who publish them.

More fool H&SE

Once you start moving weights like that around manually, there is a
high risk of injury.

Separate matter entirely.

Not at all.

Fraid so.

It is all part of the question of manual handling of loads.

No.

On 02/04/15 10:58, john james wrote:


"Nightjar.me.uk" "cpb"@ insert my surname here wrote in message
...
On 02/04/2015 10:35, john james wrote:


"Nightjar.me.uk" "cpb"@ insert my surname here wrote in message
...
On 02/04/2015 04:48, john james wrote:
...
But he isn't lifting it, just carrying it...

The same guidelines apply to handling as well as to lifting.

No.

That will come as something of a surprise to the Health and Safety
Executive, who publish them.

More fool H&SE

So thats another thing you are clueless about is it?



Once you start moving weights like that around manually, there is a
high risk of injury.

Separate matter entirely.

Not at all.

Fraid so.

It is all part of the question of manual handling of loads.

No.


--
Everything you read in newspapers is absolutely true, except for the
rare story of which you happen to have first-hand knowledge. €“ Erwin Knoll

On 02/04/15 10:15, Jonno wrote:
Lobster scribbled


We had a coal delivery today - our normal 3 x 50kg sacks.

As usual, it arrived on a flatbed truck, driven by one guy, who lugged each
bag on his back round to the back of our house and deposited it in the
bunker.

Poor bugger looked absolutely knackered; I was wondering - isn't that sort
of lifting way outside the current elfin safety guidelines? It's a well-
known, long established firm,so I'd be surprised if they just brazenly
flouted the rules, but...?


Did he try as hard as these blokes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yeFKb1nq2c



The things the Welsh do for entertainment!

On Thursday, April 2, 2015 at 9:58:06 AM UTC+1, Dave Liquorice wrote:

Thats how it was done 50 years ago when I was a lad before central
heating. ISTR we had twenty 1 cwt bags at a time though but the
"bunker" wasn't one of those tiddly modern boxes. It was a brick
outhouse about 4' wide and 10' deep, door at one narrow end. Thick
planks were fitted across the door way to a height of about 3'. Coal
would be 5 to 6' deep at the back down to the top of the planks after
a delivery. Around 6 cu yards...

When I were a lad (I'm 60) we had central heating running on coke right up until the 1970s. We shovelled coke into the boiler in the cellar twice a day IIRC in the winter. The CH circulation was gravity convection fed in 3.5" pipes. Our cooker also ran on coke.

Once they stopped making coal gas we bought anthracite 'nuggets' which lasted longer; we only needed to feed the boiler once a day IIRC.

The house was always cold.

Robert

On Thu, 2 Apr 2015 08:01:10 +0100, News
wrote:

In message , Lobster
writes
We had a coal delivery today - our normal 3 x 50kg sacks.

As usual, it arrived on a flatbed truck, driven by one guy, who lugged each
bag on his back round to the back of our house and deposited it in the
bunker.

That is exactly as ours is delivered. We normally have four sacks at a
time, and the guy just takes them from his flatbed to shoulder, through
the garden and into the bunker. He normally has a full load in the
morning, so presumably carries sacks like that all day. He cannot be
younger than late 50s. Perhaps he is 25 and just looks older :-)


Mine came yesterday - I have 7 sacks at a time which we get through in
about a month. Procedure same as you so no lifting but delivery guy
has about 40m to walk to bunker and for the past few months to step
over some bl**dy garden/railway sleepers that the next door neighbour
has had deposited on the shared path.

The guy is very average size - 5'8" and not particularly big with it.
He just trundles along and only complains about the traffic.

Currently paying £18 a sack for grade A coal (inc VAT).

Just a bit less than that but coal ain't what it used to be so two of
the bags are those manufactured lumps which burn slowly with a nice
red glow.


--
AnthonyL

In article , AnthonyL
writes

The guy is very average size - 5'8" and not particularly big with it.
He just trundles along and only complains about the traffic.

I bet he was over 6' when he started the job . . . . boom-tishhhh!

Seriously, I don't think they could make coal deliveries pay if they
didn't humph them on their backs, they'd spend far too long on site and
I'm betting your guy does those drops in less than five mins and is
gone.

--
fred
it's a ba-na-na . . . .

"Nightjar .me.uk" "cpb"@ insert my surname here wrote in message
...
On 02/04/2015 04:48, john james wrote:
...
But he isn't lifting it, just carrying it...

The same guidelines apply to handling as well as to lifting. Once you start moving
weights like that around manually, there is a high risk of injury.

I'd imagine that would only apply to people with no actual experience of doing
such work. Or with no training, which in the past was simply being shown
how to do it, by an experienced person.

Otherwise in the past it would have been impossible to find anyone
to do such work, as they'd all be injuring themselves and unable to earn
a living.

As it's unlikely that random members of the public are going to want
to lift sacks of coal, all that applying Health and Safety regulations
does in such circumstances, is denigrate the experienced coalman
in assuming that he doesn't have the skill or experience to do the
job he's being doing for years, without injuring himself.

Patronising ? Moi ?


michael adams

....


michael adams

....

Tim Watts scribbled


Did he try as hard as these blokes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yeFKb1nq2c



The things the Welsh do for entertainment!


Look carefully and you'll see sheep's feet sticking out of some of the
bags.

On 02/04/2015 14:19, michael adams wrote:
"Nightjar .me.uk" "cpb"@ insert my surname here wrote in message
...
On 02/04/2015 04:48, john james wrote:
...
But he isn't lifting it, just carrying it...

The same guidelines apply to handling as well as to lifting. Once you start moving
weights like that around manually, there is a high risk of injury.

I'd imagine that would only apply to people with no actual experience of doing
such work. Or with no training, which in the past was simply being shown
how to do it, by an experienced person.

Otherwise in the past it would have been impossible to find anyone
to do such work, as they'd all be injuring themselves and unable to earn
a living.

As it's unlikely that random members of the public are going to want
to lift sacks of coal, all that applying Health and Safety regulations
does in such circumstances, is denigrate the experienced coalman
in assuming that he doesn't have the skill or experience to do the
job he's being doing for years, without injuring himself.

That does not mean he has not been at risk of injury all that time.


Patronising ? Moi ?

There is a hierarchy of ways to protect people from risk. At the top end
is isolating them from it entirely, although fully automated coal
delivery is probably a long way in the future. Training alone comes at
the bottom, as an absolute last resort, when nothing else is possible.
Providing them with the proper equipment to do the job with a minimum of
risk comes somewhere around the middle.


--
Colin Bignell

On Thursday, 2 April 2015 16:01:32 UTC+1, Nightjar wrote:
There is a hierarchy of ways to protect people from risk. At the top end
is isolating them from it entirely, although fully automated coal
delivery is probably a long way in the future.

perhaps it could be destructively distilled into gaseous form and sent through pipes?

Owain

As it's unlikely that random members of the public are going to want
to lift sacks of coal, all that applying Health and Safety regulations
does in such circumstances, is denigrate the experienced coalman
in assuming that he doesn't have the skill or experience to do the
job he's being doing for years, without injuring himself.

That does not mean he has not been at risk of injury all that time.


Patronising ? Moi ?

There is a hierarchy of ways to protect people from risk. At the top end
is isolating them from it entirely, although fully automated coal
delivery is probably a long way in the future. Training alone comes at
the bottom, as an absolute last resort, when nothing else is possible.
Providing them with the proper equipment to do the job with a minimum of
risk comes somewhere around the middle.



When I were a lad there were two odd lorries doing the rounds where we
used to live, but I can't remember seeing one for years now!.

However the Coal men in those days seemed to hump sacks around with no
problems we had the same bloke delivering for years .. seemed very
fit!..
--
Tony Sayer

"Nightjar .me.uk" "cpb"@ insert my surname here wrote in message
...
On 02/04/2015 14:19, michael adams wrote:
"Nightjar .me.uk" "cpb"@ insert my surname here wrote in message
...
On 02/04/2015 04:48, john james wrote:
...
But he isn't lifting it, just carrying it...

The same guidelines apply to handling as well as to lifting. Once you start moving
weights like that around manually, there is a high risk of injury.

I'd imagine that would only apply to people with no actual experience of doing
such work. Or with no training, which in the past was simply being shown
how to do it, by an experienced person.

Otherwise in the past it would have been impossible to find anyone
to do such work, as they'd all be injuring themselves and unable to earn
a living.

As it's unlikely that random members of the public are going to want
to lift sacks of coal, all that applying Health and Safety regulations
does in such circumstances, is denigrate the experienced coalman
in assuming that he doesn't have the skill or experience to do the
job he's being doing for years, without injuring himself.

That does not mean he has not been at risk of injury all that time.

....

And there will presumably be statistics to support that claim.

In terms of the injuries suffered by workers in the coal delivery
trade over any given period. As against the total number of
trained delivery workers.

....



Patronising ? Moi ?

There is a hierarchy of ways to protect people from risk. At the top end is isolating
them from it entirely, although fully automated coal delivery is probably a long way in
the future. Training alone comes at the bottom, as an absolute last resort, when
nothing else is possible. Providing them with the proper equipment to do the job with a
minimum of risk comes somewhere around the middle.

....

That would all depend on how much risk experienced coal delivery men were
actually subjected to. Either in the past and at present. Which could
best be assessed by the number of coalmen employed in any particular
period past or present, as against the number of coalmen reporting
themselves injured again during that same period.

Without any actual statistics any subjective assessment of risk
remains just that. Purely subjective. And might be open to all
kinds of bias, both from people trying to create careers for
themselves, or so as to sell various types of equipment.


michael adams

....




--
Colin Bignell

"michael adams" wrote:
"Nightjar .me.uk" "cpb"@ insert my surname here wrote in message

There is a hierarchy of ways to protect people from risk. At the top end is isolating
them from it entirely, although fully automated coal delivery is probably a long way in
the future. Training alone comes at the bottom, as an absolute last resort, when
nothing else is possible. Providing them with the proper equipment to do the job with a
minimum of risk comes somewhere around the middle.

...

That would all depend on how much risk experienced coal delivery men were
actually subjected to. Either in the past and at present. Which could
best be assessed by the number of coalmen employed in any particular
period past or present, as against the number of coalmen reporting
themselves injured again during that same period.

Without any actual statistics any subjective assessment of risk
remains just that. Purely subjective. And might be open to all
kinds of bias, both from people trying to create careers for
themselves, or so as to sell various types of equipment.



I think there's also a big danger of adding new dangers when trying to
eliminate obvious ones. Adding "equipment" sounds fine and dandy but I'm
sure I can't be alone in slipping and falling backwards when trying to
pull a loaded sack barrow up a step or two. That's just one example. Add a
winch for lifting sacks and you've added a whole new potential series of
"accidents waiting to happen".

Tim

Well even some time back I'd seen a special lift device and a truck used for
coal delivery, but inthe olddays no. I don't know how they get on when the
bunker is behind the house which is a centre of terrace, you would not want
it to brough through the house and if no rear access, dunno.
Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
"Lobster" wrote in message
. 236...
We had a coal delivery today - our normal 3 x 50kg sacks.

As usual, it arrived on a flatbed truck, driven by one guy, who lugged
each
bag on his back round to the back of our house and deposited it in the
bunker.

Poor bugger looked absolutely knackered; I was wondering - isn't that sort
of lifting way outside the current elfin safety guidelines? It's a well-
known, long established firm,so I'd be surprised if they just brazenly
flouted the rules, but...?

--
David

On Friday, 3 April 2015 09:16:07 UTC+1, Brian Gaff wrote:
I don't know how they get on when the
bunker is behind the house which is a centre of terrace, you would not want
it to brough through the house and if no rear access, dunno.

Such houses would have been built with coal-cellars having a coal-hole in the pavement.

If they were really low-class houses with no coal-cellar then the occupants probably tolerated coal-dust in the hall.

Owain

Lobster wrote:
We had a coal delivery today - our normal 3 x 50kg sacks.

As usual, it arrived on a flatbed truck, driven by one guy, who lugged each
bag on his back round to the back of our house and deposited it in the
bunker.

Poor bugger looked absolutely knackered; I was wondering - isn't that sort
of lifting way outside the current elfin safety guidelines? It's a well-
known, long established firm,so I'd be surprised if they just brazenly
flouted the rules, but...?

Always used to be 1cwt (which is close enough to 50kg) was the maximum
one person lift. I seem to remember that help/training was advised
though.

--
Chris Green
·