HSE bans cycling on work premises?

"DrC" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

My employer is systematically banning cycling on work premises. They
are doing this by a) building car park infrastructure that blocks
cyclists from using the main entrance, this being a locked gate
between the car park and the bicycle sheds so another, pedestrian,
entrance has to be used to get to the shed b) blowing even the most
minor, trivial potential conflict between car drivers and cyclists out
of all proportion and c) insisting that on-site all bicycles are
walked, not ridden, even on what amount to roads.

Their final attack is to claim that they are required by the HSE to
separate cyclists from car drivers and so rather than their own
personal prejudices being involved they are simply "following the
law". I have spent some time trying to find where it says that
employers must ban cyclists from car parks but have drawn a blank -
can anyone enlighten me on where these instructions are coming from?

Many thanks,

David

I would imagine that the instructions are coming from the Directors rather
than the HSE. They can after all do as they wish on their own private land,
and are probably trying to cover their backs in case of an incident where
someone tries to sue.

Dave

On 15 May 2007 06:15:09 -0700 someone who may be DrC
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

Their final attack is to claim that they are required by the HSE to
separate cyclists from car drivers and so rather than their own
personal prejudices being involved they are simply "following the
law".

"Health and safety", like "security", is trotted out by jobsworths
when they can't think of anything better, or don't want to give
their true reasons.

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

DrC said the following on 15/05/2007 14:15:

Quoted message said:

Their final attack is to claim that they are required by the HSE to
separate cyclists from car drivers and so rather than their own
personal prejudices being involved they are simply "following the
law". I have spent some time trying to find where it says that
employers must ban cyclists from car parks but have drawn a blank -
can anyone enlighten me on where these instructions are coming from?

That really is a load of b*ll*cks. You won't find such a law because it
doesn't exist. Even the HSE were reported a while ago as saying that
they get blamed for a load of so-called HSE rules that don't exist. You
need to ask the appropriate person to show you this law written down by
the courts or whoever.

Whichever way you look at it though, the company does have a right to
impose more or less whatever rules they like on their own premises,
provided that no laws are broken, however stupid those rules might be.
For instance, a company can't have a rule that says you can smoke in the
building from 1st July, but we've long had a rule that says you can't
smoke anywhere on company premises at any time and we were legally
entitled to have that rule. Your company is applying that principle to
cyclists, and however wrong anyone sane thinks that is, especially with
the quoted excuse (sorry, reason), you have to obey that rule until you
can get it overturned.

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

Paul Boyd usenet.dont.work@plusnet said:

DrC said the following on 15/05/2007 14:15:

Quoted message said:

Their final attack is to claim that they are required by the HSE to

Can you tell us what employer might be capable of such silliness?

If health service is involved they should be embarrassable.

DrTerryJ

Dave said:

"DrC" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Their final attack is to claim that they are required by the HSE to
separate cyclists from car drivers and so rather than their own
personal prejudices being involved they are simply "following the
law". I have spent some time trying to find where it says that
employers must ban cyclists from car parks but have drawn a blank -
can anyone enlighten me on where these instructions are coming from?

Many thanks,

David

I would imagine that the instructions are coming from the Directors rather
than the HSE. They can after all do as they wish on their own private land,
and are probably trying to cover their backs in case of an incident where
someone tries to sue.

Dave

And the 'Directors' will probably blame "Europe".

John B

DrC said:

and c) insisting that on-site all bicycles are
walked, not ridden, even on what amount to roads.

Do car drivers have to get out and push? They are, after all, the ones
presenting the danger to cyclists.

DrC wrote on 15/05/2007 14:15 +0100:

Quoted message said:

I have spent some time trying to find where it says that
employers must ban cyclists from car parks but have drawn a blank -
can anyone enlighten me on where these instructions are coming from?

The fertile mind of a jobsworth.

However presumably if you cannot get a bike to the bike shed you cannot
get a mobility aid in either which could mean they fall foul of the
Disability Discrimination Act (1995 I believe)

--
Tony

"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
is no good evidence either way."
- Bertrand Russell

On 15/05/2007 16:13, Marc Brett said,

Quoted message said:

Do car drivers have to get out and push? They are, after all, the ones
presenting the danger to cyclists.

I'd like to see that argument being presented! "Stop the danger at source"

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

On 15/05/2007 15:35, TerryJ said,

Quoted message said:

Paul Boyd usenet.dont.work@plusnet said:

DrC said the following on 15/05/2007 14:15:

Quoted message said:

Their final attack is to claim that they are required by the HSE to

Can you tell us what employer might be capable of such silliness?

I can't, no, because it wasn't my employer :-) My previous employer was
capable of such silliness, but H&S never entered his mind!

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

Marc Brett said:

DrC said:

and c) insisting that on-site all bicycles are
walked, not ridden, even on what amount to roads.

Do car drivers have to get out and push? They are, after all, the
ones presenting the danger to cyclists.

Not at my workplace, it's actually the road surface which presents the
danger. Having said that it's hardly safer to get off an push over this
surface wearing cycling shoes with small cleats. I would prefer to be given
the choice to ride to the bike shed though and take responsibility for
myself, just like on the road on the way to work.

--

Nigel

in message <[email hidden]>, Marc Brett

(') said:

DrC said:

and c) insisting that on-site all bicycles are
walked, not ridden, even on what amount to roads.

Do car drivers have to get out and push? They are, after all, the ones
presenting the danger to cyclists.

Yup. Cycles being ridden are not the danger. The danger is motor vehicles
being used. You should ask that all motor vehicles be banned from the
site. If your employers don't agree, go to the HSE yourself. You probably
won't win, but you can easily make enough nuisance for everyone involved
that they back down just to shut you up. Also, the local press can be
useful.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; MS Windows: A thirty-two bit extension ... to a sixteen bit
;; patch to an eight bit operating system originally coded for a
;; four bit microprocessor and sold by a two-bit company that
;; can't stand one bit of competition -- anonymous

Simon Brooke wrote on 15/05/2007 21:35 +0100:

Quoted message said:

Yup. Cycles being ridden are not the danger. The danger is motor vehicles
being used. You should ask that all motor vehicles be banned from the
site. If your employers don't agree, go to the HSE yourself. You probably
won't win, but you can easily make enough nuisance for everyone involved
that they back down just to shut you up. Also, the local press can be
useful.

It must certainly be true that if it is too dangerous to cycle there it
must also be too dangerous to walk there, which is rather a shame for
the drivers. They can drive to their parking space but its too
dangerous to allow them out of their cars ;-)

--
Tony

"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
is no good evidence either way."
- Bertrand Russell

DrC said:

My employer is systematically banning cycling on work premises. They
are doing this by a) building car park infrastructure that blocks
cyclists from using the main entrance, this being a locked gate
between the car park and the bicycle sheds so another, pedestrian,
entrance has to be used to get to the shed b) blowing even the most
minor, trivial potential conflict between car drivers and cyclists out
of all proportion and c) insisting that on-site all bicycles are
walked, not ridden, even on what amount to roads.

Their final attack is to claim that they are required by the HSE to
separate cyclists from car drivers and so rather than their own
personal prejudices being involved

Yes, the HSE say:
"Pedestrians and cyclists should be kept away from vehicle routes
wherever possible in order to avoid possible conflict.", and plenty more
besides. See:
<http://www.hse.gov.uk/workplacetransport/factsheets/segregation.htm>

Quoted message said:

they are simply "following the
law". I have spent some time trying to find where it says that
employers must ban cyclists from car parks but have drawn a blank -
can anyone enlighten me on where these instructions are coming from?

Read the reference.

--
Matt B

"Matt B" <"matt.bourke"@nospam.london.com> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

DrC said:

My employer is systematically banning cycling on work premises. They
are doing this by a) building car park infrastructure that blocks
cyclists from using the main entrance, this being a locked gate
between the car park and the bicycle sheds so another, pedestrian,
entrance has to be used to get to the shed b) blowing even the most
minor, trivial potential conflict between car drivers and cyclists out
of all proportion and c) insisting that on-site all bicycles are
walked, not ridden, even on what amount to roads.

Their final attack is to claim that they are required by the HSE to
separate cyclists from car drivers and so rather than their own
personal prejudices being involved

Yes, the HSE say:
"Pedestrians and cyclists should be kept away from vehicle routes wherever
possible in order to avoid possible conflict.", and plenty more besides.
See: <http://www.hse.gov.uk/workplacetransport/factsheets/segregation.htm>

Quoted message said:

they are simply "following the
law". I have spent some time trying to find where it says that
employers must ban cyclists from car parks but have drawn a blank -
can anyone enlighten me on where these instructions are coming from?

Read the reference.

Note that it also says that a Cycleway Should be provided, both are Shoulds
not Musts.

Niall

Name and shame!!

DrC said:

My employer is systematically banning cycling on work premises. They
are doing this by a) building car park infrastructure that blocks
cyclists from using the main entrance, this being a locked gate
between the car park and the bicycle sheds so another, pedestrian,
entrance has to be used to get to the shed b) blowing even the most
minor, trivial potential conflict between car drivers and cyclists out
of all proportion and c) insisting that on-site all bicycles are
walked, not ridden, even on what amount to roads.

Their final attack is to claim that they are required by the HSE to
separate cyclists from car drivers and so rather than their own
personal prejudices being involved they are simply "following the
law". I have spent some time trying to find where it says that
employers must ban cyclists from car parks but have drawn a blank -
can anyone enlighten me on where these instructions are coming from?

You should ask to see their "Risk Assessment". They are breaking the
law if they have not carried one out or if they refuse to show it to
any affected person.

Quoted message said:

You should ask to see their "Risk Assessment". They are breaking the
law if they have not carried one out or if they refuse to show it to
any affected person.

Now that is interesting. What law would they be breaking?

--chris

Chris Gerhard said:

Quoted message said:

You should ask to see their "Risk Assessment". They are breaking the
law if they have not carried one out or if they refuse to show it to
any affected person.

Now that is interesting. What law would they be breaking?

Very funny when you point it out on a Jobsworth.

Health & Safety at Work Act 1974. It's actually one of the bits of
secondary legislation introduced later but I understand the offence is
one under the main act.

DrC said:

My employer is systematically banning cycling on work premises. They
are doing this by a) building car park infrastructure that blocks
cyclists from using the main entrance, this being a locked gate
between the car park and the bicycle sheds so another, pedestrian,
entrance has to be used to get to the shed b) blowing even the most
minor, trivial potential conflict between car drivers and cyclists out
of all proportion and c) insisting that on-site all bicycles are
walked, not ridden, even on what amount to roads.

Their final attack is to claim that they are required by the HSE to
separate cyclists from car drivers and so rather than their own
personal prejudices being involved they are simply "following the
law". I have spent some time trying to find where it says that
employers must ban cyclists from car parks but have drawn a blank -
can anyone enlighten me on where these instructions are coming from?

It's coming from the back of someone's head. I'd take two lines:

A. Crash into the locked gate and claim that:
1. I didn't see it because it had no high-visibility warning bands on it,
2. there never used to be a gate there and there's no 'warning: new gate'
sign like the 'warning: new road layout' signs other people usually put on
roads, and
3. I forgot the recent construction when entering the site that morning.

Claim damages for the crash into the locked gate.

B. As part of the claim, demand the risk assessment for the new no-cycling
policy *and* the locked gate. Someone's suggested this already in this
thread, but it does work and they really don't like it.

On top of all this, get the union involved if you can. Coercing workers
to pollute more on the way to work (rather than travel for work) is
unreasonable.

Good luck!
--
MJ Ray - see/vidu http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Experienced webmaster-developers for hire http://www.ttllp.co.uk/
Also: statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder, workers co-op.
Writing on koha, debian, sat TV, Kewstoke http://mjr.towers.org.uk/