Health and safety law - Stopping coppers doing their job

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Bad_Crow, Dec 6, 2007.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Have a read and see what you think. I'd have worded it differently.

    Merseyside Chief Con speaks out

    So should certain organisations have freedom of movement outside of health and safety law?
  2. To quote from the article

    "Health and safety law says the police service, like all emergency services, should look at the risk involved and if there's a reasonable risk and they've put all the safety precautions in place can they then take it.

    "That seems to be a contradiction and members of the public aren't governed by the same law.

    Put all safety precautions in place AS FAR AS IS REASONABLY PRACTICABLE he forgot to add

    Also, members of the public are governed by the same law. It says so quite clearly in the H&S at W act.
  3. Gee- willickers. Another plod with an excuse why they can't do their job. Well, well, who'd ha' thunk it?

    Not as if the law and order problems are even partially the fault of poor prioritisation by senior policemen, or anything?
  4. "At Work" - Thats the point.

    Unless car theft is a recognised form of employment in which case I want to know why car thieves don't wear seat belts and why they are allowed to smoke in their vehicles.

    I think its a good idea. One less excuse of why PC Plod couldn't do x, y or z. In this blame and claim culture its one less reason to avoid "Getting stuck in".

    Possibly identifying that Crown immunity made for a more effective Police force/service. Now they'll never get that back but its a start to making it easier!