• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Hanging out of Windows

Status
Not open for further replies.

GB

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
6,468
Location
Somewhere
ive never seen anyone with their head out far enugh to have it hit by another train or the OHLE, signals, tunnels bridges ect, maybe a few branches but they have their head in if they see it.

The key phrase there is "If they see it".

at the end of the day, its dangerous and could kill you but its up to the person doing it and if he/she wants to put their head out then thats their choice

But its not though is it, as its clearly against bye laws.

And what about those unfortunate people that have to clear things up when it does go bad, or the people who are unfortunate enough to witness the event, or the poor sod that has to break the bad news to family, or the bad press the railways would probably get and the subsequent fines through delay minutes, or the potential 100's of people inconvenienced?....all because some immature idiot things its a good laugh to stick ones head out a moving train!

Ones actions during such "actvities" can affect a hell of alot of people, some people would do well to remember that.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
17,890
Location
Reston City Centre
if anyone wants to carry on with this foolhardy behaviour then go ahead. I can foresee that, following a fatality caused by leanin gout of the window, heritage coaches with droplight windows will be banned unless the windows are sealed shut, and then that will be the end of it anyway!

Totally agree! And, if that sadly happens, people will want to blame the train operator, regardless of the fact that there's safety notices warning against this kind of thing.

It only takes another idiot further up the train to throw their fag out of the window - you won't see it coming, but if it hits you it'll hurt!

As for the behaviour of some, that's why I don't bother with railtours these days - too many grown men acting like twelve year olds :(
 

Greenback

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
9 Aug 2009
Messages
15,268
Location
Llanelli
I know what you mean. It's all very well people saying it's their choice to put their head out of the window, but if something terrible does happen to someone that way, then you can bet that their family and freiends will be looking to blame whoever they can for the tragedy, rather than the victim.

To be honest, the behaviour of people around railtours, whether its those ont he train or those trespassing on the line to get their photos, is bringing the reputation of rail enthusiasts to even lower levels! It's bad enough being regarded as an anorak wearing, twix eating, mummy's boy by muggles, without also being labelled as an incosiderate moron!

By the way, I do eat twix bars occasionally, wear an anorak type coat in the Winter and love my mummy (and my wife!)
 

kelladam96

Member
Joined
23 Jun 2008
Messages
43
If staff on any railway, modern or heritage need to stick their head out of the window then fine, but I don't think anyone else should
 

GWRtom

Member
Joined
1 Jun 2008
Messages
366
Location
Dorchester.
i have to confess i have to stuck my head out the window feaquntly(SP) how ever this is on a 25mph heritage railway aka the Swanage line witch i am a gaurd on and i have to stick my head out to check the doors on the Mk1s, you whouldnt belive how many doors iv'e seen were people have slammed them and the locks got caught out side if you know what i mean but mind you since im a staff member even through the risks still apply im not stuped enougth to stick me head out when a bridge is coming up like some idoits. but to sum up

You should NEVER on a NR mainline stick your head out the windoe even if you think its safe if you want a thrill just stand by the door theres no reason to poke your head out

Edit: Sorry if my post dosn't make any sense(SP) i had totype in a rush
 

O L Leigh

Established Member
Joined
20 Jan 2006
Messages
5,611
Location
In the cab with the paper
ive never seen anyone with their head out far enugh to have it hit by another train or the OHLE, signals, tunnels bridges ect, maybe a few branches but they have their head in if they see it.

And how far is that...?

There is not standard minimum clearance between trains and the fixed infrastructure. Sometimes the clearances are incredibly tight, as many of us have been saying repeatedly for the past few days.

Besides, just because you have "never seen anyone" leaning out too far (however far that is) it doesn't mean that people don't. I've never seen anyone tagging a train or some item of lineside equipment but clearly it happens on a fairly regular and widespread basis.

at the end of the day, its dangerous and could kill you but its up to the person doing it and if he/she wants to put their head out then thats their choice

No it isn't. It is against the railway byelaws and is therefore prohibited.

O L Leigh
 

Lee_Again

Member
Joined
29 Sep 2007
Messages
669
Location
Stevenage
WOW. I can't believe what a Hornets mess I started. For me, it has been really interesting reading all the various points that people have so fiercely defended.

For what it's worth, the original post was supposed to draw comment from those that had written such harsh comment (IMO) about the poor young lad who was killed in Liverpool while trespassing. I wanted to see if the writers of those comments would also be the same people who condone 'hanging out of windows'. Having looked at both threads there are some that do. I find that quite interesting.

I just think we should go easy on the guy who was killed. Trespassing is clearly dangerous and deffinately against the law; not sure this justifies a 'death' sentance though. And it certainly doesn't justify the awful comments. I'm sure at some stage we have all done something that others consider stupid or even illegal. Just remember, one day it could be you. Unlikely, admittedly, but cemetries are full of people who 'new what they were doing'.

Everyone... be safe.

Lee
 

GB

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
6,468
Location
Somewhere
I wanted to see if the writers of those comments would also be the same people who condone 'hanging out of windows'. Having looked at both threads there are some that do. I find that quite interesting.

Ah but you see, when rail enthusiasts are caught doing something they shouldnt its OK becuase they are rail enthusiasts and they know everything there is to know about the railway and they know what they are doing.;):roll:
 

Broken Viking

On Moderation
Joined
23 Oct 2006
Messages
1,666
Location
some place west of France
Hail all! <D
I have to confess to being prone to "peeking" out of the windows on HSTs whenever I'm using them, but admittedly I try to take a number of precautions to ensure that what I'm doing allows me to enjoy myself whilst staying completely safe...After all, I sure as hell wouldn't ever want to put anyone through the sheer horror of having to deal with a decapitated passenger! :shock:<D

Basically; What I normally do is to start out literally "peeking" out of the cess-side of the train (I.E: One eye out only, head remaining within loading gauge) to inspect the line ahead and note any potential dangers - Such as bridges, signal posts, and right-hand bends. If there's a good amount of clear space ahead and visibility is sufficient to react to what can be seen at the current speed well in advance, then I'll move the head out a little more.
Even then though, I'll normally move my head out only as far as needed to get that "wind in the face" feeling and good forward vision, meaning that I can draw my head back quicker if necessary. Also, I tend to draw back well in advance (Normally at least 15 seconds before passing) of any lineside structures as - Even though they may look like they're a couple of foot from the side of the train - I'm not taking a chance with clearances at over 120mph! :shock:8)

Personally, I cannot understand why a minority of people insist on sticking the whole upper-halves of their body outside of the train though. I've seen one or two doing this on services that I've used in the past, and one of them wasn't giving himself much time to react to oncoming dangers at all! :o:roll:
Having said that, I have to confess that I do occasionally lean my body out of the windows on HSTs whenever I'm using them...But that's only when the train has stopped at the platform, the doors have been unlocked, and I'm leaning out to reach for and use the door handle! :razz:

Given my description of the "peeping" practice that I've outlined above though - And while we're on the subject - Could I get an HST driver's/guard's opinion on that practice? As far as I can tell, it's probabally the safest way of doing a cautious "heads out" when desired and it's probable that I'm not putting anything outside of loading guage at any time...But not having any form of track safety or gauge training, I cannot tell for certain. :?:

--- Old post above / New post below: ---

Ones actions during such "actvities" can affect a hell of alot of people, some people would do well to remember that.
I can foresee that, following a fatality caused by leanin gout of the window, heritage coaches with droplight windows will be banned unless the windows are sealed shut, and then that will be the end of it anyway!
Actually, those are both very good points. :!:
Although I try to gravitate more towards opening a window and standing next to it (I.E: Remaining completely inside the train) facing forward or out wherever possible, I still find myself caught by the temptation to get that "wind in the hair" experience... :roll:

To be honest, I might make a disposable periscope out of some cardboard and a couple of cheap mirrors or aluminium foil, and use that insted for all of my forward vision needs... :idea:

Out of interest if you did lose your head at 125mph hit by a train also travelling at 125mph and the emergency cord was pulled within a few seconds what would the distance be between your head and body.
Assuming a typically Gory severing on a signal or OHLE post, the "bouncing" distance for 125mph, and what little I know of HST braking capability; I'd guess the seperation would be about two miles down the line, with the head coming to rest about 350m away from the line - Assuming there were no obstructions to it's path.

On this subject; I'll make it perfectly clear that I don't mean to be sick or disgusting in any way when I ask the following - This question is intended to be a serious and mature one, asked for perfectly legitimate reasons - But is anyone aware of any video footage that shows such a decapitation in it's full and uncensored nature?
I'm currently in the initial stages of setting up a Gore-centric version of YouTube, and one of the features that I'd like to open up the site with would be some truly horrific and hard-hitting railway safety videos to try and successfully hit home the dangers of tresspassing, and other such sins on the railways. :?:

Farewell...And thanks for any info on the above! <D
>> Death <<
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Old Timer

Established Member
Joined
24 Aug 2009
Messages
3,702
Location
On a plane somewhere at 35,000
From an infrastructure point of view there is nothing going to be THAT close to the side of the train, UNLESS it is lineside vegetation.

There are locations however where lineside structures would strike a person's head if it fully protruded out of a carriage window.
 

SouthEastern-465

Established Member
Joined
24 May 2009
Messages
1,659
Location
Greater London
I dont think someone should be banned just because of there personal life as that has nothing to do with the site neither does the videos posted on youtube as it has nothing to do with the site either.

Only things that are bad that occur on the site should involve moderators as thats there job and I am sure they'll agree with me.
Regards
 

GB

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
6,468
Location
Somewhere
Out of interest if you did lose your head at 125mph hit by a train also travelling at 125mph and the emergency cord was pulled within a few seconds what would the distance be between your head and body.

Quite simply with the forces involved your head would cease to exist. Bit like a car hitting a water mellon at high speed.
 

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,773
With regards to mainline stock- why do they still have the drop-lights?

The mrk3 fleet in use have all, at various pints, been through refurbishments of varying levels. They've all long had central door locking- even leaning out the window and trying to open the door, it can't be done until the doors are released.

So why haven't they had a handle fitted to the inside of the door? The window could then be sealed up, solving the issue (as far as those trains are concerned). Opening the doors from inside, as it is, is difficult for anyone short, and confusing for those that have never encountered them before. The engineering would surely not be that difficult?

The only people who would complain would be enthusiasts- though I'll accept not just those who stick their heads out of the windows, as there are those who're content to just stand in the vestibule with the window open.

So, it would prevent a dangerous practise and make life easier for many passengers. Why hasn't it been done?
 

37401

Established Member
Joined
12 Nov 2008
Messages
3,276
Location
Birmingham
And how far is that...?

There is not standard minimum clearance between trains and the fixed infrastructure. Sometimes the clearances are incredibly tight, as many of us have been saying repeatedly for the past few days.

Besides, just because you have "never seen anyone" leaning out too far (however far that is) it doesn't mean that people don't. I've never seen anyone tagging a train or some item of lineside equipment but clearly it happens on a fairly regular and widespread basis.



No it isn't. It is against the railway byelaws and is therefore prohibited.

O L Leigh

True, true and true, its against the law didnt know that one!
 

Broken Viking

On Moderation
Joined
23 Oct 2006
Messages
1,666
Location
some place west of France
With regards to mainline stock- why do they still have the drop-lights?
The mrk3 fleet in use have all, at various pints, been through refurbishments of varying levels. They've all long had central door locking- even leaning out the window and trying to open the door, it can't be done until the doors are released.

So why haven't they had a handle fitted to the inside of the door? The window could then be sealed up, solving the issue (as far as those trains are concerned). Opening the doors from inside, as it is, is difficult for anyone short, and confusing for those that have never encountered them before. The engineering would surely not be that difficult?

So, it would prevent a dangerous practise and make life easier for many passengers. Why hasn't it been done?
I'm no expert on HSTs and Mk-IIIs admittedly, but I seem to recall that the HSTs did have internal door handles on them at some point in their lives. The main reason I can think of for doing away with them would be if there had been too many incidences of children playing with the handles and unwittingly opening the doors whilst in motion, or if the handles kept getting caught on baggage etc. with the same outcome. :shock:

Admittedly - Though I do like drop-lights myself - I think that an internal handle would be a better approach to using handles outside of the train, and now that CDL has been installed on all HSTs it could be done without any concerns over safety.
An additional suggestion I would make though would be to use the same design of internal handle as those used on the SR 411's (2-CEP, I think) in standard class - Aside from being relatively unobtrusive and difficult to catch accidentally, the strong springs used in those handles would act as a good child-proofing measure, too! 8)
 

Bighat

Member
Joined
19 Jul 2005
Messages
429
Location
Ilford
Where on earth did this ridiculous 'heads out' phrase come from which has only appeared in the past couple of years, usually used by children? Can't you call it looking out? And the use of plural indicates you have more than one head! :|

Or conversely, as there is no apostrophe, more than ONE person.

An activity of MANY heads! :) :) :)
 

Old Timer

Established Member
Joined
24 Aug 2009
Messages
3,702
Location
On a plane somewhere at 35,000
Because the UK has not followed the European approach to personal responsibility and accountability, but has slavishly copied the US style, the use of internal door handles has a number of drawbacks.

One of the biggest is that unlike Europe we seem to be reluctant to allow morons to leave the gene pool by their own hand. Abroad, the approach very much is that if you are stupid enough to mess with doors on a moving train then ultimately you will fall out. When you do, it is YOUR fault not that train operator or railway administration, indeed the chances are you will be taken to Court unlike here.

Another drawback is that Chavs and ne'r do wells just love to mess with such things, possibly because removing oneself from the gene pool is genetically programmed from birth.

Probably the greatest drawback is the Type A four wheel/SUV driving macho male moron who would inevitably overcome the CDL so as to gain a couple of seconds over everyone else. This being the apparantly normal behavioural trait exhibited by such individuals who view themselves to be outside of the rules that apply to normal people. Parking being a perfect example.

As and when they killed themselves, their trophy-wife would be wailing to all and sundry about dangerous trains, almost certainly supported in another unbelievable claim by the Compensation Cultures parasites of the legal profession, who would persuade one of the bewigged idiots to award some extremely large sum based on some tenuous pretext that no-one of sane mind would agree with.

Such is the world we all now inhabit. The world where a warning that a bag of nuts contains nuts has to be printed in bold, and purchasers of hot drinks have to visibly be able to see a warning that their hot drink is indeed hot and could burn if it spills. :roll:
 
Joined
17 Aug 2009
Messages
535
Because the UK has not followed the European approach to personal responsibility and accountability, but has slavishly copied the US style, the use of internal door handles has a number of drawbacks.

One of the biggest is that unlike Europe we seem to be reluctant to allow morons to leave the gene pool by their own hand. Abroad, the approach very much is that if you are stupid enough to mess with doors on a moving train then ultimately you will fall out. When you do, it is YOUR fault not that train operator or railway administration, indeed the chances are you will be taken to Court unlike here.

Another drawback is that Chavs and ne'r do wells just love to mess with such things, possibly because removing oneself from the gene pool is genetically programmed from birth.

Probably the greatest drawback is the Type A four wheel/SUV driving macho male moron who would inevitably overcome the CDL so as to gain a couple of seconds over everyone else. This being the apparantly normal behavioural trait exhibited by such individuals who view themselves to be outside of the rules that apply to normal people. Parking being a perfect example.

As and when they killed themselves, their trophy-wife would be wailing to all and sundry about dangerous trains, almost certainly supported in another unbelievable claim by the Compensation Cultures parasites of the legal profession, who would persuade one of the bewigged idiots to award some extremely large sum based on some tenuous pretext that no-one of sane mind would agree with.

Such is the world we all now inhabit. The world where a warning that a bag of nuts contains nuts has to be printed in bold, and purchasers of hot drinks have to visibly be able to see a warning that their hot drink is indeed hot and could burn if it spills. :roll:

I really couldn't agree more.
 

Broken Viking

On Moderation
Joined
23 Oct 2006
Messages
1,666
Location
some place west of France
As and when they killed themselves, their trophy-wife would be wailing to all and sundry about dangerous trains, almost certainly supported in another unbelievable claim by the Compensation Cultures parasites of the legal profession, who would persuade one of the bewigged idiots to award some extremely large sum based on some tenuous pretext that no-one of sane mind would agree with.

Such is the world we all now inhabit. The world where a warning that a bag of nuts contains nuts has to be printed in bold, and purchasers of hot drinks have to visibly be able to see a warning that their hot drink is indeed hot and could burn if it spills. :roll:
Ditto-ing JustinStacy above, my thoughts exactly...And at least 90% of it is all down to those twunts in the House of Commons. They don't give the slightest crap about anything, save filling their already bloated and parasite-infested bellies... <(<(<(

(I tried to voice the same sentiments on another forum that I use last night, but no-one seemed to interperet my post correctly for some reason. :? )
 

The Snap

Established Member
Joined
10 Jun 2005
Messages
3,148
Ditto-ing JustinStacy above, my thoughts exactly...And at least 90% of it is all down to those twunts in the House of Commons. They don't give the slightest crap about anything, save filling their already bloated and parasite-infested bellies... <(<(<(

(I tried to voice the same sentiments on another forum that I use last night, but no-one seemed to interperet my post correctly for some reason. :? )


This is to Old Timer, JustinStacy and Death.

I'll play devils advocate here...

Perhaps the government are only acting on the complaints they receive and the bad press they receive for not warning us over (obvious) dangers. I find it unbelievable the amount of times I hear people have complained over something ridiculous. Let's take Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand, for example. A joke on the radio...to which boring old farts took offence to because they've got nothing else to do but complain. Newswatch on the BBC's Saturday Breakfast show - people who complain about the way the news is read, or the way the news is reported...why don't they f**k off and not watch it then? These people need to get a grip on reality and get used to the fact that people don't give a sh*t about that kind of stuff anymore...

If there is no warning on a cup of boiling hot coffee, and you spill it on yourself, and then claim you weren’t warned it was hot - you're a tosser! IMHO. It is, in my opinion, those people in society who cannot live without being told what to do or how to do it that have caused this influx of rules, regulation and pathetic warnings...

Perhaps the recent phenomenon of compensation has also influenced such legislation…
 

O L Leigh

Established Member
Joined
20 Jan 2006
Messages
5,611
Location
In the cab with the paper
Some risks are obvious but some are not. That doesn't make them any less lethal. As this thread clearly shows, some people do not have a full understanding of the risks associated with leaning out of train windows so to have a warning on a sticker over the door is not inappropriate.

However, on the broader point, I do generally agree that if you play the odds then you have to expect that you are increasing the risk to yourself. Deliberate misadventure in full knowledge of the risks is an act of personal responsibility. If you get mown down on a level crossing because you wilfully ignored the signs and notices then that is your own fault and not the railway's (which, just for clarity, is not the same thing as saying that "they deserve it").

However, I will say again that you cannot assume that everyone has a full understanding of the risks associated with any activity. I would say that a significant proportion of the population need to be told. What they then choose to do with that information is their decision.

O L Leigh
 

moonrakerz

Member
Joined
10 Feb 2009
Messages
870
Some risks are obvious but some are not.

Uhmmmmm...................OK. London Eye (+ Waterloo)

otddgm.jpg
 

johnb

Member
Joined
26 Jun 2009
Messages
223
Probably the greatest drawback is the Type A four wheel/SUV driving macho male moron who would inevitably overcome the CDL so as to gain a couple of seconds over everyone else

Eh? The only way for a passenger to overcome the CDL on a Mk3 is to break into the guard's panel and switch it off. Which would be no easier with internal door handles than with external ones. The reason Mk3s haven't got internal door handles is that they weren't designed to have them (the Mk2s did, and they were later removed, but the Mk3s were handle-less from the outset) and so it'd be expensive to retrofit them.

I agree with earlier posters, albeit with a heavy heart, that installing internal handles and sealing the windows mightn't be a bad idea.

And at least 90% of it is all down to those twunts in the House of Commons.

Not really. Elfinsafetygawnmad stories rarely have much at all to do with new laws or regulations - it's almost all about people being increasingly keen to sue under the tort laws we've had since time immemorial, helped out by ambulance-chasers. But in the UK (unlike the US, which uses the jury system for tort cases and believes in 'punitive damages', and therefore frequently gets utterly mad results), it's very rare for stupid claims to succeed, or for stupidly large sums to be awarded.

However, on the broader point, I do generally agree that if you play the odds then you have to expect that you are increasing the risk to yourself. Deliberate misadventure in full knowledge of the risks is an act of personal responsibility. If you get mown down on a level crossing because you wilfully ignored the signs and notices then that is your own fault and not the railway's (which, just for clarity, is not the same thing as saying that "they deserve it").

This is absolutely right, and is also recognised in law (if you provide clear warning of the danger you're unlikely to lose a lawsuit). The family of someone who lost their head flailing on a railtour would stand pretty much no chance of getting anything - possibly a very small payout if there was evidence staff were aware of the behaviour and had tolerated it rather than telling the flailer to stop.
 

Broken Viking

On Moderation
Joined
23 Oct 2006
Messages
1,666
Location
some place west of France
Hail again! <D
Perhaps the government are only acting on the complaints they receive and the bad press they receive for not warning us over (obvious) dangers. I find it unbelievable the amount of times I hear people have complained over something ridiculous.

If there is no warning on a cup of boiling hot coffee, and you spill it on yourself, and then claim you weren’t warned it was hot - you're a tosser! IMHO. It is, in my opinion, those people in society who cannot live without being told what to do or how to do it that have caused this influx of rules, regulation and pathetic warnings...

Perhaps the recent phenomenon of compensation has also influenced such legislation…
I have to admit that this whole "wrap everything in cotton wool" culture that we've adopted (Speaking of the country as a whole) does rub me up the wrong way. Although I have no problem with warning notices where they're concievably relevant (Such as "Warning...Coffee is hot" or "Leaning out of the window may result in Death") my main problem in that area is not so much that they try to warn us of such dangers, but more that they actually try through various means to force what we can/can't do. <(

Let's take the issue in the OP as a working example: The warning notices on HSTs clearly warn me that leaning out of the window is a dangerous activity, and that I should not do it. However - As I've mentioned in a post above - I have developed a technique for performing heads-out in a manner that appears to me to be completely safe and doesn't pose risk to either myself, or anyone else who may be on board or otherwise about the line.
In deciding whether to perform such an act, I feel that I should be allowed to use my own personal judgement as a responsible adult to do such things, and I fully acknowlege that any negative consequences of such an act (Such as a pleasantly Gory decapitation, or my face being horribly lashed by a bush at 130mph) are my own responsibility...And if anything like that does happen, then it is soley my own fault. :!:

Of course; In the case of the original issue one also has to consider others who might be affected by such a happening (I wouldn't be too bothered about seeing a severed head bouncing alongside the train, but my fellow passengers would be mortified by it) but - Putting that concern aside for a moment - One of my biggest gripes is the fact that our dear Government (And the European Parlament) seem to have adopted the truly erroneous view that they have the "right" to control what we can and can't do, and have the "right" to tell us all what to do. <(
IMO the role of Government is to handle and run the country in the best interests of it's residents, and by that I mean listening to what the people say, and acting upon it...NOT acting in a summary manner and making assumptions as to what we do and don't want. <(

As a second example; I certainly wasn't asked for my views or input on the proposed switchover to digital television at any stage, and nor was anyone else that I know...The Government assumed that people would want it because it was a modern thing, and just went ahead with it. Personally though - If I used a television - I'd want to stay analogue, as digital TV requires a perfect reception to get any picture at all...Whereas with analogue a poor signal still gives an imperfect - But still usable and viewable - Transmission! :!:

Oh aye...And the recent emergence of the American where there's a blame, there's a claim mentality over here is another pet hate of mine. The following image emphesises this point perfectly...
this_sign_has_sharp_edges.jpg
As far as I'm concerned, the advertising or otherwise soliciting of such services should be both banned from the media and made illegal. Sadly though, such a ban would never come into effect now...Gordon Clown wouldn't allow it because he'd stop getting those massive financial kickbacks from the solicitors who run those services! :roll::mad:

To finalise: We never had any of this crap back in the 1960's, and I would love to see a return to those days where people were allowed to make decisions based on their own mature judgement...And not told how to make those decisions by a 40,000 page long Government document! :!:

Farewell... <D
>> Death <<
 
Last edited by a moderator:

AlexS

Established Member
Joined
7 Jun 2005
Messages
2,886
Location
Just outside the Black Country
This might be a moment to point out I should really add myself to the casualty list as someone who has ended up requiring medical attention for **** in the eye.

Not all that pleasant, though the local anaesthetic was kind of cool!

That was while legitimately watching a diesel train into the station out the window while on duty.

It's happened 3 other times with liberal amounts of eye wash resolving it.

It's an accepted occupational hazard but the paperwork is still irritating and the smut is even more so!
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
17,890
Location
Reston City Centre
To finalise: We never had any of this crap back in the 1960's, and I would love to see a return to those days where people were allowed to make decisions based on their own mature judgement...And not told how to make those decisions by a 40,000 page long Government document! :!:

...yes, then good old days of tens of thousands of industrial accidents/ workplace deaths... :roll:

Just look into the British Coal compensation fiasco to see how costly mistakes were made back that that are being paid for (heavily) now. Or look up asbestos - or dodgy blood transfusions - or...
 

Dennis

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2005
Messages
2,676
Location
Trowbridge
It's an accepted occupational hazard but the paperwork is still irritating and the smut is even more so!

That situation is completely unacceptable - why doesn't your employer supply suitable eye protection for something which is so obviously a risk?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top