Fantastic job folks, the fines really seem to be doing the trick!
@Martin Summers Fantastic job folks, the fines really seem to be doing the trick!
From the article:
Over the last seven years, TfL said it has handed BT 991 fixed penalty notices (fines), netting it £67,270
If the average fine was just over £68, then I'm not surprised it's not having much effect.
Are there a few digits misplaced in the above figures?
"Are there a few digits misplaced in the above figures?"
I would hope so, although sadly I imagine they are correct. Even if there were an error clearly monetary punishment isn't the answer.
Seems like a good money spinner for TFL.
It really doesn't. £68k in 7 years? They have £5bn a year income from bus and rail fares.
Look on the bright side
at least they weren't Somerset County Council
A bit more than a fine, for not doing their job.
In fact not only no fine, but they put their Council Tax up too. (probably, if it's owt like round here)
Re: Look on the bright side
the nazz that was a pay off /bribe. Some on some were has naughty pics of a councilman.
I find this absolutely shocking.
BT actually doing work on infrastructure.
They should take the Motorway maintenance approach
Cone off 14 miles of busy motorway for 3+ years, even though you're only working* on one section. Ensure your contractors have their own fast lanes. Put up patronising posters of kids saying "Slow down - my mummy works here".
* 1 worker, 4 supervisors, if there's actually anyone there.
Re: They should take the Motorway maintenance approach
Yep, I've seen those patronising posters and I can't help but think your mums got a builders arse. Either that or gender fluidity has really taken hold and what was traditionally dad is now mum, which makes me wonder what term they are going to use in the future for parent?
Yes I am aware women work in the industry and rightly so however to infer in a picture that only mummy's work there is a bit far fetched and open to lighthearted mockery.
"The aggravating feature in this matter, in my view, is the failure to properly close off the pedestrian crossing close to the work site, which resulted in pedestrians walking freely around heavy machinery."
We can't have have ordinary people walking freely around machinery, what if they accidentally try to eat it? No, it's much better for everybody concerned if we close the crossing and force people instead to dash into oncoming traffic to get across the road. That way when they get hurt, at least they can't blame us.
Yes the regulations are there for a reason, and it has fuck all to do with protecting pedestrians.
Sorry, but you are an arse.
BT are flouting safety regulations that are there for a reason. Heavy machinery is incredibly dangerous and working near it is incredibly dangerous. People get killed in the construction industry regularly by it. And the HSE quite rightly come down on you like a ton of bricks if it happens. And similarly if a member of the public is injured. Unlimited fines. They are not using hyperbole.
Sites should be properly designed and that includes pedestrian safety. Pedestrian safety means closing down paths, crossings etc AND PROVIDING PROPER SAFE ALTERNATIVES. The rules are there to protect everyone. BT are being chancers.
This is not the 1920s where a few deaths on a construction site are acceptable. Come back when you have passed your CITB site safety course and then you can express an opinion.
I thought HSE was to prevent a ton of bricks coming down on you?
what if they accidentally try to eat it?
Well, it is heavy plant.
Not quite but near. Most people have blind trust in the machine driver but were there are machines then drivers make mistakes (think of cars). Machines can also malfunction. The rule when you need to go near a machine is to wait well out of the way where the driver can see you and only approach when they tell you.
If anything is stupid it is people. A builders lorry was unloading paving slabs by our house. The old lady who lived opposite saw my wife, crossed the road for a chat and walked under the ton or so of concrete moving through the air on a sling. She never even realised what she had done. The truck driver turned white.
Those site fences are important.
"The old lady who lived opposite saw my wife, crossed the road for a chat and walked under the ton or so of concrete moving through the air on a sling."
A few years ago, a Jewson delivery lorry was delivering supplies to a site which happened to be on the way to my children's school. Traffic was chaotic, because it's an "A" road, and the lorry was blocking half the road, and the driver had made no attempt to re-route pedestrians and prevent people walking underneath the crane being used to dump the supplies at the site.
I contacted the council and miraculously, the site had proper safety barriers put up round it and from then on no more deliveries occurred with lorries blocking the road. Wish I'd had a camera and taken a photo of the lorry and driver and sent them to the Jewson head office though. At the time, I was just relieved to have managed to get my kids across the choas of the main road *twice* to get them to school safely without walking under a tonne of bricks. (I wouldn't usually attempt to cross that road except at a pedestrian crossing or traffic island....)
As an engineer, I understand and trust the safety factors used to calculate the safety of the slings holding the bricks, but I know enough not to put blind trust in the control system of the crane or more importantly, the muppet using it.
British Telecommunications plc pleaded guilty to the charge of failing to comply with directions regarding street works, contrary to the New Road and Street Works Act 1991, on October 4 at Westminster Magistrates' Court.
BT getting their hands dirty?!? I'm surprised it wasn't a contractor doing the work.