Demonstration safety prompted by posting in Yandles show topic

[Derwent Woodturning club]

I have just read a post by Dave Brookes under the Yandles Spring show topic and wanted to respond but felt it justified starting a new topic.
I hope Dave doesn't mind my quoting his post below, but it sets the situation for my reply.

I was in two minds as whether to post this or not but having stewed/simmered for a few days here goes........

Despite the various threads on the forum with regards to Health & Safety, I was dismayed by some of the demonstrators at the show who were proudly displaying their AWGB badges yet had no means of protection between their lathes and the general public.  It seems evident that the show host does not require the basic Risk Assessments to be submitted and complied with, and if they do, then no one looks to see if all is in control.

As an organisation, we need our members to set the example to others.

Dave

Now I agree with Dave that we should be setting good examples to all and sundry but to what level does this apply?

A bit of background here. I am secretary for one, and involved with several other clubs. I also demonstrate to woodturning clubs, and at craft fairs, village shows and WI meetings.

The situation I find myself in is, when doing demonstrations for woodturning clubs, it would NOT be acceptable if I put a screen between myself and the audience. And I have never seen another demonstrator at a club event, put up a screen. However, when I do demonstrations at craft fairs, and other 'public' events, I am expected to, and DO use a polycarbonate screen between myself and the audience.

My own Risk Assessment is that it does not matter who is in front of you, there IS a risk of a piece coming off the lathe and hitting them but that goes against 'club attitudes'.

So, my questions are:- Were the 'general public' at Yandles Spring show deemed to be 'woodturners', as at a club meeting, so screens would have been rejected? Or was it an oversight not using them?

And more importantly, this situation implies that woodturners are not 'general public'.

I appreciate this could be a bit of a minefield but would be interested to hear other's opinions.

[bodrighywood]

When I am doing shows etc I have a screen that I put up between me and the public and they have a line beyond which they are not allowed. At Yandles I was one of the demonstrators who didn't have a screen however for two reasons.
1. I was using a borrowed lathe and there was no way I could have my screen attached as it is custom made to fit my mini lathe and Yandles didn't provide one.
2. I made sure that anything I was turning was as much as possible safe and not likely to split, fly off etc and also ran the lathe at a much lower speed than I normally would ( sub 750).
I agree that H&S is important and we should all be aware of but there are times when we have to reassess the situation and work accordingly. If I start to do a lot more shows such as Yandles I will make up a free standing screen that I can use such as the ones that a couple of the other demonstrators had but in the meantime I can at least make sure that I take every precaution to ensure safety. Much of the wood that I use normally is potentially dangerous as it can have splits, holes, or parts that are very soft and I wouldn't use this at a show or a club as the likelihood of it coming off are far more likely.

As a sort of side issue, I have never had a piece come off and go anywhere but towards me. I assume it must happen in the other direction so maybe I have just been fortunate.

Pete

[PhilipS]

My guess is that you or the demonstrator has to assess the level of personal risk and responsibility you/he wishes to accept if things go wrong. You may well find that not taking adequate precautions may negate your insurance and potentially you may be personally liable as may the club officers, in the event of a claim.

The AWGB as an organisation went to a limited liability company and then a charity which probably resolved the problem of the executive being the port of last call.

No-one seems to read the small print of policies until after 'the event' it is up to the club and the demonstrator to determine what is a risk or not, what is actually covered not assumed to be covered by the policy and then accept the consequences of their decisions.

If there are young people in a club meeting there might be an awkward situation to answer if they are injured and a parent isn't present.

With video in most clubs the need for a clear view becomes irrelevant. I never sit in front of a demonstrator and that is my risk assessment being satisfied.

I might well be wrong of course, I usually am - I am not a Club Officer and have not seen the details of the club insurance policy wording. If you have any doubts you should contact the insurance provider and get your replies in writing.

Philip

[Andy Coates]

Hello all,

I'm a slightly uncomfortable position here as one of Admin of the forum, and as one of the demonstrators who was at Yandles. Before I get to my point for entering this discussion I'll make the following points:

1) I used a safety screen based on past experience of Yandles show. It gets busy and people seem only too eager to stand literally at your shoulder if there's no barrier. The screen was an attempt to create one. As it happens it was a wise choice as I had a bowl blow due to a moment's distraction when a dog was allowed to walk freely across the area behind the headstock (viewer side of the lathe). So it saved the day in that respect. The unforeseen can happen.

I'll also add that despite the screen and its obvious role I had to ask people on an annoyingly regular basis to move behind it as they continued to move around it. Clearly the individuals had made their own RA and decided that it was fine to ignore the screen.

2) Risk assessment is not only for the venue owner/organiser but also for the demonstrator. RA's don't illuminate risk, they identify them. Our job is to take "all reasonable precautions" against the perceived risk. People will, of course, have different ideas on what's reasonable.

Ok...that's my input.

Now for the awkward part...

I am closing this thread because it specifically mentions one company and they are not here to put their side of the debate.

I am happy for this to be re-posted as a new general topic, but must insist, in view of the potential for libel or posts detrimental to a third party that all concerns specifically related to a particular company/event be directed to said company.

apologies, but we've been here before and I have no inclination to spend the next fortnight in protracted conversations with aggrieved companies or individuals.

Keep it general and the world can breathe easy folks...

Andy