lekker wrote:Ask them to show you the national agreement that says you have to wear them on delivery. I don't believe there is one. It is the same as cycle helmets, these need to be worn on delivery only - if you ride the bike to and from home you don't have to. Your choice of course but remember the DIMs make up the rules as they go along and most of the time they get it wrong whilst threatening you with the conduct code.
We have i'm sure a report on here somewhere where a guy was either sacked/disciplined for not wearing the helmet when either coming into work or going home.
Your joking surely that cant be right? How can they discipline you for something like that outside work? I understand they can discipline you for doing something in your own time that reflects badly on the company like drug taking or being a nazi for instance. But not wearing a helmet in your own free time?
I've been stopped twice whilst out on delivery by security and both times he checked off Hi-viz among other things such as ID, van locked etc
I asked him what if he caught me without Hi-viz and he said he would report me to my manager,it was then up to the manager's discretion if he conduct coded me.
Hi-viz at all times, no exemptions.
They tried to make us wear them a couple of years ago, we wore them for a couple of days then didn't bother. Daft idea. If your'e on a bike then fair enough but out in the middle of the day? Nonsense. Why can't people just rely on common sense?
luddite wrote:I've been stopped twice whilst out on delivery by security and both times he checked off Hi-viz among other things such as ID, van locked etc
I asked him what if he caught me without Hi-viz and he said he would report me to my manager,it was then up to the manager's discretion if he conduct coded me.
Hi-viz at all times, no exemptions.
You Dom must have been related to my wannabe pol pot Dom
The way I look at it RM is looking for ANY excuse to get rid of Posties...so why give them a hand. H & S Poster boy me, all the gear! Plus if I have an accident I don't want either RM or the senile, half-blind, coffin-dodger to wriggle out of paying my compo when I sue their ass!
Whats the problem with wearing a bit of Dayglo Nylon? It's not as if it's Body Armour or anything substantial "Weighing" you down in your pursuit of more speed! 1500 Offices = 1500 different interpretations of the rules! I'm sure we can all find something more important to worry about, like people losing their jobs or being forced to quit!
Like all Wage Slaves, he had two crosses to bear: The people he worked for and the people he worked with! (Stephen Vizinczey.)
Like I stated earlier, nobody is saying that a car driver cannot see you in a red top what I'm saying, and it's been proven in figures from all over the world, is that the car driver can see you earlier wearing a fluorescent garment giving them more thinking time and thus resulting in fewer last minute manoeuvres and accidents.
Although you're effectively wearing another layer, if you're not trying to beat Pegasus I really don't think that the resultant increase in body temperature outweighs the benefits in reduced accidents.
DirtyHarry wrote:What utter nonsense, a walking postie having to wear a hi-vis, in broad daylight, in hot weather, absolute nonsense, how come the dick splash at our place hasn't offered up this pearl of stupidity, I wonder.
Would be right up his street, the silly cant.
At last someone who talks sense,how ridicuolous to wear a high vis walking down the street,what possible hazard does it protect you from let common sense prevail
DB1100 wrote:
At last someone who talks sense,how ridicuolous to wear a high vis walking down the street,what possible hazard does it protect you from let common sense prevail
But "common sense" won't protect you from the conduct code if wearing a high vis is obligatory.
The societies of consumption and squandering of material resources are incompatible with the idea of economic growth and a clean planet.
DB1100 wrote:
At last someone who talks sense,how ridicuolous to wear a high vis walking down the street,what possible hazard does it protect you from let common sense prevail
But "common sense" won't protect you from the conduct code if wearing a high vis is obligatory.
Its no wonder health and safety is such a joke when pointless things like this are enforced.I am sure that this is not something that the Health and safety endorse
I'm pretty sure wearing a hi vis IS the law when it comes to health and safety, or at least thats what i was told, all of us at our office wear them all year round. I also got stopped by i.b whilst out on the round and they commented on the fact i was wearing a hi vis and that i would of been in trouble if i hadn't.
I think its pretty much the same as if your not wearing your cycle helmet then you may not be able to make a claim if you have a bike accident.
da'bunny wrote:I'm pretty sure wearing a hi vis IS the law when it comes to health and safety, or at least thats what i was told, all of us at our office wear them all year round. I also got stopped by i.b whilst out on the round and they commented on the fact i was wearing a hi vis and that i would of been in trouble if i hadn't.
I think its pretty much the same as if your not wearing your cycle helmet then you may not be able to make a claim if you have a bike accident.
I understand and agree with wearing them on a pushbike,but walking on the pavement its crazy.
DB1100 wrote:
I understand and agree with wearing them on a pushbike,but walking on the pavement its crazy.
It's not crazy...it would be crazy if it was a suit of armour or the arse end of a pantomime horse but it's not...it's just a lightweight hi-vis that you won't even notice you're wearing after 5 minutes.
1500 Offices = 1500 different interpretations of the rules! I'm sure we can all find something more important to worry about, like people losing their jobs or being forced to quit! 
Can't see that she'd get THAT Hot! But I can't remember anyone ever complaining. 