It struck us recently how health & safety is more commonly being used as a reason for going on strike; at least it’s what we hear on the news and in the press. However it also struck us how these apparent health & safety concerns are not clearly identified; but are just labelled as health & safety failings.
So why is it that the press fail to pick up on this and do not challenge what the failings are? Is it because they are so sensitive that they cannot be disclosed or is it that the words ‘health & safety’ are just becoming an easy excuse that people feel won`t be challenged?
We know that in these hard economic times corners are sometimes cut and that changes are made to working practices, but wonder if a high risk industry such as the Petrochemical would shortcut health & safety that far that it would take a threat of a strike to put it right? Of course we are not saying they haven’t but just wonder why the failings have not been outlined in more detail.
The tanker drivers’ union are not the first and probably not the last to raise health & safety concerns but are they trying to mask the reason of wanting more money by playing the health & safety card? It seems that talks have overcome the health & safety problems yet it is still not clear (at the time of writing) if the dispute has been fully resolved!