Forum Options

« Back to Miscellaneous Topics Topics

Sign In above to begin adding replies.
 

HSG216 Is Being Replaced - THIS AFFECTS YOU

Nigel Musson

Joined: 18-08-01

Topics: 1

Replies: 3

Posted: Fri 8th Sep 2017, 2:17pm
HSG216 Is Being Replaced - THIS AFFECTS YOU

Please see the news item on this important matter which affects everyone in the hobby

Your committee encourages you to consider this important matter and make your views known

https://goo.gl/6Lunff
 

Replies To This Post

Peter Beevers

Joined: 9-10-01

Topics: 3

Replies: 134

Posted: Fri 8th Sep 2017, 3:09pm

My views are simple:

1) We do not HAVE to replace HSG216. It remains the defacto standard. It would probably be good to do so, but it is by no means mandatory. Any replacement would not be owned by the HSG, but the hobby itself, so is a rather different beast.
2) A more prescriptive solution is not acceptable under ANY circumstances whatever, risk evaluation and then covering these off by risk assessment is key. This is because we do not all run the same kind of railway - each has its own constraints, risks etc. which may (or may not) need action.
3) I agree that there is a need for education is some sectors.

A key to any such new document is cross hobby engagement and agreement - my view is that, should an overly prescriptive document result, then, as a last resort, the 7.25" society should withdraw its support, thus rendering the new document worthless (and staying with HSG216).
 

George

Joined: 1-12-05

Topics: 3

Replies: 12

Posted: Fri 8th Sep 2017, 5:07pm

Having been part of a restrictive regime I can assure you that it is the wrong way to go! Fortunately some people have seen the light.
 

George Coles

Joined: 4-08-09

Topics: 19

Replies: 90

Posted: Fri 8th Sep 2017, 5:14pm

If HSG216 works, why not carry it forward as the hobby's own standard? I am aware that, as a government document, copyright belongs to the crown. Can we petition the crown to have the copyright either put aside, or transferred to a representative group? Failing that, I am sure that it could be rewritten, whilst not changing its intentions!

So, does HSG216 work for us? Does it NEED replacing. If it works, then it ain't broke, and don't need mending.

George C

 

George Coles

Joined: 4-08-09

Topics: 19

Replies: 90

Posted: Fri 8th Sep 2017, 5:24pm

A prescriptive regime is (as PB writes above) not acceptable, because our situations are so diverse.

I fear that a the only effect of a prescriptive regime would be to accelerate the decline in absolute numbers of clubs, and in the number of clubs offering passenger hauling. I know many clubs rely on the income from public running, and could not continue without that income.

George C
 

RussCoppin

Joined: 19-09-01

Topics: 0

Replies: 8

Posted: Sun 10th Sep 2017, 1:42pm

The actual content in HSG216 comes to about 20 pages which is a good and manageable size for a guidance document. If you start getting prescriptive just on the current items without covering anything new you can end up with a 100 page document in fine print that you need a qualification to read. This would be devastating to the hobby and impossible for clubs to follow.

Paragraph 86 states:
"... The rules should be appropriate to the railway, easy to understand by all staff and not too complex."

The rules are written from the guidance document taking into account each clubs unique setup. If the new guidance is prescriptive the it is impossible to write a new rule book without going against this previous document that has been accepted in court and precedent has been set.

As the hobby has developed things have changed and the document should be revised to reflect this but not rewritten. Mentioning items that frequently come up on insurance claims could be a useful addition along with some mention of safeguarding. On the whole HSG216 works, the biggest problem is some clubs aren't even aware of its existence and this needs to be addressed once the new document is published.
 

Roger

Joined: 1-01-85

Topics: 6

Replies: 35

Posted: Mon 11th Sep 2017, 9:07am

I agree no document should be too prescriptive, if it is people will just ignore it and that would completely defeat the whole objective of attempting to produce a new document.
 

frankcooper

Joined: 9-08-09

Topics: 9

Replies: 58

Posted: Tue 12th Sep 2017, 3:28pm

A draft guideline will be produced by early 2018. It is not being policed so clubs/railways may choose to opt out of the suggestion. This is the case with the current 216. However failure to comply may lead the HSE to impose fees under "Fees for Intervention".

There are a large number of representatives involved in railways of all types less than 350mm.
We cannot use the wording in 216 as Crown property - we have asked.
 

George Coles

Joined: 4-08-09

Topics: 19

Replies: 90

Posted: Tue 12th Sep 2017, 4:55pm

Glad to learn that 'we' wanted to use the wording in 216, even if permission was refused. Do we know how close the wording of 'our' document can be without infringing on the copyright?

George C
 

frankcooper

Joined: 9-08-09

Topics: 9

Replies: 58

Posted: Tue 12th Sep 2017, 5:09pm

George.

We will attempt to keep the spirit of 216 without using the exact words.Just needs to be in the current HSE "Style" for which they employ a team of 37 people just to do that on their main documents!.
 

ivanhewlett

Joined: 1-01-85

Topics: 8

Replies: 53

Posted: Wed 13th Sep 2017, 11:10am

Hi All

With the greatest respect how ridiculous is it that a document has to be completely rewritten because someone 'owns' the order of the words currently used ?
HSG 216 works, establishment of the RMR proves this, if we wish to retain it's use we should be able to surely ?
Beurocracy for beurocracies sake is how this sounds to me. I am not being critical of the society or anyone involved here - apart from the archaic copyright laws and lawyers.

I hope we can find a way forward that allows us to retain the spirit of our hobby with sensible approaches to health and safety.

Best Regards, Ivan (1065)
 

Roger

Joined: 1-01-85

Topics: 6

Replies: 35

Posted: Thu 21st Sep 2017, 9:28am

Well we do have an AGM this weekend and I understand that there is an item on the Agenda regarding the replacement of HSG216. So this could be an ideal oportunity to convey your thoughts to Frank Cooper who is representing our Society on the group that is reviewing the document. Hopefully we should be able to have an informed and balanced discussion on the matter.

Best Regards Roger (1066)
 
 
« Back to Miscellaneous Topics Topics

Web design by Slingshot