Working on live distribution boards?

[Davehaywire]

Can anyone tell me if I'm asked to work on a live db be it TP or SP lv ,by my employer,as I have done for many many years in cases where the board cannot be isolated for various reasons.
if for some reason I'm electrocuted and I have a hot works permit or not, should my employers insurance cover me for injury,death,loss of work, or should I have my own insurance.
can you get insurance for hot works or not?
i have wondered about this for a while, I have a family now, so if for some reason the worst scenario happens,what happens? What can I or my employer do to cover for this?
can any1 enlighten me

 

[Guest55]

define "illegal" ?

illegal as in a criminal act ?

and how can it be illegal 99% of the time yet ok for 1% ?
law simply doesnt work like that.

i'd change your wording to "ill-advised" as it has been already noted that the EAWR doesnt confer with your claim.

 

[Hawkmoon]

If you are in contravention of the regulation, for example you work on live equipment when it is avoidable, then presumably you have broken the law...no?

 

[pennywise]

I'll just hand myself in at the local police station now

 

[D Skelton]

Where does it state that working live is ilegal?

What regulations does it come under?

This is an opinion not a fact right skelton?

If you break a statutory regulation you break the law chap. If you carry out live work when not absolutely neccessary (which will only be the case in a fraction of situations) then you are in breach of the EAWRs.

You just can't help yourself from being an argumentative little so and so can you?

 

[Pete999]

EAWRegs is a legal document, going against a legal document is ummm against the law

 

[Guest111]

If you are in contravention of the regulation, for example you work on live equipment when it is avoidable, then presumably you have broken the law...no?

I think it's a bit like speeding,only illegal if you get caught.

 

[telectrix]

what should be made illegal is that synthetic beer in bean cans, creamflow.

 

[Silly Sausage]

If you are in contravention of the regulation, for example you work on live equipment when it is avoidable, then presumably you have broken the law...no?

EAWR1989 clearly states under regulation 14

Regulation 14 requires that such 'live' working only occurs when it is unavoidable, and after suitable protective equipment has been provided.

This why we have Lawyers!

Also, how much are you prepared to pay one to do their Law jiggery pokery in court to get you off?
(were the case ever arise!)

 

[Hawkmoon]

Seem to be going off track a bit - I thought the question was not if you're going to jail, but 'will your widow get a payout?'

 

[Guest111]

Seem to be going off track a bit - I thought the question was not if you're going to jail, but 'will your widow get a payout?'

Well his own life insurance should pay out,the only way they don't is usually if you top yourself!Unlikely to get anything from the company though.

 

[pepparz]

when i had my interview for the company I currently work for now the head engineer said to me, "if i asked you to do a job live to keep production going, what would you do?" and I said " I'd tell you to f*** off " and he said "that is exactly what I wanted to hear".
large companies wil not ask you to work live, a poor safety record is bad for business, the shareholders don't like it.

 

[Knobhead]

So how would you feel about working live on this?

I was brought up with the kind of gear. This was at 550V with a 400A feed, some had 1000A feeders. Unfortunately I ripped this panel out when the plant was converted to dual fuel. I’ve felt guilty about it ever since.
You couldn’t make it dead for the simple reason, as E54 said, it would take hours to get things up and running again.

 

[D Skelton]

So how would you feel about working live on this?

I was brought up with the kind of gear. This was at 550V with a 400A feed, some had 1000A feeders. Unfortunately I ripped this panel out when the plant was converted to dual fuel. I’ve felt guilty about it ever since.
You couldn’t make it dead for the simple reason, as E54 said, it would take hours to get things up and running again.

Yes, you could! When determining whether something is unavoidable or not various other statutory documents are explicit in their explanation that economic reasons alone are not sufficient.

You make a choice, that is on you.

 

[Knobhead]

Damian, I’ve made that decision in the past. Could you cope with 450 people laid off for a week while we in engineering were knocking our guts out on overtime? I must have been the most hated person in the universe.
But it was my decision. The only decision as a catastrophic failure would have meant a big part of the plant being blown apart.
You work on process critical equipment, you’ll change your mind.

 

[D Skelton]

Damian, I’ve made that decision in the past. Could you cope with 450 people laid off for a week while we in engineering were knocking our guts out on overtime? I must have been the most hated person in the universe.
But it was my decision. The only decision as a catastrophic failure would have meant a big part of the plant being blown apart.
You work on process critical equipment, you’ll change your mind.

450 people being laid off for a week and something taking a few hours to get running again are poles apart mate. With the former option then yes, I would agree, it is unreasonable to be expected to work dead (depending on the severity of the work) when 450 people rely on their wages to feed their families, with the latter however, it would be unreasonable to be expected to work live (although like I said earlier, depending on the situation I wouldn't necessarily condemn someone for doing so) when all the boss needs to do is to tell everyone to have the morning off!