Each author is an expert in UASs. Lead author, Ron Bartsch, has worked in the aviation industry for more than 30 years and is a former director of the Australian Association of Unmanned Systems.
This is reflected in the fascinating detail they provide about the technology's development and its end-use applications. The book starts by discussing the terminology and different definitions of UASs before moving on to cover the regulations governing their use. This includes brief summaries of the legal requirements in selected countries, including the US, UK and Australia.
The downside is that the book only briefly references the UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), which lays down the safety requirements an operator must comply with before they can operate a UAS in UK airspace. The book can also be a little confusing when the authors allude to the fact that the CAA does not have any specific UAS regulations and then mentions that in civil aviation guidance (CAP 722, Unmanned Aircraft Systems Operations in UK Airspace) there are rules that provide governance for operators to comply with (articles 94 and 95). It is worth noting that UAS operators have been prosecuted for not following these rules and fined thousands of pounds.
Anyone who wants to fly a UAS in the UK for commercial work needs consent from the CAA. To obtain what is known as a permission for commercial operations, they will need a remote pilot competence certificate and to pass a flight test, invigilated by CAA-approved commercial organisations called national qualified entities. Some concessions from the full remote pilot competence requirements are available if the prospective user already has suitable piloting qualifications. (For more detail see our feature on UAS's bit.ly/2wws7fM)
Chapters 6 and 7, which cover invasion of privacy and terrorism, highlight some of the negative uses of remotely operated aerial vehicles. Chapter 9, however, covers the positive applications, from fighting the Zika virus to robotic medical couriers. A well written book, it provides an accurate account of the good, bad and ugly uses for UASs. Unfortunately, there are several similar accounts already out there.
In the past 12 months Graham Parker has often found himself working into the early hours. His work as head of health and safety at one of the UK’s biggest property companies has been overlaid with duties representing his professional institution as its president.
Andragogy, digibesity, people-centred safety; even to those with English as their first language, the global gathering of OSH practitioners in Singapore offered some potentially novel terms.Almost 3,500 delegates from more than 80 countries attended the 21st World Congress on Safety and Health at Work in Singapore’s Marina Bay Sands Convention Centre from 3 to 6 September.
In British criminal law, the employer has to look at the evidence that all reasonably foreseeable hazards were identified, and that all reasonably practicable controls were put in place. However, in civil law, vicarious liability is strict, with the organisation liable for what is done (or not done) on its behalf by employees.
The European Union’s OSH strategic framework, which runs from 2014 until 2020, prioritises embedding and simplifying existing regulations rather than introducing fresh ones, so the other major source of new UK safety regulation has also slowed to a trickle.Safety and health practitioners may be relieved that they have been left alone – except for the occasional blip such as the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015 – since each new statute makes more work for them.
Heinrich’s precursors of unsafe acts and conditions – social environment and ancestry, and fault of the person – have been challenged by some as being overly class-conscious, and even racist. Similarly, ideas about causality have become more sophisticated, making the domino theory seem too simplistic. In Heinrich’s own words, “each accident was assigned either to the unsafe act of a person or to an unsafe mechanical condition, but in no case were both personal and mechanical causes charged”.
Its aims include reducing the fatal accident rate by 20%, communicating the avoidability of accidents and business benefits of safer farms and organising farm safety talks, events and competitions for children aged between 6 and 12.The new programme builds on the first and second FSP action plans, launched in 2012 and 2014. The FSP says that the past three years more than 3,000 people have completed a farm safety awareness training course and 24,000 school children have attended safety presentations.
People Power is very much a book that reflects its time; as its subtitle suggests, this really does feel like 'the era of safety and wellbeing'. In this respect, the author does a fine job of mapping out how the perceived momentousness of this historical milieu might play out in the real-life work environment.
IOSH and award-winning content marketing and publishing agency Redactive today announced a new partnership to provide news, updates, insight, careers advice and job opportunities for safety and health’s largest professional community.
We spoke to Health and Safety Executive (HSE) inspector Andrew Johnson about a case where a one-tonne pallet of glass fell on a United Pallet Network (UK) Limited’s employee, causing life-changing injuries.
Safety interventions should be practicable and cost-effective, but too much of an imbalance towards safety does not make economic sense for employers, argues Geoff Vaughan, who suggests ‘gross disproportion’ provides a practical limit.
A proposed new law aims to revoke EU-derived legislation, including life-saving protections, by December 2023, unless specifically kept or replaced – Richard Jones CFIOSH explains how OSH practitioners can get involved.
The US Department of Labor has presented an Ohio-based vehicle parts manufacturer on its ‘severe violator enforcement programme’ with a fine of $480,240 (approx. £373,000) after inspectors found it had continually exposed workers to multiple machine hazards
Chipboard manufacturer Norbord Europe Limited has been fined £2.15m after a four-week trial held at Perth Sheriff Court in Scotland found that a series of failings at its Cowie site in Stirlingshire in July 2016 had led to an employee’s death.
Birch Brothers (Kidderminster) Ltd was the principal contractor on a construction project in Derbyshire that was building a concrete overflow weir structure on the site. The Midlands firm had brought in steel fixers and joiners to undertake the work.