Tony
Carpal tunnel level member
- Location
- Lancaster, PA
I see your point but you are lumping all Arborist electrical hazards training into one unfair category. Just as you did earlier in the thread when you said all EHAT for arborists is based on fear. Again I understand your viewpoint, but caution about overgeneralization.Look at your firefighter job. You get training about electrical hazards. I know you do because my son is a fireman/first responder. Your training doesn't say, stay away. What it does is tell you the hazards you may, and will run into and the dangers involved and what you do to prevent being hurt. Why can't we do that with arborists? But we don't, we just tell them to stay away.
This is not to pick on you Shadowscape. It is a good opportunity to point out what does and does not make decent training, especially in the area of electrical hazards. I trust in your intellect to see the difference and appreciate in advance your tolerance of using your comments as an example.
Any training that only outlines the "how" without the "why" is at an awareness level only and serves a specific purpose. As you called it "stay away" training is appropriate for very new workers and or people incidentally involved where there is an electrical hazard. "Stay away" mitigates a hazard with minimal input if followed.
You are absolutely correct in surmising "Stay away" lacks in many respects. It is a very temporary solution for a specific reason.
When EHAT has not only a "how", but a "why" component then it can start to inform a worker about the nature of the hazards and allow for different methods to mitigate or eliminate them. This is how I have taught hundreds of single to multi-day EHAT courses over the last 20 years. (Hence, my sensitivity to overgeneralizations!!)
When it comes to selecting or evaluating training of electrical hazards there should be plenty of "How", there should also be an equal or greater amount of "Why" and a smattering of the legislation that binds it all together.
Too much "how" is only a band-aid. A poor one that won't work long, but may be necessary.
"Why" without "How" is an electrical engineering course!
Over-emphasis on legislation just muddles what can be a confusing topic for men and women in the field. While necessary, administrative controls are much like traffic cones. They should be used, they can direct behavior, but you should never count on one to stop a moving vehicle from hitting you.
Back to the service drop Insulation topic. Rest assured I have learned and will adapt my teaching and wording thanks to your and others' knowledge shared here. I will however still "preach" and practice the "avoid contact" approach distance for this voltage range. This is in the Z133 because as arborists we neither have nor are trained to have/use the necessary PPE to physically handle such lines.
We can debate why this is and if it should change. I look forward to the day an arborist crew regularly uses a proximity detector to test for the presence of voltage on a job site. Perhaps the use of appropriate PPE and techniques for handling with these wires should be in our training...
Respectfully,
Tony
