Insurance, Health & Safety, Duty of Care

[markocosic]

Hi folks,

The University is paranoid about the liabilities involved in formula student.

I've explained that by its nature is has the potential to harm and so we spend lots of time ensuring it doesn't. I've explained that 'benign' activites that have been going on within the university for the last 500 years have the potential to ahrm but nothign is done about it because they appear benign. The university accepts that FSAE is one of the safest 'extra-curricular' activites around, but it is right when it says it'd be the first on the HSE and lawyers look at when picking on non-compliance.

Insurance at the event is provided by teh IMechE/MSA.

Insurance in the workshops is provided by the engineering department/materials science department.

Insurance when out of the university and 'testing' is a stickign point.

We'd eb set up as a company limited by guarantee and registered as a charity; or a student society. Either way, whoever is in charge is liable under UK corporate manslaughter law if somebody shoves their arm through the rear drivetrain.

I'm happy to stick my head in the sand and pretend I never considered it - provided I have some say in who we recruit and therefore eliminate the kind of muppet who'd hurt themselves or the numpties that'd sue. The university isn't so keen...

What insurance/HSE arrangements do you have within your institution or your team to cover this?

[Gabriel Descamps]

Hey Marko. Well, what we do is we make EVERYONE who wants to join the team sign a waiver which states that neither the team nor the university are responsible for accidents where the student´s involved, and the he can´t make a claim nor sue the university if something happens (either at the workshop or at a practice session). It´s just a simple legal way (at least in our country) to avoid lawsuits, and to keep university authorities happy.

Over here we only get insurance during the competition (provided by one of our biggest sponsors). Anything else just isn´t covered (we don´t have the funds). Of course, when something happens (and it has, we all know it: lack of sleep, untrained personnel, etc.) we´re all there to support and aid.

During practice it´s also good to take security measures as if you were at competition.,i.e. only 4 dynamic passes including drivers, security lines, barriers, keeping the crowd at least 30 ft. away from the track, etc.

I´m not sure all I wrote here will help, but hey, it´s just my two cents.

[Z]

Marko,

Cambridge isn't too far from Rugby, and I'm guessing your school has a rugby team. You say "whoever is in charge is liable ... if somebody shoves their arm through the rear drivetrain." Plenty of young men have broken their necks shoving them into a rugby scrum, not to mention arms and legs. And on the training paddock too. Maybe you could talk to your school's various sporting teams?

Z

[Kevin Hayward]

Marko,

Feel for you on the insurance issue. I don't think you can actually call FSAE a naturally safe activity. We haven't had a lot of breakages in the life of our team but a few of the things that have happened could have caused problems if they had happened without being careful to be safe.

The potential for harm can be quite high. Probably more so for non-drivers at the test track.

I also don't believe that signing waivers is in the best interests of the students. It may protect the team but leaves a person injured through no fault of his/her own in a really bad position.

We recently had to go through some legal issues when organising a test venue with someone who had space available. It involved coming up with some pretty serious documents on procedures to be followed etc. If we follow those procedures and are still harmed then all is okay in terms of recompensation.

It took quite a while to sort out but it was very beneficial for the team. It really made us look at the procedures we were ACTUALLY using in test sessions. Some of the corners we were cutting in order to run a car were a little worrying. A side benefit is that our test sessions have become more organised out of necessity. This has increased testing productivity.

I suggest it might be worth going through a similar process. Afterall businesses have to do potentially dangerous jobs have to go through the same legal issues.

Cheers,

Kev
(ex) UWA Motorsport

[markocosic]

Plenty of young men have broken their necks shoving them into a rugby scrum, not to mention arms and legs. And on the training paddock too. Maybe you could talk to your school's various sporting teams?


I could, but I know the answer already:

Rugby has been going on for a blody long time, and therefore it it accepted that its a dangerous sport and that people will be crippled by it and the tacit agreement is that "its exempt from all health and safety rules/legislation..."

[markocosic]

The potential for harm can be quite high. Probably more so for non-drivers at the test track.

Non-drivers are definitely the ones in most danger


We recently had to go through some legal issues when organising a test venue with someone who had space available. It involved coming up with some pretty serious documents on procedures to be followed etc. If we follow those procedures and are still harmed then all is okay in terms of recompensation.

Risk assessements, HAZOPs, best practice etc?

So you're effectively still liable for everything, but should it go to court you wave these bits of paper at them and hope that they don't blame you?




That's a benefit I hadn't considered actually

[quote]I suggest it might be worth going through a similar process. Afterall businesses have to do potentially dangerous jobs have to go through the same legal issues.

Aye, don't know about AUS but in the UK the full-on 'dangerous business' type paperwork is a project as big as FSAE itself! http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_redface.gif

[syoung]

Originally posted by markocosic:Rugby has been going on for a blody long time, and therefore it it accepted that its a dangerous sport and that people will be crippled by it and the tacit agreement is that "its exempt from all health and safety rules/legislation..."

Rugby's subject to just as much legislation as any other organised activity. Health and Safety legislation, contrary to what the Daily Mail et al tell you, doesn't ban everything that's "unsafe", it merely requires procedures to anticipate and minimise risk. Insurance companies' requirements are different from legislative ones (although the two are often confused by the press), and stem from the huge increases in insurance claims over the last 5-10 years, even though UK law limits damages to cover only actual harm suffered (no "punitive" awards).

Rugby is a pretty good parallel actually - as long as safe practices are followed (e.g. adherence to rules on high tackles, safety gear e.g. gumshields, no off-the-ball violence, etc.) the insurers will cover anything that goes wrong. In the case of FSAE, you have to set out your own safe practices as well as enforcing them.

And it's important to note that, however many waiver forms you draw up, it's impossible (as in illegal) to exempt yourself from liability for damages caused by negligence etc. - make sure you're covered.

[Gabriel Descamps]

Kevin, it is true that signing a waiver isn´t in the student´s best interest, but I was just talking about the legal part. I know it´s kinda cold, but it is needed in order to keep the team going on (and the university happy).

In our country the only way to get treated well is in a private clinic (since there´s no budget to run public hospitals properly), so many people get insured by a private company.

With our budget and possibilities, the best we can do is enhance security procedures, train people in the use of tools the best we can, make sure that practice sessions are as safe as possible, and make people sign the waiver since neither the State, the University nor the Team has the budget to cover everyone.

Believe me, if we could, we WOULD cover everyone. And it´s not that simple. But the student MUST understand that this is a dangerous activity (regardless of what everyone thinks), and that he may inccur in an injury if he doesn´t follow procedure. He/she must also understand that we simply don´t have the money.

I´m sorry, but that´s the way things work down here in 3rd world countries.

In your case, once you´re insured, well, the waiver won´t harm. If there´s a possibility to cover everyone, hell, go for it! I know we would!

Also, what kind of procedures during practice sessions did you improve? As I said, we tried doing everything as if we were at the competition. Any other suggestions?

[El Kevino]

I addition to liability waivers, we also keep emergency contact info and proof of insurance on file. In this way, if someone is incapacitated, we can notify family and properly check him into a hospital. Plus, by proving a member has insurance, it follows that he has less incentive to sue the club, university, or state.

Kevin Edwards
University of South Florida

[Gabriel Descamps]

I hadn´t thought of that. It´s a good idea to keep that information on file, but what about those who aren´t insured?

[markocosic]

Originally posted by syoung:

Rugby's subject to just as much legislation as any other organised activity. Health and Safety legislation, contrary to what the Daily Mail et al tell you, doesn't ban everything that's "unsafe", it merely requires procedures to anticipate and minimise risk. Insurance companies' requirements are different from legislative ones (although the two are often confused by the press), and stem from the huge increases in insurance claims over the last 5-10 years, even though UK law limits damages to cover only actual harm suffered (no "punitive" awards).

Rugby is a pretty good parallel actually - as long as safe practices are followed (e.g. adherence to rules on high tackles, safety gear e.g. gumshields, no off-the-ball violence, etc.) the insurers will cover anything that goes wrong. In the case of FSAE, you have to set out your own safe practices as well as enforcing them.

If FSAE were rugby, it'd say "you are going to race each other, but when you race please don't touch wheels because that's dangerous". As it stands, the rules as written to prevent contact as far as is possible. If rugby were FSAE, the rules would be written to prevent player-player contact as far as is possible. As it stands, they set guidelines as to how you can contact each other.

Its not the same - the laws might be the same, but the tacit agreements are very different - and they're different because the sport pre-dates the legislation.

Are any teams willing to share the risk assessements/best practice documnts etc that they have done? Or if you've not done anything yet and suspect its time you did - any teams willing to work with us in addressing such issues? I've contacted Alexander Forbes to enquire about just what they'd like to see before covering us, and I'm in touch with the University Sstudent society" people but clearly they'd not be coming at it from a first-hand point of view.

[El Kevino]

If a student does not have insurance, we can't allow him to participate in shop work or drive the car. Health insurance is available through our school at reasonable cost, so nearly everyone is covered anyway.

Kevin Edwards
University of South Florida