European vs US safety

[niemeyjt]

One of the many interesting things on TBN is the exchange of ideas and information between the posters from the different continents - so I thought I would run this one by you all for thoughts as a safety matter - I hope you do not feel an open discussion like this will dilute the message of a safety forum - if it does I am sure a mod will move it.

Attached are two photos of a Bearcat 73554 chipper shredder - one is Hazmat's (I hope he does not mind me using his photo, and I would like to thank him for his postings which guided me to my choice), the other is mine. Spot the difference (other than the blue / orange on the front)!

Clue - mine has the European feed extension that elongates the feed chute so I cannot put my hand down and touch the moving blades. It also means that I have to feed much straighter wood in, and wood without side branches, as otherwise it fouls the top of the feed chute. I also have to lift it higher.

In a similar vein, my wood splitter has two handles both of which have to be depressed to operate it so that (unless you have three arms) you cannot operate machine with a hand in front of the wedge. It also means you cannot use one hand to steady a log and stop it rolling off.

So my questions for your thoughts:

Do you think American-market (and maybe others?) products adequately protect the user or do you think that additional guards and controls like those fitted to European tools should be legislated for and fitted in all markets even if the cost does go up and functionality goes down?

Do you think that European-market products are overkill on the safety to the detriment of the operation of the machine where common sense should / would dictate that you don't feed you hand into a chipper or splitter?

Regards,

Julian

 

[mrutkaus]

Good question, requires some thought so I'll reply when I'm feeling a little chipper.

Mike

 

[ModMech]

Julian (BTW I have a great Uncle with that name!),

It is *my personal belief* that the Health and Safety laws of the EU (and many other MICs) are superior to those in the "States" and should be universally adopted.

Why do I say that? From the perspective of one born and raised in the US of A, Germany and many other EU countries have much more strict Health, Safety and Enviromental laws. Where do the technologies come from? Research and Development budgets of the companies.

"Oh well, you see that's the biggest reason not to do it, cost!" Yea, gnash your teeth all you want but when is PROFIT more important than safety? If safety and environmental laws are so terrible and costly, how come there are MANY many products so widly sold in the US when the reported "cost" of doing business like they do in the EU is reportedly so high???? Simple, the costs are not "so high", they may be a little more but not so much so that the products are non-competative. Lee Iacocca put it best, "Lead, follow, or get out of the way!" This applies to many things in life and I believe it's a good motto to aspire to.

I'm tired of listening to pundits complaining about anything related to a clean environment, safety or wages that might add $0.00000001 to the cost of a product. Do they REALLY expect me to believe that the US manufacturers are so stupid that they cannot figure out how to do anything both Well and Safely? Hmm, so we have the most inept workers and managers in the world, so much so that we must have some of the most lax safety, environmental and emissions laws just to compete?

Are we aiming to emulate China or Germany (GB, Norway, Sweden, Italy) in terms of quality of life?

 

[soulasphil]

IMHO things are not as simple as that.
I live in Europe and I don't find that European equipment generally has more safety features than US equipment. Yes, like niemeyjt's, my log splitter requires to have both hands on the handles and I'm grateful for that, prevents me from putting my hand in the wrong place, especially when tired. On the other hand, my JD tractor, like all tractors sold in France, has no safety belt.
There is a cultural and historical aspect to the way safety is understood in different countries : for instance, tractors cannot be sold here without 2 rear view mirrors and amber stobe lights, but they do not have a slow vehicle sign.
There is also an economic aspect to it. Lobbies can influence politicians to vote legislation making this or that device compulsory just because such and such a firm happens to manufacture it. Protectionism also plays a part on both sides of the Atlantic, there is a lot of legislation making imports more difficult in the sacred name of safety: for instance US headlights are not legal in Europe and vice versa.
Sorry for having been so long but I feel there is a lot to be said on the subject ...

 

[RoyJackson]

I prefer the "common sense" approach rather then the nanny state concept of the European. In Europe, sometimes the bureaucrats are a bit too intrusive in the lives of the citizens (not just in safety).
I guess it depends if you want to control your own life or let some one else do it for you.
This topic has the potential of getting too political, so I'll end my response now.

 

[dave1949]

Soulasphil - Good point about cultural and historical differences.

Here is another safety comparison. Where I lived in Germany, a licensed chimney sweep made mandatory visits to each home with a chimney - (virtually all homes) either once or twice (forget which) per year. The chimney sweeps each had a district for which they were the only sweeps.

He cleaned the chimney, inspected it and also had some say over the oil-fired boiler's operation as to emissions and safety. He had the power to condemn your chimney or furnace, forcing you to get it repaired.

Since the sweeps district was protected, you didn't have the option of getting a 'friendlier' opinion from another sweep.

Sounds like a 'nanny' thing alright, but it has the consequences of rare chimney fires and less air pollution. Those are worthy goals in and of themselves.

If you include the follow-on costs of a house fire from damage through death - which we all pay for one way or another, it has a validity that is hard to argue against.

The cultural feelings about this vary widely of course. Historically, one lazy homeowner could be responsible for burning down half the village in the days before modern fire fighting equipment. Culturally, you can decide it is better to have a fire department and bear the cost of burns to people and property inorder to preserve the right to be lazy.

For some cultures that makes sense, others not.

Dave.

 

[300UGUY]

I get tired of guys arguing against anything new. Really, folks will argue about seatbelts in cars, when data has shown for decades that they save lives. Same with airbags. Or, god forbid, motorcycle helmets. The safety laws on these items are there mostly to protect the public purse - taking care of the dweebs who become vegetables because they refuse to wear a helmet costs the government a lot of money. And jacks up everbody's insurance rates.

 

[dave1949]

I get tired of guys arguing against anything new. Really, folks will argue about seatbelts in cars, when data has shown for decades that they save lives. Same with airbags. Or, god forbid, motorcycle helmets. The safety laws on these items are there mostly to protect the public purse - taking care of the dweebs who become vegetables because they refuse to wear a helmet costs the government a lot of money. And jacks up everbody's insurance rates.

The safety items you cited are all clear cut cases. No doubt.

I see your point, but I think Julian poses a valid question. Do the extensions improve his safety, or are they just something someone thought would be a good idea? Or, in the EU is there a safety regulation that requires a minimum clearance between the blades and feed opening that gets applied to all similar equipment?

Being that a chipper is designed to make small pieces out of large ones, the user bears some level of responsibilty for personal safety when using one. If there were safety tests done that show the feed hopper extensions prevent injury and not just stupidity, the results should be publically available at least. For all I know they are I am waiting for delivery of my own BX62, I would sure like to know if there is an issue that I need to be aware of. Since reading of the 'chuck and duck' loading techniques, I take that as an important clue

Perhaps the sticking point is dealing with reduced functionality while not being informed as to why. People are for the most part reasonable and definitely safer, when informed. Although, there are those who never buckle their seatbelts too.

Not trying to get all serious or anything, but I think Julian's question isn't a simple one.
Dave.

 

[RobertN]

There are definitely different ideas, and different approaches. I do not like to be protected from myself in general, by something that makes the job more difficult.

However, I think it would be of great benefit to share the ideas(the engineers) more, because no country or company has "THE" best answer.

I think the same regarding smog stuff on cars. California is a strong leader in reducing emissions, but I think they may very well be able to learn from some European countries, as well as Australia. Kills me it is so hard to get Volkswagen TDI's here. ANd, I would love to have my little PT Cruiser in a TDI. I have a 5spd and turbo, 29mpg is best I have got. I think 50+mpg with a peppy little diesel.

I'm sure there are safety regs on US cars, tools ect that other countries think are extreme or odd. Same for the US looking at other countries. But, we could all learn from others.

 

[Redneck in training]

There are definitely different ideas, and different approaches. I do not like to be protected from myself in general, by something that makes the job more difficult.

However, I think it would be of great benefit to share the ideas(the engineers) more, because no country or company has "THE" best answer.

I think the same regarding smog stuff on cars. California is a strong leader in reducing emissions, but I think they may very well be able to learn from some European countries, as well as Australia. Kills me it is so hard to get Volkswagen TDI's here. ANd, I would love to have my little PT Cruiser in a TDI. I have a 5spd and turbo, 29mpg is best I have got. I think 50+mpg with a peppy little diesel.

I'm sure there are safety regs on US cars, tools ect that other countries think are extreme or odd. Same for the US looking at other countries. But, we could all learn from others.

That is protectionism at work. In Europe (if I am not mistaken) they measure pollution per km driven. In USA we measure polution as percentage of pollutants in the total exhaust. European approach penalizes large engines no matter how clean they are while USA restricts less clean nevertheless less polluting vehicles such as mentioned Golf TDI.

Speaking about tractor safety. In Czech republic you can't buy an open platform tractor for at least past 45 50 years. In fact the cab has to be certified to withstand complete rollover. When I was a kid I witnessed a tractor rollover killing the driver. Made really strong impression on me seeing him squished. Due to large number of such death the government legislated the cabs.