Ignoring the banksman
Re: Ignoring the banksman
It's true that there may be a difference between legal obligation and what's sensible.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
Re: Ignoring the banksman
Vorpal wrote:pwa wrote:On my way back from doing an errand this morning I was stopped by a banksman (apologies for gender bias of the word for a person in hi-viz stopping traffic) who was there to halt the traffic for a minute or so while an unsafe branch was felled across the road. Coming the other way was a man on a race bike, hands on drops and going for it. The banksman had his hand up to tell him to stop, and I think he was talking to him, but the cyclist just ignored him and went very close to the kerb to get round him. The banksman put his palms up towards the sky in a shrug gesture, just as the branch came down. The leafy tips brushed the back of the cyclist. What an idiot!
I've done the banksman job in the past and it can be difficult. Why some people cannot grasp that the banksman is there to protect them I don't know.
Firstly, a banksperson must have training and authorisation to stop traffic, in which case, they will have police or highways authority signs or notices. If these things are lacking, there is no legal obligation to stop for them.
Secondly, the drop zone should have been cordoned off or barricaded. If the cyclist had been injured or killed, the company doing the felling would have been held liable, despite the actions of the cyclist.
(I've no idea so am asking here but) With the way I understood the courts "allocate blame" these days (e.g. victim 30%, perpetrator 70%), if the people cutting the tree had taken reasonable steps, including a person in Hi-Vis clearly stopping traffic and even though they might not have been complying 100% with legal signs and notices and the Hi-Vis guy was not fully trained, if he was clearly stopping traffic (verified by witnesses) and his clear instructions were ignored by the injured cyclist, might the court apportion a higher degree of blame to the cyclist ?
i.e. It was blindingly obvious work was being carried out, traffic was very obviously being stopped and yet that guidance was ignored by an injured party because it did not comply 100% with the relevant regulations, under such circumstances might the injured party not take a lot of the responsibility for their injury ?
Ian
Re: Ignoring the banksman
In general, companies anf local authorities carrying out work like that are under quite high obligation to protect the public. HSE guidance on tree felling over roads is to 'ensure that road users and members of the public do not enter the danger zone'. Merely telling them that they shouldn't (especially if the banksman was not authorised to stop & control traffic), and no other measures would not normally be considered sufficient.
Edited to add: if the person cutting down the tree were a private person, allocation of blame might have consideration, but with regards to organisations carrying out work which presents risk to the public, HSE matters are typically treated as issues af strict liability.
Edited to add: if the person cutting down the tree were a private person, allocation of blame might have consideration, but with regards to organisations carrying out work which presents risk to the public, HSE matters are typically treated as issues af strict liability.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
Re: Ignoring the banksman
That all seems reasonable enough for planned tree felling work.
This particular case sounds like dealing with an emergency case of a tree overhanging the highway, damaged by strong winds.
This particular case sounds like dealing with an emergency case of a tree overhanging the highway, damaged by strong winds.
Re: Ignoring the banksman
[XAP]Bob wrote:Unless of course you suspect South African tactics - stop you then attack you...
Not just South Africa. There was an incident reported last week with a teenager flagged down in Norfolk and then pushed off his bike
Maybe the cyclist in the tree-felling example made a mistake, not spotting the tree danger and thinking it was a joker trying to disrupt him for some reason. Don't get agitated about it. http://highwaycode.info/rule/147 - someone felling a tree over a road without signing and closing it temporarily properly is a bit more worrying IMO.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
Re: Ignoring the banksman
beardy wrote:That all seems reasonable enough for planned tree felling work.
This particular case sounds like dealing with an emergency case of a tree overhanging the highway, damaged by strong winds.
IMO, while this could make some difference to approach (e.g. cordoning off with red & white tape, instead of barricades), it does not change the contractor's responsibility to protect the public.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
Re: Ignoring the banksman
Just to clarify a few uncertainties that have been raised by previous posts, The contractor ( a private, professional tree surgery company that works for the highways authority sometimes) had coned off the wagon, which also had its hazards on. The unconed bit of the road was presumably without barriers (other than the banksman) to allow the flow of traffic to continue up to the last minute. The banksman was wearing a bright yellow hi-viz jacket and yellow hard hat and looked the part. There were signs down the road on either side, but the flat, straight bit of road gave road users plenty of time to see what was going on.
When I approached the banksman in my car and saw him standing in the centre of the unconed half of the road with his hand up in a "stop" gesture it did not even occur to me to question his legal right to stop me. Even if I had been concerned about that, it was obvious (to me at least) that the man was implementing a safety control measure and that I was being told to stop for my own safety. There are other circumstances where individuals who may not have special authority stand in the road and indicate for us to stop. Farmers moving cattle on the lanes, for example. So long as they are not doing anything grossly unreasonable I exercise a bit of patience and wait. Surely most of us see it that way.
When I approached the banksman in my car and saw him standing in the centre of the unconed half of the road with his hand up in a "stop" gesture it did not even occur to me to question his legal right to stop me. Even if I had been concerned about that, it was obvious (to me at least) that the man was implementing a safety control measure and that I was being told to stop for my own safety. There are other circumstances where individuals who may not have special authority stand in the road and indicate for us to stop. Farmers moving cattle on the lanes, for example. So long as they are not doing anything grossly unreasonable I exercise a bit of patience and wait. Surely most of us see it that way.
Re: Ignoring the banksman
With regard to authorisation to stop traffic and a legal obligation to obey, it's my understanding that a member of the public, such as a banskman, tree surgeon or even an amubulance crew member, has no legal power to force traffic to stop, but once traffic has stopped that traffic is legally obliged not to move until signalled to do so by the banksman etc.
As the cyclist had stopped and had a few words with the banksman in this case, he was breaking the law by then continuing onwards. That's if we want to be legalistic about it. In practice I'd note Vorpal's comment on the difference between legal obligation and sensible.
As the cyclist had stopped and had a few words with the banksman in this case, he was breaking the law by then continuing onwards. That's if we want to be legalistic about it. In practice I'd note Vorpal's comment on the difference between legal obligation and sensible.
Re: Ignoring the banksman
When reversing HGVs in congested areas, company rules insist on a banksman. It would be impractical to have a uniformed officer available for each occasion so it is often a colleague or occasionally a security operative. The universal experience is that both the banksman and reversing horn are ignored. Nobody will wait 30 seconds today.
Re: Ignoring the banksman
Is that why HGV drivers are always so grateful when I wait far enough away to give them space, or on the occasion that they get sent to the low bridge by their sat nav when I ask the drivers behind to stop and give them room...
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to spot that an HGV driver needs a bit of help at times. Mind you I also stop to give blue light services extra space, crossing my hands above my head seems to confuse motorists enough that they don't then try to pass...
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to spot that an HGV driver needs a bit of help at times. Mind you I also stop to give blue light services extra space, crossing my hands above my head seems to confuse motorists enough that they don't then try to pass...
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
Re: Ignoring the banksman
Dunno about crossing your hands above your head, don't think I've seen that as a stop signal. I have seen a woman stop her car in the middle lane of the M4, get out and give an 'arms wide' stop signal. Impressive cool from her and amazing obedience from the rest of the traffic. The reason she did this, which wasn't initially clear, was a motorbike on fire.
Re: Ignoring the banksman
On a 'bent trike it gets the desired result...
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
-
- Posts: 4336
- Joined: 11 Nov 2012, 9:24am
- Location: On the borders of the four South East Counties
Re: Ignoring the banksman
I'm not sure that a person "controlling" traffic for the purpose of enabling the cutting branches or trees on a roadside is a banksman. A banksman is one who is guiding the safe movement of a vehicle, which is entirely different.
"It takes a genius to spot the obvious" - my old physics master.
I don't peddle bikes.
I don't peddle bikes.
Re: Ignoring the banksman
MikeF wrote:I'm not sure that a person "controlling" traffic for the purpose of enabling the cutting branches or trees on a roadside is a banksman. A banksman is one who is guiding the safe movement of a vehicle, which is entirely different.
That is correct. Officially, I think the person doing that at roadworks or tree felling is a 'traffic guard', but I've also heard them referred to as marshalls.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
Re: Ignoring the banksman
Vorpal wrote:MikeF wrote:I'm not sure that a person "controlling" traffic for the purpose of enabling the cutting branches or trees on a roadside is a banksman. A banksman is one who is guiding the safe movement of a vehicle, which is entirely different.
That is correct. Officially, I think the person doing that at roadworks or tree felling is a 'traffic guard', but I've also heard them referred to as marshalls.
That may well be correct, but "banksman" is used within various trades for that role, regardless of whether it is technically accurate. Incidentally, I was out cycling yesterday afternoon on a 24 mile circular route that is 90% on lanes, and I came to a road closure sign. I have no reason to think it was not done properly, but I decided to continue with caution to the obstruction. It turned out to be a tree cutting crew removing a couple of dodgy trees from the edge of an oak forest. Their two vehicles and one trailer were occupying the narrow lane, but with just enough room for me to get past. The trees were already down and the team were in clean up mode, so I asked if it was okay for me to push past. They were happy with that. I did joke that if they wanted to get rid of all that wood they could leave it on my drive (I have a log burner). They said they don't get much wood. Most of what they cut (including that lovely load of oak logs) is kept by the customer. Pity.