OK, I'll play. First, my credentials. Chartered civil engineer, member or fellow of several engineering institutions, accredited street works supervisor. 25 years in the construction industry, much of it around highways and until the summer,
10 years as a local authority liaison officer who had training in the role from the London Fire Brigade as well as training on multi-agency exercises with them as well as attending live incidents with them and other agencies.
I've written about risk assessment therantyhighwayman.blogspot.com/2018/08/risky-… and therantyhighwayman.blogspot.com/2017/06/risk.h…
As well as the subject popping up in other blog posts.
As well as the subject popping up in other blog posts.
Hi-viz will not someone driving into you and in many cases, drivers don't even see it. We use hi-viz on site as a "last resort" when we haven't been able to design the risk out and it's why being a road worker remains a high risk job in my industry. 
In a "safe systems" situation, we remove or manage the hazard. On site, that means avoiding mixing people with vehicles. We have one way systems, crossing points, walkways etc. On the streets, this means we do the same which is why "militant cyclists" like me advocate for
cycle tracks on main roads, filtered side streets and the limitation on driver speed. The usual gotcha here is that the streets aren't like that, so why wouldn't don the PPE to be on the safe side? Well, I have read the research from people like Dr Ian Walker which has showed
that hi-viz doesn't stop close passes and indeed, he found some evidence that *not* wearing helmets led to safer driving around people cycling. road.cc/content/news/9…
There also the whole issue around victim blaming which seeps into the collective brains to say that people who don't wear hi-viz are essentially leading to their own demise, rather than talking about danger at source (vehicles) and how streets are managed
It means we even get judges blaming the victims of crashes eta.co.uk/2017/10/20/the…
As a highways officer, I routinely wore a hi-viz vest or coat when I was on the street, even though most of the time I was in no more dangerous a position than someone walking to the shops, but
As a highways officer, I routinely wore a hi-viz vest or coat when I was on the street, even though most of the time I was in no more dangerous a position than someone walking to the shops, but
this was because of an employer's rule as well as site rules. The best use of a hi-viz coat is to keep warm and dry in my experience. The thing that kept me safe was being aware of my surroundings and understanding what was going on - we all do it, but it is formally known as a
"dynamic risk assessment" - I cycle the same way and when faced with a situation which is too risky as I do on site, I bail and rethink. I am no more going to measure the width of the outside lane of a 50mph dual carriageway as I am going to cycle there - hi-viz doesn't help.
As an interesting aside, the LFB has changed it's operational kit over the years and hi-viz was first brought in to help fire-fighters see each other in smoke-filled rooms. Modern kit is lighter and they now have hi-viz and retroreflective strips london-fire.gov.uk/museum/history…
Fire-fighters are at risk from drivers when they are tacking a fire because idiots think they can get through, despite the bright red vehicles covered in hi-viz which is why as a LALO, I was often called on to help establish road closures with the police to remove risks from the
operational area within the inner cordon of an incident. The emergency services, recovery operators, refuse collectors, delivery drivers etc all routinely wear hi-viz, but it doesn't stop them being put at risk by drivers mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/i…
So, while I do use a cycle as transport, it doesn't make me a "militant cyclist" (whatever that is), my criticism of the LFB's tweet is valid. You are of course welcome to disagree with me. /Ends
Additional - lots of road works contractors have policies that staff wear full PPE on every site at all times - boots, hi-viz tops with sleeves, hi-viz trousers, hard hat and eye protection. This is not to make people safe, it is because from a management point of view it is far
easier to sheep-dip the workforce with one rule than have to dynamically manage the situation. For example, why the hell would you need to wear a hard hard when you are relaying block paving (unless yobs are lobbing blocks at you)?
