Almost 2/3 London construction workers don't know asbestos can cause cancer

This may be of interest following the Paddington Cemetery asbestos controversy LINK (From Construction News)

A third of construction workers don’t know that asbestos can cause cancer – in London it’s almost two-thirds.
 

These two statistics staggered me when I read the findings of an asbestos awareness survey by the Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (IOSH), published on Monday.

This was part of IOSH’s No Time To Lose campaign, which aims to raise awareness about occupational cancers caused by diesel exhaust fumes, silica dust, solar radiation and asbestos.

You would expect any contractor health and safety programme worth its salt to make sure workers know the dangers of asbestos, are familiar with onsite asbestos registers, and have clear guidelines on what to do when faced with the stuff.

But it seems the message isn’t loud and clear everywhere, with 40 per cent of workers surveyed by IOSH saying either that asbestos risks were not regularly reinforced, or they had never been told about them in the first place.

This failure to inform was reflected in the findings that one in three workers did not check asbestos registers on site, while 15 per cent didn’t even know they existed.

Part of the reason for this ignorance seems to be rooted in the idea that asbestos is an old problem, with the substance being banned for use in new buildings in 1999.

I have to confess, I was in that camp until yesterday. I assumed, given the publicity around it over the past few decades, pretty much everyone – let alone construction workers – knew the dangers.

The stats say otherwise.

Around 5,000 people die from asbestos exposure every year, with construction workers accounting for 66 per cent, according to the Health and Safety Executive.

Within this, 20 tradespeople a week are killed by mesothelioma – a particularly horrible form of cancer that Mesothelioma UK director of services Liz Darlington calls “a death sentence”.

Given the number of workers dying every week due to asbestos, is it really getting the attention it deserves?

It’s true that many sufferers were exposed decades ago, when asbestos was widely used in lagging, insulation boards, fibre concrete, tiles, gaskets and other products.

But we still have a legacy of more than half a million commercial and public buildings containing the deadly mineral. On top of that it’s estimated that more than a million residential properties could contain asbestos

So it is clearly still an ongoing problem for people working on site. If we get complacent about it, then the deaths – which are completely preventable – will continue far into the future.

Speaking to people at the No Time To Lose launch, the lack of awareness primarily affects small and micro companies as well as sole traders.

IOSH is now calling on everyone in the industry to help it reach these organisations. To do this, IOSH has produced workplace posters, information cards for workers, action flowcharts and other general information that is freely available at notimetolose.org.uk.

So even if your company is up to date on the risks and managing them well, make sure the same is true of other subcontractors and partners you work with.

By the time IOSH does its next survey, everyone should be aware of the dangers.

Thanks to David Price, reporter, Construction News 

-->
 

How disruptive will Pedway/Steps work be at Wembley Stadium?

A reader has asked about the demolition and construction phase of the replacement of the Wembley Stadium pedway with steps. They were concerned about safety and impact on local roads. Please see an extract below from the Site Management Plan published on the Brent Council Planning Portal HERE 

The works are planned to take approximately 87 days and some phases will require work from 7am until 11pm. The work will not take place on Event Days.


EXTRACT

Upon taking possession of the site, it will be secured around the areas of immediate construction work. The initial work activity will focus on clearing the site below and around the Pedway of those utilities and other items that will obstruct the pedway demolition and subsequent staircase construction. As areas become clear works to the foundations of the steps and substructure will commence. 

The foundations to the steps will be constructed in and around the existing pedway str ucture in advance of its demolition. Therefore, there will be a need to utilise small / specialist plant, such as restricted access piling rigs that will be able to access the low headroom areas beneath the existing Pedway to construct the piles. 

In conjunction with the construction of the new staircase substructure , earthworks will be undertaken to create crane mats to the south and west of the proposed staircase. These will be required to accommodate the craneage that will service the construction of the staircase superstructure. It is anticipated that these crane s will be greater than 100T in capacity/size. 

Any superstructure elements of the new staircase that fall outside of the existing Pedway may also be built in this phase , however, this will require further consideration in due course as such elements will need to be protected during the demolition of the existing Pedway structure .

Phase 2 – Pedway Demolition and Construction of Steps

Demolition 

This phase will commence within an agreed window of time to minimise the impact to Wembley National Stadium. This will be through a window on non - events ( or , if this is not feasible, where there are minimal events ). Due to the constraints in agreeing such a suitable timeframe, extended working hours to ensure that the works are completed within the agreed timeframe will be required (as agreed with the Local Authority) . 

The Pedway will be demolished in two stages. It is anticipated that the Pedway will be demolished using traditional excavator mounted munchers and breakers. The majority of the Pedway will be removed using excavator mounted munchers will minimise the noise and dust that will be create by this operation. Water spray dust suppression will be utilised to prevent dust from the demolition operation. 

The first stage of demolition will focus on removing the Pedway structure from the area of the new staircase construction. Once this is removed , the demolition will focus on removing the remainder of the Pedway (as it runs across Engineers Way towards Olympic Way and Wembley Park station north of the Stadium). A road closure of Engineers Way will be required whilst the Pedway is removed across the carriageway area (details as to the number and timeframes required for the road closures are not yet available but will be agreed , at the appropriate time, with the Local Authority ) .

Construction of Steps

The construction of the staircase is anticipated to be a combination of pre - cast and cast in - situ concrete. It is anticipated that the podium section that will connect to the S tadium will be cast in - situ and the staircase will be formed from precast struc tural elements. The staircase is of a modular construction and will follow a step by step process that will be prescribed by the designer and supplier. Through this phase of heavy lifting it may be necessary to have lane closure on Engineers Way to facilitate easy delivery and unloading of the precast elements. Pedestrian management will be a key feature of this phase to maintain safety exclusion zones around the works. 

The podium area will be formed using a birdcage scaffold system that will be designed and installed by specialist contractors. This will be used to support the permanent formwork panels that will form the soffit of the deck. 

Temporary works will be required to support the precast elements before they are permanently stitched into the main structure. This support will be provided by either a birdcage scaffold system, steel trestles or similar . This detail will be established early in the project . 

Two cranes in excess of 100T capacity will service the construction of the staircase to allow for lifting and installation of the concrete units and temporary works systems. 

Once the structure is completed, it will be waterproofed using a proprietary waterproofing system to allow the paving to commence and the handrailing and lighting to be installed. 

The attendant craneage will be utilised to service the paving and street furniture installation. The paving will be finished in sections and will work up the staircase. The paving at the podium level will be progressed concurrently with the stair case paving. This will be essential to ensure the programme is met within the time constraints for delivery .

Construction & demolition dust should concern construction bosses

This piece by the acting news editor of Construction News LINK echoes concerns voiced by Wembley Central residents over dust from the demolition and construction  taking place in the High Road, Wembley.

A short walk from Construction News’ offices in Old Street, the refurbishment of the shop formerly titled Acme Electrical Co is well under way.

While the noise emanating from inside sounds like someone has captured a remnant of storm Brian, outside each passing breeze brings to life a dust cloud that wafts into the street. On the floor, plasterboard offcuts and old brick mortar are trodden into London’s pavements by commuters. It is a scene repeated across the capital. Almost everywhere you look London is busy building the latest version of the 2,000-year-old metropolis. Every new development, demolition or refurbishment comes with an issue that is increasingly on the minds of politicians and the public alike: air pollution. London’s mayor Sadiq Khan has woken up to the problem and is tackling it initially with the introduction of a new T-charge for polluting vehicles in the capital. But in calling for new government powers to tackle air pollution, the mayor also said that “non-transport sources contribute half of the deadly emissions in London” and urged a “hard-hitting plan of action”. There’s little doubt that controlling dust is a difficult problem for any construction firm. The fact that construction site dust has shot to the top of the political agenda – at least in London – should mean that construction firms now take note. However, it is not only the mayor of London’s air pollution plans that should cause concern for construction bosses. According to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), respirable crystalline silica dust is the second-biggest killer of construction workers after asbestos. And, in an industry that records a death rate three times higher than that of other professions including medicine, dust is a serious cause of illness. Of course there are safety measures in place, but are they enough? Could they be about to be made tougher? And, if as a sector, construction is aware of the risk that particle pollution has for both staff and the general public, what is the culpability for failing to act? A number of years ago I was asked by a family to help trace the work history of their deceased father. The man had worked on hundreds of construction sites in London between the 1930s and 1960s - including prestigious schemes such as Wembley Stadium and Broadcasting House. Trawling through the London Metropolitan Archives as well as the back catalogues of titles such as Construction News and sister title Architect’s Journal, I was asked to look for one thing: evidence of asbestos. The fact that the original builders who had been the deceased man’s employer had long since gone out of business did not deter the legal claim that the family was looking to file decades after the event itself. The man had died of mesothelioma – a cancer that develops from asbestos fibres lodged in the lining of the lungs. The research request came as part of a call for evidence to prove culpability for the illness during the man’s career. The big question for the sector is: with the evidence of the health risks that particle pollution can cause, could there be similar legal issues in the decades to come?

Tim Clark, acting news editor, Construction News

Student protest over technician and teacher cuts at College of North West London

As students were registering for courses on Saturday at the College of North West London in Dudden Hill, Willesden there was a demonstration outside by mature student Zo Flamma-Hill of Women in Construction.  She was opposing cuts in technicians, teachers and librarians at the college and the failure of the college to inform students about the cuts. She was also concerned that the Students; Union had taken no action and that the redundancies had taken place in an atmospere of bullying.

She called for investment in education and an end to discrimination in terms of age and gender. Zo pointed out that women represent only 11% of the construction workforce. Most of these jobs are office based and only 2% work in the manual sector. CNWL has been attractiong women into manual trades, graduate construction professions and engineering.

She claimed that courses were being reduced to less technical ones geared to the provision of cheap labour with some apprentices paid only £2 an hour

Give Brent Council the power and finance to build new schools for those without a school place

The Kilburn Times LINK this weekend headlined the news that more than 600 Brent primary school children are without a school place. I recently obtained figures from Brent Council under a Freedom of Information request that sheds a little more light on the situation.

There are in fact vacancies in some Brent primary schools but these may not be geographically convenient for parents of children out of school, especially when they involve children in a family attending several different primary schools.

This is the snapshot of  vacancies and children out of school on November 8th. Brent Managed and School Managed refers to the administration of admission applications. You can see that there is a slight surplus of school places in Years 3, 5 and 6.

The schools with several Reception vacancies at the time of the snapshot were Ark Franklin Primary Academy (the academy converted former Kensal Rise Primary), Brentfield Primary, Fryent Primary (recently expanded) and St Mary's RC Primary. The position changes rapidly so it is likely that these places will have been filled by now.

The fact that many children attend schools which are not their first choice or the most convenient means that many are on waiting lists for one or more other schools. With the current movement of families due to benefit reforms this produces 'churn' - high mobility as children change schools.

Despite a common National Curriculum across local authority schools this still produces disruption for children as they get used to a new school,  new teacher and new classmates, and is disruption for teachers as they cater for an ever changing class population.

Research indicates that such mobility has an initial impact on standards of achievement of the children who change schools.

The exceptional nature of the place shortage in Reception means that in total there are almost 2,500 on waiting lists in Brent. On the day of the snapshot five schools had more than 100 on the Reception waiting list: Anson 118, Ark 264, Islamia 104, Malorees Infants 102 and Wembley Primary 100.

I have asked for further information on how many of these are pupils on several waiting lists.

Things become much more settled at Year 1 with Barham the longest waiting list at 30, with a more equal distribution across schools, totalling 546. By Year 6 the total is 360.

The schools

I requested figures on the number of children out of school by planning area in order to get a picture of the geographical distribution. Brent Council said these figures were not available and instead provided distribution maps which are not exact. The blue figures on the map below indicate groups of children needing a Reception school place.

The demand for Reception places reinforces the need for planned construction of new primary schools by local councils rather than reliance on the vagaries of free school providers popping up in areas of need. The Council presently has a statutory duty to provide education for these children without having the powers to do so apart from expanding schools which are already often on crowded sites.

The Government needs to give local authorities back the power to plan and build new schools as well as the finance to do so. Instead they are wasting money of unwanted free school vanity projects.

Full documentation on my Freedom of Information Request can be found HERE