nah, my bet is that’s a machine that’s like visibly exploded to pieces. some manager walked by and reprimanded them for not tagging the broken gear. writer of tag argued back that “it’s obviously fucked, i mean look at it. have a think about it for a second”. manager said it doesn’t matter, protocol. tag writer writes sarcastic tag.
you know, i bet it’s literally missing its primary control surface. like a tractor with the entire cab missing and some higher up was concerned someone would try to use it and hurt themselves.
Genuinely wouldn’t be surprised if someone did try to use it, but also don’t see why anyone would think a little red tag would prevent such a person from trying anyway.
The red tag isn’t to stop it, it’s to document the stupidity. Now when it goes to court/WCB, there’s documented proof that they tried to ensure even a moron would understand it’s not safe to use
yeah, it’s likely for insurance or regulatory reasons.
insurance will find any reason possible to deny your claim. even if that is a failure to remove the keys from the ignition after the car burst into flames.
regulators shouldn’t allow slack. with any company in a regulatory situation they will to exactly as much as they’re allowed to get away with. give them an inch, they take a Mile. letting hazard tags slide based on judgement creates space for corruption and abuse. following procedures to the letter with strict documentation can help curtail that.
haha, no doubt. i may not be Australian, but i have written similar snarky reports before lol. after a certain point you’re choosing between 5 hours of overtime to write a report, or writing something like “event was fucked, station did not coordinate, check initial documents”
nah, my bet is that’s a machine that’s like visibly exploded to pieces. some manager walked by and reprimanded them for not tagging the broken gear. writer of tag argued back that “it’s obviously fucked, i mean look at it. have a think about it for a second”. manager said it doesn’t matter, protocol. tag writer writes sarcastic tag.
I’m imagining obvious fire damage and a chalk outline of intern Redshirt in front of the machine…
you know, i bet it’s literally missing its primary control surface. like a tractor with the entire cab missing and some higher up was concerned someone would try to use it and hurt themselves.
Genuinely wouldn’t be surprised if someone did try to use it, but also don’t see why anyone would think a little red tag would prevent such a person from trying anyway.
The red tag isn’t to stop it, it’s to document the stupidity. Now when it goes to court/WCB, there’s documented proof that they tried to ensure even a moron would understand it’s not safe to use
yeah, it’s likely for insurance or regulatory reasons.
insurance will find any reason possible to deny your claim. even if that is a failure to remove the keys from the ignition after the car burst into flames.
regulators shouldn’t allow slack. with any company in a regulatory situation they will to exactly as much as they’re allowed to get away with. give them an inch, they take a Mile. letting hazard tags slide based on judgement creates space for corruption and abuse. following procedures to the letter with strict documentation can help curtail that.
This sounds exactly Aussie enough to be true
I like your take way better than mine, I think that’s exactly what happened! Still reckon it’s an Aussie ;)
haha, no doubt. i may not be Australian, but i have written similar snarky reports before lol. after a certain point you’re choosing between 5 hours of overtime to write a report, or writing something like “event was fucked, station did not coordinate, check initial documents”