I struggle with WorkSafeNZ's reasoning on passengers and quad bikes being hazards. But if this is the case then the hazard register at home will need updating.
This issue led to a remit at the recent national AGM, and it was fully supported by the provinces unanimously giving Federated Farmers' board a clear steer. The remit concerned passengers riding on quad bikes on farms and for this to be permissible.
The WorkSafeNZ guidelines state, if the manufacturer has a sticker that states no passengers then this is the rule. This means no docking crew, bank manager, family, friends, duck shooters or discussion groups.
Its common sense that you ride a quad bike differently when carrying a passenger and pick a safe route, asking the person to get off if coming to a tricky spot.
An outright ban on passengers makes my business harder to operate, increases costs and makes it less safe. I carry passengers that I wouldn't let drive a quad on the farm.
A comment was made that I could use an alternative way of getting the docking crew out in October. This misses the point, I would love to go docking in the ute, with stereo, cup-holders and a heater.
However, getting home might be the end of me so that is not a practical option which only leaves them walking or passengers on a quad bike.
What gets me is that passengers, or for that matter all other attachments to quads can't be treated like any hazard. Which is why if you can't eliminate it, then you must isolate it and if this isn't possible, then minimise.
If you don't do this and there is an accident then you have no protection under the law and I support that approach. A pig-headed approach to safety with statements implying zero tolerance to passengers is not going to achieve a culture change in New Zealand farming. Worse still, it will put back the efforts and gains that are being made.
The challenge with culture change is that you are dealing with 20,000 individual businesses of which about 10,000 will be owner operators. Many farmers are moving into their mature years so the method of delivery needs to be done in a respective way that brings about the change. So it prevents the perception that regulations and compliance are being imposed.
This is clearly illustrated by the fact that Federated Farmers represents all farmers yet not all are members. This is ironic when you think about the value that the federation delivers to members.
So what's the solution? Informal enforcement, education and word of mouth are a good start. Paper based compliance and determination to make an example doesn't work.
Outbursts about passengers at a Beef + Lamb field day don't achieve anything but getting people's backs up and I won't mention the fines. Informal enforcement is working with many farmers now wearing helmets and I find that I forget mine is on and consider it as important as the whistle.
My message to WorkSafeNZ is to come up with guidelines that work across all of the different farming systems and terrain of NZ.
Please don't impose rules which won't work as that will just put the acceptance of safety as a culture change backwards and will undo the good work which is being achieved by both WorkSafeNZ and farmers in reducing our injury and accident rates.
No death or injury is wanted, especially for the family, farmer, neighbours, emergency services that must attend, and it is our responsibility as farmers to make this happen.