User talk:MicSingh
Health & Safety
[edit]Any section on health & safety should be written from a neutral point of view and be properly sourced. An example of a more balanced section might read:
Although Tarmac claims to treat health & safety as a priority its actual performance leaves significant room for improvement:
- In 2007 five members of staff tragically lost their lives working for the company[1]
- Investigations continue into a fatal fall while working at height at Tarmac Buxton Lime & Cement[2]
- The Company has already accepted that major breaches of its "Golden Rules" occurred during the course of the last year[3]
- As recently as March 2008 Tarmac Precast was found guilt of breaches of both the Working At Height Regulations 2005 and the Health & Safety at Work Act 1974 and was made to pay significant fines[4]
- Although 92% of Tarmac's sites were free from injury in 2005, Tarmac failed to disclose statistics for either 2006 or 2007 and the reader can only assume there has been a serious deterioration in performance since then[5]
References
I would suggest deleting the section as currently drafted or alternatively replacing it with the above more balanced wording Dormskirk (talk) 22:01, 8 July 2008 (UTC)