Women's Workwear

[kevin wooldridge]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]479[/ATTACH]

And here it is ....the hi-vis kilt with what are described as 'added nail pockets', but I guess could usefully store a whole ton of archaeological kit. Available from the Blaklader clothing company (who I think are Swedish, but might be Danish or Norwegian even).....Talk to me Dave if you want to add this to the BAJR range of tools and equipment and I will send you the link....

[Jack]

brilliant! I'll get one :face-approve:

[Geli]

On the matter of employers not being willing to provide clothing in smaller sizes, I have also come across this on jobs. I'm a fairly big person so it's not an issue for me, but for some of my female colleagues this is undoubtedly a problem. Trousers which are to long, ill fitting viz coats with sleeves too long and gloves so big that they won't stay on the hands. All in themselves presenting the possibility of an accident in the work place not to mention how difficult it makes it to do the job. As it is a legal requirement for your employer to provide you with suitable PPE equipment to do your job this should never arise. Failure to do so is therefore illegal and I would say it is also sexual discrimination in the work place to provide only PPE that is designed for men in the first instance. Certainly this is an issue worth pursuing and another worthy reason for striving for Unionisation. It's issues like these which many give little consideration to, that if addressed would make the working lives of many more tolerable! :face-approve:

[Geli]

Just Seen Kevin's post. I just wonder how many kittens a developer would have if everybody turned up wearing hi viz kilts lol! Personally I'd like one for the summer months as shorts don't seem to be allowed these days (judging by some of the legs I've seen not necessarily a bad thing)! :-)

[BAJR]

Certainly this is an issue worth pursuing and another worthy reason for striving for Unionisation.

Good grief... I will look like a stalker Geli. I agree again!

Indeed I think this issue - that perhaps - just perhaps the men can cope with... I note that the women are coming forward to explain the issues and men are the ones who are flippant.

:face-huh:

[Dirty Boy]

I started the thread because the only problems I've come across is in regard to the difficulty of getting small enough gloves and boots (which I've fixed in the past by supplying girls on the site with suitable ones I've sourced from B&Q, etc). I've learnt quite a bit of new stuff from this thread, and will definately bear it in mind in the future.

Employers are under a legal duty to supply correctly fitting PPE. Certainly clothes getting in the way of mattocking is serious, and something I would take seriously if someone brought it up on site.

Part of the problem (aside from the obvious tight fisted employer) may be that there is a great deal of excuses put up why PPE shouldn't be worn on site, few of which really boil down to their safety, and more the fact that they're bloody uncomfortable (by the way, I REALLY don't like the new trends of PPE in the construction industry, but unless you can really prove its unsafe, eg; wearing boilersuits digging in the summer! - there's not much that can be done about it).

Cutting through that smokescreen can be difficult, but perhaps if you state the problem, and suggest an alternative supplier, (Like Charm and Hammer) and make yourself heard, you might have more of a chance of getting somewhere.
Of course, you may just work for a bad company or client!

If you do want a supplier of womens ppe - Charm and Hammer ship to the UK. I've done a quick look around some PPE suppliers in the UK, most seem to do women specific flash jackets, etc. although the range is a bit limited. For waterproofs I think someone suggested Millets. Pass these on to your employer - its their LEGAL DUTY to provide them!


See, sometimes us blokes make silly comments, but we're not all scum. I personally want to go mattocking in a full length ball gown, or a wedding dress. I think I'd look super :face-approve:

[GnomeKing]

Intreresting Dirty....you seemed somewhat flacid regarding Union membership but seem to advocate making "yourself heard" in regard of "mattocking in a full length ball gown"...would you want the rest of us to support your desire, or simply watch our own backs?

[BAJR]

Yup.... its a position to take.

which I've fixed in the past by supplying girls on the site with suitable ones I've sourced from B&Q, etc

And ensured it won't happen again I expec

[kevin wooldridge]

I don't personally have a problem with either Millets (are they stil in business by the way) or B&Q for what they do, but (and here's the rub), neither would be on my list of suppliers of suitable PPE 'fit for purpose'.....and its unfortunate that much of the moaning that goes on from archaeologists regarding PPE is concerned with the fact that 'Millets' style waterproofs split within ten minutes of being first put on, B&Q safety helmets contain no comfort padding band or facility for attaching ear or eye protection etc etc .....

I have never heard any archaeologist say that PPE shouldn't be worn on grounds they would rather be unsafe!! Surely it can't be beyond the imagination of the H&S organiser within any archaeological organisation to 'google' the countless suppliers out there and find one who can provide suitable PPE equipment fit for purpose.....or even just ring David and ask what the BAJR toolstore can supply....guaranteed reliability at the very least I think.....

.....and by the way GnomeKing.....Classic post!! I wish I could have thought of a way to use the word 'flaccid' in a reply to Dirty Boy.....

[Dinosaur]

Millets in the Toon was still there at lunchtime today, but then of course up here they may not have been told that the chain has shut down?