|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
13 Mar 2023, 00:08 (Ref:4146853) | #1 | |
Racer
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 422
|
Supercars cooling disqualification
I refer to Saturday's disqualification of the two 888 Camaros for having additional cooling aids.
This very wrong in my opinion. The drivers are employees of 888. Under Workplace and Safety Laws, 888 have a duty of care to provide a safe working environment to their employees. If the cars' cockpit temperature was too high, then 888 had duty to cool it. Any Supercars rules cannot override this. Supercars seem to believe they are not subject to the law of the land. |
|
|
13 Mar 2023, 00:26 (Ref:4146855) | #2 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,638
|
Quote:
|
||
|
13 Mar 2023, 00:39 (Ref:4146856) | #3 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,669
|
Quote:
Nothing at all to do with WHS laws, duty of care or Supercars believing that it is not subject to the laws of the land. Personally, sounds to me like a mess with contradicting accounts of a conversation in the 888 garage and the penalty feels harsh but it wasn't for the reason you suggest. |
|||
__________________
“We’re far from having too much horsepower…[m]y definition of too much horsepower is when all four wheels are spinning in every gear.” ― Mark Donohue |
13 Mar 2023, 01:03 (Ref:4146857) | #4 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 804
|
Quote:
Under the rules they are allowed to supply extra cooling to the drivers that require it. Its the positioning that was incorrect by T8. I think you need to look into the incident more instead of the WHS laws. |
||
|
13 Mar 2023, 02:10 (Ref:4146862) | #5 | |
Racer
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 163
|
"I refer to Saturday's disqualification of the two 888 Camaros for having additional cooling aids.
This very wrong in my opinion. The drivers are employees of 888. Under Workplace and Safety Laws, 888 have a duty of care to provide a safe working environment to their employees. If the cars' cockpit temperature was too high, then 888 had duty to cool it. Any Supercars rules cannot override this. Supercars seem to believe they are not subject to the law of the land." I guess most sports would be guilty... boxing promotors, football etc would all be subject to "duty of care" if that is the case. |
|
|
13 Mar 2023, 09:37 (Ref:4146883) | #6 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Jun 2020
Posts: 481
|
Quote:
When they decided not having a helmet cooler was a mistake all they had to do was to put the helmet cooler on the passenger side or put in writing that they wanted to put it on the drivers side. They did neither so it's 100% their fault. As other teams have said the cockpit temperatures weren't that high anyway. For the 2nd race they had it on the passenger side so it was always possible. |
||
|
13 Mar 2023, 10:04 (Ref:4146887) | #7 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 333
|
Was the helmet cooling unit installed in the drivers side of the cars for scrutineering on Thursday
|
||
|
13 Mar 2023, 11:49 (Ref:4146899) | #8 | |
Racer
Join Date: Jun 2020
Posts: 481
|
||
|
13 Mar 2023, 11:58 (Ref:4146901) | #9 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 333
|
Isn't it the job of the scrutineers to make sure race-cars are legal to race before they hit the track
|
||
|
13 Mar 2023, 18:23 (Ref:4146952) | #10 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Jun 2020
Posts: 481
|
Quote:
Not 100% sure on how SuperCars does it but that is what happens in other national series I've been involved with as a mechanic. As I say in all motorsport I've been involved with it's entirely down to the entrant to present a car that complies with the rules not for the officials to pick up anything that might be illegal. |
||
|
13 Mar 2023, 21:14 (Ref:4146968) | #11 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 306
|
This ^^ , especially the last sentence.
I wouldn't go racing on anyone's verbal, even if they run the show. My practice, back in the day when I worked for a quid, was to email their statement back to them, 'Just confirming, you informed us that we could ....' , and I did it as soon as I put the phone down or got back to the office. Can't remember anyone ever coming back and saying 'no I didn't'. These days you can do it standing in the same spot as he walks out the door, no excuses. |
||
|
14 Mar 2023, 21:44 (Ref:4147090) | #12 | |
Racer
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 422
|
I guess most sports would be guilty... boxing promotors, football etc would all be subject to "duty of care" if that is the case.[/QUOTE]
Have you seen today's news that a legal class action is being launched against the AFL for negligence in relation to the players concussions. So, it's coming..... |
|
|
22 Mar 2023, 11:27 (Ref:4148777) | #13 | ||
Race Official
1% Club
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 47,352
|
|||
__________________
Go woke, Go broke… Here’s hoping a random universe works out in your favour… The meaning of life… ENJOYING THE PASSAGE OF TIME! #CANCERSUCKS |
22 Mar 2023, 13:09 (Ref:4148784) | #14 | |
Racer
Join Date: Jun 2020
Posts: 481
|
Never expected anything else unlike all the warriors posting on FaceBook. No written request and no written approval. Everything else is just noise.
|
|
|
22 Mar 2023, 19:27 (Ref:4148832) | #15 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,661
|
|||
__________________
Punters Beer Fest. Indy 02, Clipsal 03, Winton 04, Paperclip 05, Darwin 06, Oran Park 07, Phillip Island 08, Sandown 09, Townsville 10, Symmons 11, Eastern Creek 12, Winton 13. Townsville 14. Paperclip 15, Sandown 16, Symmons 17, PI 18, The Bend 19 |
22 Mar 2023, 21:04 (Ref:4148852) | #16 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 804
|
Quote:
As Dutto said, they should have followed up with written approval. But they didn't... |
||
|
23 Mar 2023, 01:34 (Ref:4148872) | #17 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 306
|
Quelle surprise!
Very basic mistake to take someone's word without confirming it appropriately. I guess when you want something to be so, you hear in that context regardless of what the other party says/means. Confusion/conflict then ensues, until someone says 'show me the rules, show me the exemption' ... |
||
|
26 Mar 2023, 17:58 (Ref:4149240) | #18 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 681
|
Quote:
That said: (1) I can almost guarantee drivers wouldn't be employees. There would be a driving / media / sponsor support services contract between SVG Pty Ltd and T8REA (2) T8 chose to run a less effective cooling system, being the Chill Out system WITHOUT the helmet cooling fan supply. Their choice, no-one forced them to do that. (3) Due to the very nature of the activity, the interpretation of OH&S rules around motorsport isn't quite as black and white as you've outlined, particularly for those on the front line (mostly drivers, somewhat also pitcrew). As an example, you often see teams in 24hr races going 36+hrs straight without sleep. In a normal environment with risk of collision, fire, burns, cuts, heavy lifting etc this wouldn't be permitted (think a factory / foundry / machineshop), but in motorsport it is. |
|||
|
26 Mar 2023, 19:23 (Ref:4149244) | #19 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 6,506
|
Quote:
Had they confirming correspondence of their conversation and alleged approval T8 might have had a case. (Then the matter of whether Burgess has the authority to make that judgement becomes the focus. The Appeal panel suggested he did not.) I daresay it would never have become an issue if RD was involved. The i's would have been dotted and the t's crossed |
|||
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Disqualification maybe | beau1 | Formula One | 44 | 24 May 2005 21:10 |
Williams knew about JPM's disqualification? | Homer Simpson | Formula One | 13 | 28 Jun 2004 13:31 |
disqualification galore at Spa??? | Happy Hippo | National & International Single Seaters | 2 | 31 Aug 2001 20:15 |
Cooling systems | pink69 | Sportscar & GT Racing | 3 | 12 Jul 2001 22:06 |