John, I'm with you on this one. Whether it's a reg or not, the back box and the faceplate NEED to be linked and earthed. Well IMO anyway.
No - they do not need to be.
You may say that they should be.
You may say that best practice is that they are.
But you may not use the word "need" - that has specific connotations of compulsion which do not apply here.
You may say that they should be.
You may say that best practice is that they are.
But you may not use the word "need" - that has specific connotations of compulsion which do not apply here.
IMO for safety sake the word is NEED.
If you think a reduced safety situation is correct then so be it.
Your opinion, and your desire for safety, and your evaluation of the safety level of another configuration are all utterly irrelevant. None of them can change the meaning of a word.
"Need" may not be applied to this situation unless you are happy to disregard what it actually means. And given that you recently complained about a word which changed in Tudor times, and expressed dissatisfaction over the change, and wanted to insist that the 4-500 year old original was the one we should still be using, that would be egregiously hypocritical of you.
"Need" may not be applied to this situation unless you are happy to disregard what it actually means. And given that you recently complained about a word which changed in Tudor times, and expressed dissatisfaction over the change, and wanted to insist that the 4-500 year old original was the one we should still be using, that would be egregiously hypocritical of you.
I'm not quite sure if we are talking about the same thing here.
In my opinion, in order to have electrical continuity between two points a connexion of some sort is needed. In this case a wire. I could also use a variety of other words but I believe need is suitable for the job, unless it's use has changed since I was at school. If it's use has changed I will be expressing my dissatisfaction over that too.
If there is no requirement for the back box to be earthed directly with a flylead then no need to do it.
I agree it is a far better job to do it, but there you go.
Millions of houses won't have flyleads, simply because they won't be required.
To re-cap for the op and anyone else in doubt;
Plastic light switches would have earths connected to metal back box.
Plastic sockets and FCUs don't need metal back box earthed as this is provided through faceplate screws.
Metal accessories don't need metal back box earthed as this is provided through faceplate screws.
Metal accessories must not rely on the faceplate screws if the earth wires have been connected to the metal back box. There must be a direct earth wire(s) to the earth terminal on that metal accessory.
Of course, a plastic light switch on a plastic pattress will not have it's fixing screws earthed in any way.
On old lighting circuits without earth wires, the metal switch boxes tended to have nylon fixing lugs, presumably to reduce the chances of the fixing screws becoming live. Metal light switches in a flushed-in domestic environment wasn't much of an issue in those days I suppose.
I agree it is a far better job to do it, but there you go.
Millions of houses won't have flyleads, simply because they won't be required.
To re-cap for the op and anyone else in doubt;
Plastic light switches would have earths connected to metal back box.
Plastic sockets and FCUs don't need metal back box earthed as this is provided through faceplate screws.
Metal accessories don't need metal back box earthed as this is provided through faceplate screws.
Metal accessories must not rely on the faceplate screws if the earth wires have been connected to the metal back box. There must be a direct earth wire(s) to the earth terminal on that metal accessory.
Of course, a plastic light switch on a plastic pattress will not have it's fixing screws earthed in any way.
On old lighting circuits without earth wires, the metal switch boxes tended to have nylon fixing lugs, presumably to reduce the chances of the fixing screws becoming live. Metal light switches in a flushed-in domestic environment wasn't much of an issue in those days I suppose.
I don't think that many of us (probably not even BAS) would disagree with anything you say, the only debate having been about the meaning of the word "need".
I have already agreed that I should have indicated that when I used the word (because it would "make it a far better job"), I should have made it clear that I was expressing my opinion, not indicating a regulatory requirement.
However, despite what BAS says, I do not think the word "need" necessarily (or even commonly in terms of everyday use) implies any compulsion (regulatory, legal or whatever). For example (there are millions of possible examples), I might well write something like "... you need to find a way of avoiding having the cable visible on the surface of your living-room ceiling" - there is no doubt that there is a 'need' to do that in order for it to "be a far better job", but there certainly is no compulsion to avoid surface wiring on a ceiling, and I don't think the word "need" in that sentence suggests or implies that there is.
Having said all that, my personal opinion about flyleads is not just a matter of aesthetics or 'professionalism'. For reasons I have explained, I believe that, albeit only in fairly exceptional/unlikely circumstances, it represents a benefit to personal safety. However, even many things which are safety-related regulatory requirements often exist to 'give protection against' exceedingly uncommon events.
Kind Regards, John
Delete "need" insert "should".
Happy now?
Happy now?
I've never been unhappy - you probably should be (or need to be
) asking others!In terms of what I was taken to task about, I think that changing "need" to "should" might well have made things 'worse' in the eyes of some beholders - since, at least to me, "should" moves one further in the direction of 'compulsion' (probably being second only to "must").
Kind Regards, John
Indeed, and as soon as I return, I again find myself on the receiving end of quibbles about the meaning of words which I type!
Kind Regards, John
- Joined
- 28 Apr 2004
- Messages
- 7,634
- Reaction score
- 713
- Country
I NEED a drink!
Which might be true, if you were about to expire from dehydration. However, I suspect you mean that you really, really WANT a drink.
It seems simple to me.
If, in fact, people do not need to do something, then telling them they (do) need to do it cannot be correct.
If, in fact, people do not need to do something, then telling them they (do) need to do it cannot be correct.
I'm not sure that resolves anything, because it leaves the question of what was meant by "need".
As I've written several times, contrary to what has been suggested, the word does not necessarily, and probably not even commonly, imply any compulsion - by virtue of regulations, laws or anything else. I need to have some lunch fairly soon, need to mow my lawn this weekend, need to find out how my daughter is getting on at Glastonbury and need to get to grips with a messy and growing pile of filing. However, none of those 'needs' come with any compulsion, and nothing catastrophic will happen if I fail to do one or more of them.
This all started because I omitted to include an "IMO" in my 'need' statement. I admitted that a long time back, and that should (IMO!) have been the end of it!
Kind Regards, John