Getting The Safety Net In Place: Addressing The Risks Of Falls From Height In The Workplace Part 2

In our recent article we looked at the requirement for employers to undertake a suitable and adequate risk assessment whenever they require their employees and others to work at height. In this follow-up article we look at the other measures which need to be considered in the hierarchy of duties in respect of work done off the ground, with reference to recent HSE prosecutions, as well as some practical considerations.

As advised in Part 1, the hierarchy under the Work at Height Regulations require employers and others to consider the need to:

1. Avoid working at height if possible
2. Use an existing safe place of work
3. Provide work equipment to prevent falls
4. Mitigate distance and consequences of a fall
5. Instruction and training and/or other means

As a raft of recent successful prosecutions illustrate, even where work has to be done at height, an alternative set of measures need to be put in place, all of which can give rise to liability if failings occur.

Maintenance and suitability of mobile equipment

1. Fall from a mobile elevating work platform
   Following a tragic incident in which an employee died whilst carrying out a pre-use check of a mobile elevating work platform, it was identified that the manufacturer had manually uploaded into the machine incorrect data causing it to be mis-calibrated. This resulted in the device becoming unsafe because the secondary boom angle sensor started to extend when it was at the wrong angle, causing the platform to tip over.
   
   This highlights the critical importance of ensuring accurate data is used in modern high reach MEWPS.
   
   As a result, the manufacturer was fined £270,000 and ordered to pay costs of £165,175. Read more.
   
   
2. Fall from hoist platform
   A building owner was sentenced to 12 months in prison after an employee was paralysed when the hoist platform he was working from fell from third floor to ground floor during fit out works.
   
   It was established that the building owner had not maintained or inspected the hoist and that it was not suitable for carrying people when in a raised position.
   
   Furthermore, there had been a similar incident 12 months previously and notwithstanding this, an adequate risk assessment was not carried out which could have prevented the incident. Read more
   .
3. Fall through fragile roof
   A construction employee sustained serious injuries when they fell 7 metres through a fragile roof whilst carrying out roof repairs. It was established that whilst there was a scaffold tower in place, the employer failed to plan or supervise the work including failing to give adequate consideration to fall prevention measures such as netting. The employees were left to devise their own makeshift ladder/staging system from planks, which did not operate to protect the employee when he fell.

Of course, in many situations, there are often multiple entities with employer, or control responsibilities, and in such circumstances it is essential that all such personnel communicate, collaborate and collectively ensure the safety of the work being carried out.

Regulation 5 WHR provides that every employer shall ensure that no person engages in any activity, including organisation, planning and supervision, in relation to work at height or work equipment for such work unless they are competent to do so. Similarly under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957, an occupier may escape liability to visitors for the faulty execution of work by contractors if they have acted reasonably in engaging contractors to undertake the work, and they have taken reasonable steps (if any are reasonably required) to check the contractor was competent and the work was properly done. Accordingly, occupiers are at risk if they cannot demonstrate that such steps were taken in respect of the contractors they engage or if, for example, they were aware of safety issues with the premises (particularly those which were not obvious) which they did not communicate to the contractor.

1. Fall through roof
   A failure to undertake appropriate due diligence of a roofing contractor's documents and to ensure an appropriate phase plan was prepared resulted in a warehouse owner being fined £96,000 when an operative fell through the roof, sustaining serious injury.
   
   The contractor admitted failing to plan the work and to provide fall prevention measures such as nets or coverings. Further, he admitted that he had not completed any health and safety training, neither did he train the operatives. Read more.
   
   
2. Fall through hole
   The failure of a contractor to properly identify the presence of a hole allowed their client's employee to fall 2.5 metres, sustaining injury to their pelvis and hips.
   The contractor was working over the hole without any suitable protective measures for their own employees. They failed to assess the risks or implement appropriate control measures.
   
   As a result, the hole was left unguarded save for two unsecured aluminium plates and plastic barrier tape. The contractor was issued with an £8,000 fine and £7,194.32 costs order. Read more.

Such recently-reported HSE prosecutions demonstrate the particular difficulties that can arise with multiple parties working within the same space and the importance of communicating regarding the risks arising out of their respective operations and training their employees regarding the risks of working at height. Those in control of work at height must give consideration to all persons who can access their work area and implement appropriate controls.

Summary

Adherence to the HSE hierarchy of risks is essential whenever work at height is being undertaken. The recent HSE reports show that risks rising from work at height still remain a major source of incidents and that those involved in such works still need to do more to minimise the dangers. Work at height should be avoided where it is reasonable to do so. Where it is not possible to avoid working at height, conducting a suitable and sufficient assessment of the risks should be of primary importance as this will identify the hazards and inform appropriate control measures.

It is of key importance that employees and personnel working on your premises are trained in respect of how to work safely at height, and that there is a culture of identifying and reporting any concerns regarding the working practices.

Furthermore, companies must take reasonable steps to ensure that any equipment used as part of the assessment of adequate control measures is suitable for the task at hand, and is properly maintained and inspected.

If it is not reasonably practicable to avoid working at height, we therefore recommend documented consideration of the following matters:

1. What is the height of the task?
2. How often is it done?
3. Is work equipment being used when at height?
4. Can the work be undertaken reasonably without precautions?
5. If not, what equipment can reasonably be used to prevent falls: ladders, working platforms, scaffolds, lifts, guard rails, toe boards etc.
6. What personal protective equipment can be used to prevent falls: fall arrest, harnesses, hard hats etc?
7. Are safety nets/soft landing systems reasonably required and if so, provided?
8. Can work equipment be extended safely from the ground?
9. If not, how can equipment be safely transported for working at height?
10. Ensure inspections of the work equipment are done periodically and documented.
11. Ensure maintenance of the work equipment is done periodically and documented.
12. Ensure work surfaces are inspected and documents retained.
13. Reasonable steps should be taken to train personnel working at height in respect of the risks of working at height and how to work safely.