Posted By Brett Day

Just off the top off my head, a couple of reasons why it is not a good idea to rely on the emergency services for WaH emergency / rescue plans:

Suspension Trauma - by the time the ES arrive, especially in remote locations the casualty could already be dead not from the fall but from suspension trauma as they hang in the harness.

Given cuts in budgets depending on the height there may not be an appliance in your area with sufficient reach to effect a rescue. Likewise (I'm making an assumption) but not all the laddey appliances are off road suitable and as suchmay not be able to physically get to your site.

Posted By Paul Bellis
Its part of the requirements under the Working at Height regulations 2005 - you cant just rely on emergency services

see hse website http://www.hse.gov.uk/construction/pdf/fallsqa.pdf

Posted By brian mills
It's under Regulation 17 "Plan for emergencies and rescue".

Any planning would have to consider that the emergency services might not be able to respond, because of priorities.


Therefore you would have the risk of suspension trauma injuries Etc, so would have to have in house rescue plan not relying on the emergency services

Regards

Brian

Posted By Dave Merchant
It's not in the WAHR in an obvious way, for the simple reason that they don't need to bother - it defaults back to HASAWA courtesy of some very clever use of language. There are also many types of work at height which don't need a rescue plan at all (working on a stepladder) so if the WAHR specifically said "you will all have a rescue team" the country would grind to a halt. What they do say is hidden behind assumptions made in the original Temporary Work at Height Directive that weren't translated into the UK Regs, but can still be seen by analyzing the legal phraseology.

WAHR (4.1) says:-

4. - (1) Every employer shall ensure that work at height is -
(a) properly planned;
(b) appropriately supervised; and
(c) carried out in a manner which is so far as is reasonably practicable safe,
and that its planning includes the selection of work equipment in accordance with regulation 7.
(2) Reference in paragraph (1) to planning of work includes planning for emergencies and rescue.

so there's a need to "plan" for them, but in many cases the plan concludes there's no need for any rescue (the stepladder again). If the plan says a rescue is needed within 5 minutes or 5 hours then 4.1c, HASAWA and the Management Regs catch you on failing to implement a RA properly and providing SFAIRP safe working conditions.

If you're using PFPE then 8(d) says:-

1. A personal fall protection system shall be used only if -
(b) the user and a sufficient number of available persons have received adequate training specific to the operations envisaged, including rescue procedures.

This infers via the wording that a 'procedure' must exist for PFPE users, therefore the plan drawn up from (4.1) must have included actions to be followed to effect such a rescue. The Directive already assumed you knew that from its appendices (not part of the WAHR). The actions may still just be "call for a first aider", but if they include needing to physically rescue someone then the staff ON SITE have to be trained in that procedure.

As there's no ACOP (and won't be) the best you have in terms of 'guidance' is BS8437, which is not mandatory but reflected what might once have become the ACOP had it not been so problematic. That says:-

BS8437:2005 (11.1.1) It is essential that there is a specific rescue plan and resources in place for each worksite... resources should include not only equipment but also trained personnel.

and

BS8437:2005 (11.4.2.a).. an injured person hanging in a harness awaiting rescue should be removed from upright suspension...The aim should be to do this within 10 minutes.

and

BS8437:2005 (11.5.1) Specific rescue equipment should always be present at the worksite

The notion is therefore that 'resources' are already on the worksite and not called in from outside (using the emergency services or not), plus that the rescuers are trained (many fire services do not train their front line pump crews in all aspects of work at height and the response time from a specialist line rescue appliance can be over an hour). It still remains the case that the "resource" may be a man with a phone and a first aid box, but if your RA says it's a team of harness-wearing abseilers in a truck, that's what you have to provide on the worksite. If you read the Confined Space Regs they use the same principle - you have to provide on site what you need to rescue someone, but you decide what you need via your RA. In theory someone with a broken leg 'needs' a hospital, but your RA proves you don't have to build one. If they can die in 10 minutes it's no good having your rescue team in a cafe 200 miles away.

Posted By alex mccreadie
I work for a Tower Crane Hire company. Earlier today one of our customers rang asking why we had not put in a Rescue plan for the Operator operating the crane. I pointed him initially to his local fire service,they readily agreed operational requirements allowing. Most importantly they have asked if they can carry out a training exercise using the crane.
That is the 3rd Service in about 2 months that have asked for the use of a crane.
As previously discussed I have informed the site agent that I will help him with a plan but I would like to see his Regional Safety Manager who told him he needed a plan and to get us the crane supplier to do it.
Sadly this happens a lot in the industry someone walks in says you need that and disappears or shirks their responsibilities. As a company we do not quote regulations as to who is and is not responsible but offer to assist.

The cranes are hired under CPA Terms and Conditions making the Operator a loan sevant and the responsibility of the hirer.

Ta Alex

Posted By David AB Thomas
See http://www.hse.gov.uk/fo...od/oc/200-299/200_31.pdf