Posted By Susan Powell On competency checking a contractor I have come across a view that to me seems a bit strange to say the least. A contractor whose role is to clean/clear ventilation ducting is telling me that their personnel never work from ladders (hence their is no risk assessment for ladders) and doesn't carry out any work at height (hence the h&s policy doesn't contain any arrangements for work at height) 'Some' of the work may be from a plant room accessed by a staircase. I am still seeking clarification from the Client as to whether ladders or other working from height may be involved. I appreciate that there may be some instances somewhere where the work at height assessments may say that the risks involved in some works may be so negligible as to not need any other control than training, but I can't conceive of a situation where this kind of work wouldn't at some time involve some work at height as defined by the Work at Height Regs. 2005. Has anyone else come across such a view? In our risk averse world I try to see things from a real world philosophy but this one has stumped me. I pride myself on having convinced plenty of small contractors of the cost/benefit approach to health and safety. My instinct says this is just another attempt at ducking out of actually doing something to meet the Regs. unless anyone out there can convince me otherwise? Regards Sue

Posted By CFT Dear dear dear, it must be nice to be so choosy over what work you take and what you don't! Ventilation ducting, (name is a wee bit of a give-away)by the very nature of what it is, will require someone to access height to get to it; a company with a greater understanding of what real life is all about maybe worth a thought. 'Avoid the need to work at height where possible' is one thing, but there are more times than not when you have to! CFT

Posted By Mitch I would try these http://www.hvca.org.uk/. WAH is not the only significant risk associated with this work!

Posted By steve e ashton Whooooaaaaa..... If the vents / ducting / shutters and etc are all above the ceiling - and the contractor gains access by walking up stairs and through a door into the 'roof space' which is fully floored or partially boarded with walkways handrails etc provided - the contractor may well be right. I am sorry, but walking up and down a fixed staircase is not something I would consider to be working at height. I can easily foresee projects where all this work could be done without any work at height. Many Hospitals and care homes are designed so that such equipment can be easily and safely maintained without 'work at height'.... Why is everyone assuming the contractor is a numpty or an imbecile? Steve

Posted By Tim Are there any open edges, exposed or become open by nature of removing access panels etc? where are the plant rooms situated? As already mentioned speak to the client, ask for a method statement Have they supplied any training records, any mention of work at height in them? What height is the ducting set at?

Posted By CFT Am I the only one that fully appreciates what Susan posted?? 'They won't work at height'!!!!! So a MEWP, tower, jet pack, whatever won't be much use; read the original post. CFT

Posted By Pete48 One simple interpretation is that the contractor has assessed his work and genuinely found that they don't ever work at height or don't ever want to work at height within the definition of same in the Regs. The poster, to me, appears to be questioning whether that is ever practically possible in order to test check the statement from the contractor. From the replies it would seem that it is possible; so it may be a valid statement but CFT amongst others is simply challenging that view based on their experience. Not right or wrong, just opinion. Put 3 experts together to get 5 views??

Posted By Robert K Lewis Susan You have answered in effect the Competence check issue which was why you have appeared to ask for this method of work. You are not satisfied then for your purposes the contractor is not competent. You need then to decide if you are competent to supervise the work, and wish to do so. Alternatively find a contractor that satisfies you. As an aside however the question as to whether a method statement is evidence of an organisations competence is rather a moot point. Competent organisations need to have the supporting systems in place to ensure that people doing the work are competent or competently supervised. Having appropriate methods of identifying and assessing risks are the key factor. This question will tell you more about the organisation than a single RA, albeit a poor one. From your viewpoint as a client I sense that you do not have adequate benchmark standards in place to produce consistent answers to the competence question. I am afraid that many questionnaires themselves do not provide the value they claim always and can be hard for clients to use consistently. Bob