Not sure I understand you there. If there is a risk of head injury then it will be identified in your risk assessment. If there is no risk of injury then that will identified too. Sorry, I don't understand your problem.

It does seem a rather odd way to approach it!

I guess you need to know why the decision was taken to make it mandatory to wear hard hats in the first place. IF these risks have been removed then i see no reason why you can't remove the need for hard hats. if there are job specific task that might have the need then right that into the procedure. What are the likely things that are going to fall from height to cause a head injury. Ultimately a light fitting could fall down in an office but it's not likely so we don't require office workers to wear hard hats. You need to look at what is reasonable foreseeable to cause this type of injury. It might be that the warehouse id identified as an area where an item might fall of a pallet at high level so there would be a need. i guess it your risk assessment to it's down to you to make the decision but you would need good justification for removing a safety measure especially if things should go pear shaped. Phil

I know from personal experience: 1. HSE inspectors agree that if working on a roof hard hats are not required as there is nothing that can fall from above (except airplanes and bird poo but that's just a rare occurrence and acceptable risk to HSE). 2. If workers are instructed to wear head protection for specific tasks and/or in certain areas, they tend to forget to wear the head protection in other areas they have to pass through to get to their workplace. It is usually a mandatory instruction to wear head protection to make life easier for supervisors foremen etc.

Referring back to the original question, this is another example of 'how can I write a policy and procedure and risk assessment document to "prove" hard hats are unnecessary'. That way of thinking disturbs me. Write all the policies you want, and make whatever rules you want to. Within limits, it can be a completely arbitrary process. But the question also seeks help in 'writing a risk assessment to prove.....a pre-determined outcome'. That is fundamentally wrong. Run the risk assessment, then consider the outcome. Do not decide upon the outcome and then write a pseudo-risk assessment to fit your outcome of choice.

Sounds to me like you are looking for a few pieces of paper that have gone through the correct H&S motions to fall back on in the event that someone does clonk their swede and at the same time appease a workforce that does not want to wear hard hats anyway. Try "bump caps", a lighter solution if bashing their heads is the most likely injury.

Chapman, The answer to your question is a very simple one in theory, if as other commentators have stated your risk assessment shows the need for head protection, then to prove that you do not have wear them............eliminate the risk! I think everyone who has responded are of the same opinion here, you are trying to fit a pre-conceived outcome from a recognised risk without running the system correctly....not a wise move.