I agree totally. There is so much over use of RAMS etc that people stop paying attention to them. I do have a 'control measure' in some of my RA that states, ' operative to pay attention to where they are walking and take personal care'. No client has made a negative comment yet.

Are you referring purely to the risk of slipping or tripping? or any other risks associated with walking round site? It will clearly be organisation / site specific, but (and I don't think we're alone) we do still get people slipping or tripping within our warehouses (not often, but it does occur). For us there are myriad (albeit relatively low risk, but not insignificant) slip and trip hazards that are subject to risk assessment and control measures. We have claims for slips and trips. If we had no risk assessment, we'd have no defence. I'd also like to think that the (simple / common sense) control measures (that aren't that common if you don’t actually tell people..) go some way to our low slip / trip rates. Presumably you have a policy on spillages / dropped items? Clean as you go policy? Etc. etc. For our warehouses, clearly slip and trip risks are not the main concern when risk assessing walking round site.

Gotcha, in which case I whole-heartedly agree with your stance. We don't risk assess these 'every-day' scenarios.

I agree entirely with the comments so far. I do not see that it is a risk assessment you are looking for. At the risk of sounding like the rule book, look for 'arrangements '(as per MHSWR Reg5) being in place. In simple terms, this would be a general instruction about what to look for/what to do when going around the site. No need to include all the niff-naff and trivia that normally turns up (as suggested earlier in this thread), but only that which is significant/unusual and which the reasonable person could not be expected to know.

In my experience alot of the emphasis for risk assessing all manner of low risk activities stems from the over zealousness of insurance company loss adjusters. When investigating claims they ask for access to the usual accident reports etc and also automatically ask for the risk assessment when strictly speaking there is no need because of the 'every day' nature of the activity in question. When in the past I have said that we do not have a risk assessment for people walking in a corridor or up stairs they look at me as if to say 'ahhh....guilty as charged', (I'm sure much the same would happen in a prosecution case, it's an easy win). In my view the over use of trivia based risk assessments actually detracts from the really hazardous things we do have to assess and they serve to lessen the impact amongst staff who now see the whole process and outcome as being a bureaucratic exercise and a waste of time. Instead of being a useful tool many assessments are regarded as solely being a way to cover ones backside in the event of a claim, rather than being the means to help prevent injury or harm. (Should I be risk assessing the decorations that have been put up in the office - I think I would be lynched!...... Bah humbug..........Happy Christmas to one and all, roll on the New Year).

Last time I looked (today) We don't have to risk assess everything. Far from it. As long as the real hazards are recorded and the risks ane controled then the need for 'pick your feet up' is at best pointless and at the other end of the scale 'bringing the world of H&S into disrepute' a :-) as always

Well said Zimmy

OH I wish I could use that one! Not with our clients. They want RA for everything! One even wanted the step up into a mobile welfare cabin SPECIFICALLY included in the site access method statement because it was a bit high! They wouldn't allow work to commence on a £50,000 contract until someone had ran down to a caravan store and bought a step!

agreed no need for a risk assessment - pure and simple - employees are required to take reasonable care of their own health & safety! (That is writen in to our H&S Policy)

"I once wrote back a very "tongue in cheek" letter to one lot who did this explaining to them that there was no "Young Person's assessment" for their client because she was aged over 50. I also pointed out to them all their errors in quoting the various Regulations as they had not updated their list and were quoting the old Reg numbers from MHSWR and several others. Needless to say they had no sense of humour" Heather - solicitors do have a sense of humour - and they charge for it. Every bit of correspondence relating to a claim - even letters they receive. Current rate is about £125 per letter I believe. Phil

Unfortunately Heather it was part of a standard disclosure list infact it was very specific about it. I have had the standard stuff when they ask for a manual handling R/A when some one has slipped etc. Graham, I hate the phrasing of the letters when they go on about deliberately setting a trap when someone has been hurt.