Posted By Glyn Atkinson After ploughing through lots of highly learned and qualified answers on here, can I point back to my response for a simple safety chain or similar device that could be easily and relatively cheaply fixed to any set of steps or ladder in order to establish good posture and safe access for this work to be done in a PRACTICAL manner? Apart from two fixing holes of a suitable size, there is no major change to the construction or safety of either form of access at height, so no huge and costly expense of carrying different equipment on fire appliances. In my humble opinion, you can quote legislation as much as you like, what the HSE are looking for is a safe solution to this problem, acceptable to both sides.

Posted By Pugwash Have a look at this from a local newspaper on Humberside. Thanks to JEB who posted the link in another thread. Not a good outcome! http://www.thisishull.co...36245&contentPK=16417388 The text of the article is below but its worth going to the link above to see the subsequent discussion. Firefighters in Hull and the East Riding have been advised to stop using stepladders when fitting smoke alarms. Representatives from the Fire Brigade Union (FBU) said firefighters should not use stepladders at work because they were not "fit for purpose", according to new legislation from the Health and Safety Executive. Today, senior managers at Humberside Fire and Rescue Service revealed they were reviewing procedures and equipment to see if the ladders posed an "unacceptable" risk. Sean Starbuck, FBU regional chair for Yorkshire and Humberside, said: "The use of stepladders to fit smoke alarms contravenes working at height regulations, which were introduced by the Government. "We have raised the issue and the Health and Safety Executive has agreed a review is needed." But highly-trained firefighters, used to scaling heights on extension ladders to rescue people, said they believed the ladders were safe. One, who asked not to be named, said: "Is it me or is this an example of health and safety gone mad?" Another asked: "Where will this end? Will we still be able to carry a rescued person down a ladder or enter a burning building without the HSE on our back?" Brigade spokesman Glenn Ramsden said a review was necessary, as the brigade had to comply with health and safety rules. But he said: "This does not mean we will stop fitting alarms in homes, but we are looking at the equipment our teams use and the way in which they approach their work." The brigade offers free home fire assessments and will fit free smoke detectors if necessary. Stepladders are routinely used by firefighters to install smoke alarms. In the past year, Humberside firefighters have fitted about 15,000. Mr Ramsden said: "The fitting of smoke alarms in homes is a fairly recent initiative introduced to the role of the fire and rescue service. "Although it is not emergency work, we see it as a planned activity and it is essential to the survival of any family if a house fire occurs. "The service, just like any other organisation, is not exempt from the legislation." The service may consider a platform, rather than a ladder, to comply with regulations. HSE Work At Height Regulations 2005 state employers must select the "most suitable" equipment and ensure protection measures are in place. Mr Ramsden stressed no decision had been made regarding the use of the ladders. He said: "When the best system of work has been selected and risk assessed, all of this information is then put into a working document telling staff how to perform a task safely." The Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents says 40,000 people attend hospital each year with "ladder related" injuries. A spokeswoman said: "If used correctly, ladders are still a much safer way of working at height than standing on household items." Lisa Fowlie, president of the Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, said she believed stepladders could be safely used in the workplace. Noel Marshall, of east Hull, a decorator for 21 years, has used a stepladder almost daily without injury. He said: "They can be dangerous, but only if you're not sensible." No figures are available to show how many firefighters have been injured while using stepladders.

Posted By Crim My patience with this issue has now run out! As an ex fireman with 25 years service from 1966 to 1991 I was always frustrated by the local trade union officials who continually battled against management and often caused good working practices to be discontinued. This is one such working practice that, if properly managed, would be quite safe and has not yet caused any serving firefighter to be injured. I realised from the start of this posting that it was the trade union who were responsible for raising it with HSE but chose to bite my lip and remain quiet. The local news article has brought the issue to a head and I note that there is lots of support for the Brigade by members of the general public. How ridiculous that trained and experienced fire fighters are prevented from utilising stepladders, by far the best equipment for the job. Tony Blair yesterday stated that if every home in the country had 3 energy saving bulbs fitted there would be the equivalent energy saving to light every street light in the country. I wonder if he thought about how/who would fit those bulbs especially as work at height is required for most of them and the poor simple step ladder has now been given the death sentence?

Posted By Alan Hewett http://www.hse.gov.uk/risk/principles.htm It would seem to me that there is potentially a conflict between the statement in the above link and the approach currently being taken with regards to the original posting in this thread. Alan

Posted By Chas Just for info....This very issue was mentioned on the Today programme this morning as another 'bonkers conkers' type story, alongside another story about UK being taken to court by the EU for not enforcing H&S legislation properly! I understand it was referring to the use of 'reasonably practicable' in our regulations. H&S hit the headlines again....

Posted By Andy Brazier Just to be clear the statement "The use of stepladders to fit smoke alarms contravenes working-at-height regulations" is not correct. I think most (but I accept not all) people on this site think use of step ladders is the best option for this task.

Posted By Granville Jenkins Ohh Well!! In for a penny in for a pound, I was going to pass this by, but I just can't resist the temptation to once more dive head long into this discussion thread - so here goes:- Perhaps some people haven't noticed, but health and safety has moved on in recent years and the recent introduction of the revised 'work at height regulations' is a prime example. The HSE are not out to punish people they are there in an endeavour to protect people. In the past health and safety took a back seat and some (I'm not saying all - there are some really mindful contractors, regrettably there are also those who are less mindful and put themselves and/or others at risk due their inactions. Stepladders being 'quiet safe' is perhaps 'not safe enough' in some situations. I have found that stepladders are used because they are the easiest (most convenient)and cheapest (cost effective) method of carrying out some tasks and as a consequence are therefore unlikely (in some situations at least) to meet the requirements of 'insofar as is reasonably practicable to do so'. The concerns that the HSE have with the FRS are possibly (as this is my personal opinion) more to do with 'numbers or statistics', for example, if there is a 1:100 chance that someone will have an accident when using a stepladder it stands that if you have used a stepladder 101 times that the probability of you having an accident is statistically greater than someone who has used a stepladder 50 times (I hope people get my drift!). Its not about being trained and experienced, how many people have lived to regret having said 'done it a thousand times mate and never had an accident - just leave it to me!!) Getting back to stepladders, stepladders have not been given the 'death sentence' stepladders could be used (subject to risk assessment) where there are no mechanical fixings involved, for example when fixing in place with double sided adhesive pads where the action is one of simply pushing the smoke detector to the ceiling (quite possibly while still maintaining 3 points of contact!)there is hardly any risk. However, mechanically fixing (drilling and screwing) smoke detectors in place introduces more risk as it is unlikely that 3 points of contact will not be maintained, also pressure has to be applied to the drill to drive it into the ceiling which results in force's being applied to the stepladder, which may cause the steps to wobble or the operator to loose balance, whichever the result is the same. Regards GJ

Posted By Alan Hewett For information. This has now reached Jack Straw and been discussed in the commons. http://www.thisishull.co...rPk=79656&pNodeId=136251 Alan

Posted By Pugwash A quick causal analysis: Why is there a dispute about how this simple task involving work at height should be undertaken? Because there is no consensus among health and safety professionals as to how the job should be done. (If there was a consensus, it would be an open a shut case – the job should be done like….. this!!! No argument.) Why is there no consensus among health and safety professionals? Because new goal setting Regulations have been introduced and the application of the Regulations is not well understood by many health and safety professionals (as can be seen from the postings in this and other threads). Why is the application of the Regulations not well understood by many health and safety professionals? Because there is no coherent guidance to accompany the Regulations and the HSE is unwilling to recognise that there is confusion and state how they expect the simplest of jobs involving work at height to be undertaken. (The guidance which has been issued has come out in a somewhat piecemeal ad-hoc manner. In particular there is not an Approved Code of Practice to accompany the Regulations. Such a Code would “give practical advice on how to comply with the law and by following the advice, an employer would be doing enough to comply with the law in respect of those specific matters on which the Code gives advice”.) Why is there no coherent guidance and why is the HSE unwilling to recognise that there is confusion and say how they expect the simplest of jobs involving work at height to be undertaken? I don’t know but perhaps we are now getting to the root of the problem. To me, this is the question which needs to be answered. WAHR is causing confusion among many health and safety practitioners. They do not know how the HSE expects them to apply the Regulations to particular circumstances. Some go over the top and “suggest technical solutions to a supposed problem that are in no way practicable for the situation at hand”. Other practitioners prevaricate and lets problems fester. All fodder for the sections of the media which are hostile to “elf and safety”. Come on HSE. You set the rules of the game. You then moved the goal posts with WAHR. Please can you recognise that all is not now well on the playing field. Many of players do not understand the new rules and need some help from the referee. The press are up in the stands mocking the standard of play and the crowd are starting to join in. In the House of Commons yesterday Theresa May was trying to tax Jack Straw with a few questions. She said “….. may we have a debate on the operation of health and safety rules? There are regulations to stop the overcrowding of chickens on trains, but not of people. Meanwhile, health and safety rules mean that firemen in Humberside have been stopped going up ladders to fit smoke alarms, because a firefighter on a stepladder not much more than 6ft from the floor may be contravening the Health and Safety Executive Work at Height Regulations 2005. Chickens are protected but not people, firemen are stopped from going up ladders: we could not make it up if we tried, so may we have a debate to expose the utter stupidity of many health and safety regulations that are seriously damaging our way of life?" Jack Straw replied “I was also asked about the operation of health and safety rules. I suspect that we all agree about this. I heard on the radio this morning the story about the Humberside fire service. If it is correct, it is barmy. I go up ladders quite frequently….this is certainly a ludicrous interpretation of health and safety rules.” Many congratulations and thanks to Lisa Fowlie who has been a voice of sanity in all of this. She said “Common sense is needed. If people are well trained, understand how to stay safe and are working for a short amount of time, then there should be a way to get a job done using a stepladder." Now why cannot the HSE get off the fence and say this and put an end to this nonsense. But from the HSE we have heard ……. .nothing!!

Posted By Andy Brazier HSE have NOT said that step ladders cannot be used.

Posted By Alan Hewett The HSE have issued a response to the press articles regarding this at: http://www.hse.gov.uk/press/record/var180107.htm Alan

Posted By Max Bancroft I've just been having a look again at HSE 'Safe Use of Ladders and Stepladders' Indg 402. It seems clear enough to me. Ladders can be used under the right conditions and are banned under the wrong conditions. Can anybody from the Fire & Rescue Service confirm that this started 3 years ago within the context of the FB pay dispute and the desire of the employers to extend the duties of FRS personnel?

Posted By Ken Taylor Whilst the HSE are unlikely to accept the use of other peoples' stepladders, Sean, the issue, as presented by the author of this thread, is that they have said that they will serve a notice upon the FRS if they cannot come up with an acceptable alternative to the current fixing method whereby a FRS stepladder is used - as there are not 'three points of contact' with the ladder. I've just watched another of those 'doing up old structures to create impressive houses' TV programmes and can say that I've not yet seen one without noting numerous infringements of the Work at Height Regs. It really is the Construction sector that needs HSE attention rather than firefighters in houses.

Posted By Ken Taylor No, Pete. To assist Sean, I have sought to present the gist what the author of the thread has said and not what the HSE contributed to it. I have also said that they are seeking an alternative to the fixing method and not specifically to the use of stepladders under any circumstances. In fact, I did suggest a possible method of doing the task (at least in many homes) by using a stepladder and retaining three points of contact (You may have missed that one). In this case the FRS have assessed the current method as low risk and I have no reason to doubt that this was done ‘sensibly’.

Posted By db The main problem with all this is that HSE has backed away from being too prescriptive. I don't think they have a choice in this - its not just a political decision but a pracical one. Can you tell people its OK to use a stepladder/ladder for this job but not for that? No, because they can be an effective piece of kit if used properly. This doesnt help, though as this thread has shown - there is still confusion about the risks. For example, it is not r prac or really possible to put protection up when putting a stairs carpet in and no-one would suggest that the risk of falling here is akin to that of falling from a ladder(surely?). The misunderstanding here is that its the type of work that is done that contributes to the risk. I'm sure its perfectly simple to most but you have to take into account the task carried out as well as the 3 points of contact issue. If you are working sideways and drilling in to the wall, this affects the centre of gravity (and the steps are not designed to be worked on like this) and increases the risk of falls. This is why every job has to be assessed on its merits. Simple stuff but the point has been missed I feel. Any improvement notice from HSE could only ask FRS to risk assess, taking more account of the hierachy and different types of access platforms (be that better steps or whatever) and not ban the steps. However, it is not true that HSE could not argue that a risk assessment was, in their view, wrong as a PN can be issued if the work is carried out unsafely, irrepsective of what the risk assessment says. If that were true you could do a risk assessment for working on a roof using no precautions at all. Just because your risk assessment says its OK, doesnt mean to say its right.

Posted By Max Bancroft I think db and Ken Taylor have got it right. There is an additional safety feature mentioned earlier on in the thread - there is a second person footing the ladder - this will result in extra stability. Nobody has confirmed or denied that this really started off in an industrial dispute and has little to do with sensible H&S.

Posted By Jimmy Bittlestone Hi, have you thought about the asbestos risk in the textured ceiling coating, (artex)? As I am currently investigating our methods of drilling and plugging for smoke alarms into ceilings which is the recommended Home Office method of fitting smoke alarms. My concern is that by disturbing the artex your crews could be getting a repeated asbestos shower. We currently use a 3 step step ladder.

Posted By Ken Taylor I wonder what the FBU would make of that!

Posted By Paul Thank you all for your contributions on this forum, following a meeting with the HSE we are now in a position to release the following statement: Humberside Fire and Rescue Service have explored a range of step ladders and work platforms to enable a safe system of working at heights, to fit smoke alarms in typical domestic premises. Of the work equipment currently available today, step ladders have proven to be most practicable and suitable for purpose. 1. The Service has identified a step ladder with optimal characteristics and satisfied themselves that it is appropriate via a risk assessment. This will be kept under review. 2. The Service will keep the use of this equipment under review and continue to be interested in any future improved equipment that becomes available. 3. The step ladder will not be appropriate in all domestic premises and alternative arrangements will be made to fit smoke alarms in these circumstances. Humberside Fire and Rescue Service have explained all relevant matters to HSE representatives locally and they accept our conclusions.