Posted By GARRY WIZZ Recently started employment with an electrical services company who do a lot of work at height. All staff trained and current for MEWP and for Tower along with the normal associated bits. Phone rings and the engineer(s) is off 150 miles down the road. Very difficult for me to do a height risk assessment which may or may not be needed.How do you manage this situation? Having been out and about with the engineers I considered issuing harness / arrest system.Working indoors at 2 / 4mtrs in pairs I could enhance safety.Yes, it would be second rate inhouse training but in the event of an incident the guy has not hit the floor. It is just not practical for this company to send engineers on approved courses.Time and cost will ensure it does not happen. My problem is thus, issue a harness and prevent impact with the floor but I would be out on a limb. Or do not issue the harness which see's me ok and not at odds with the regs.Impact hazard.. Or is there another way, such as proving it was not practical to send the engineers on the course. hence some training is better than no training.

Posted By GARRY WIZZ THANKS, points agreed, I should have mentioned that as an example they often have to go onto interior suspended ceilings. Having decided its safe to move on the ceiling I would not have a problem going the extra mile in case the conclusion of safe was in reality not safe

Posted By Robert K Lewis This is a situation that cries out for the operatives themselves to undertake the work risk assessment together with PROPER Dynamic Risk assessment as job proceeds. You can provide them with standard assessments to guide their thinking but ultimately as the "responsible" persons on site they will have to make the decisions to go ahead or not. Contact me if you want to talk about this further offline. Bob

Posted By Martin C Any contractor turning up at the department where I work, who will be required to work at height, will be asked to submit proof of training for working at height before work commences. Also required will be proof of training and competency in the use of equipment such as MEWPs, scissor lifts, overhead cranes etc. This will be part of the control of contractors procedure we have in place. The control of contractors procedure also requires a risk assessment by both the contractor and ourselves as well as a method statement for the work to be carried out. The two risk assesments are required because neither the contractor or ourselves will have a comlete understanding of the risks. We know the site specific risks, they should know the work specific risks. Control of contractors also covers fire procedures, working alone rules, PA testing of electrical equipment, use of site facilities and disposal of waste, amongst other things. After the work is done a review is carried out to check the contractor complied with the requirements. A bad mark can result in them being removed from the acceptable contractors list. Problems are also recorded in the near miss system and would therefore provide evidence if something in the future required it. As someone supplying contractors you will need to meet these types of requirements more and more as the legislation is pushing everyone down this path.

Posted By Dave Wilson Interesting argument in a court when you try to win the case on the grounds it was not practical to train the site staff! methinks you could lose big time!!