Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By Chris Duffy
Hello All,
Scaffolding,
Well where do we start.
On a normal construction site where there is independent scaffolding erected, I understand that external ladder accesses are the best solution (apart from staircase etc) but why do Scaffolding Contractors always leave both guards rail off and lean the ladder onto the ledger where there is a potential of a fall from height.
Surely a ladder access must have a fixed guardrail or swinging tube to ensure compliance with the WAH Regs (fall protection and prevention etc)
Is leaving a gap at the ladder access (where the Operatives leave materials usually) legal or not.
I believe NASC are not issuing TG20 till later this year.
HELP Please......
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Tim
Chris,
Swinging gates should be fitted to close the gap
Regards
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Garry Adams
Chris
The scenario of which you have described would not be acceptable in the Scaffolding Culture of which I promote.
I am aware that the practice you describe is permitted in certain circles, however, it is out dated and must be discouraged when observed by the Commissioning agent/competent person before it is tagged.
Remedial and corrective steps should be deployed to eradicate this practice, where is the Safety Management System on these Projects ?
Garry...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Chris Duffy
Yeh,
We know it is bad practice and should not happen but does any one know exactly what the law is or do we need to wait for TG20.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Garry Adams
Chris
The NASC TG 20 series of Guidance are sanctioned by the HSE, however, Scaffold Hand rails fall under the definition of Guarding and are a Statutory requirement...as in guarding of a turning lath or a band saw.
If there is a breach in the guarding then this falls into the category of a Breach of Statutory requirements...If I were to be called upon to commission a Scaffold Structure with a section of hand rail omitted then I would refuse to tag said Scaffold until it was rectified.
Further Reading
B.S. EN 12811-1 and TG20:05
B.S. EN 39: 2001
B.S. 1139:1991
B.S. 1129:1990
Garry...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
The other real problem with the external ladder resting on a ledger is that the ladder often ends up as long as the scaffold is high. If ladders are to be used then a tower with lift to lift short ladders are the best option.
I feel that often though it is the purchasing and order placing process that leads to this situation - access towers are an additional cost.
B ob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ron Hunter
Chris, you state: "I understand that external ladder accesses are the best solution".
What is your basis for that understanding? I wouldn't permit the access method you describe on sites I have a say in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Garry Adams
Chris
Firstly, I agree with Bob with regards to costs, fiscal considerations are one of the most likely precursors which ultimately lead to non-compliance or indeed an incident which happens without intelligent design.
We all have to work within budgetary restraints, In a competitive world we all have to analyse all the component parts before submitting our tender for work, however, yet again on this occasion H&S is the Cinderella.
What is the price of an operatives Health and Safety nowadays ?.
Ron, I concur with your views.
Garry...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
Garry
What price a stair tower at £400 against a lost life. Order placers only see the line of cost at the time of order and get a pat on the back for reducing the price to the bone. Never seen a senior manager congratulating somebody for a safe decision - only a cost cutting one!!
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Garry Adams
Bob
Here, Here a small price indeed Sir, in comparison to the gamble of the consequences becoming a reality. These so called Managers proclaim to be custodians of H&S matters sit in their safe snug offices have no right to gamble with the well-being of Site operatives.
excuse the wee rant...had a heavy day at the Piper Alpha Memorial yesterday...my collage's and I have been discussing the Legacy left by the 167 Men who died in the disaster.
I sometimes despair...why do management persist in taking short cuts and turning a blind and being selective in their duties.
Garry...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
Garry
As a Flixboro survivor I sympathise with your day. It certainly heightens the desire to get changes made.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Garry Adams
Bob
As with all disasters we learn at the cost of blood and treasure.
Man cannot change time but time can change Man
Subsequent investigations and enquires attributed mechanical shear stress as the prime factor for both disasters, however, I fear the prime-mover is closer to home in-that competency/capability levels of training were never the number One priority of the Operating Authorities...Human error is the weakest link and is the most difficult regulate ...a prime example being, Long Island.
Best regards, Garry...Apologies Chris went off at a tangent somewhat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
Garry
Or Chernobyl!!
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Antony McManus
All,
Its how the brickies want them.... I am an ex-scaff (but, still keep my hand in). If you build a correct access, 9 times out of 10....it will be have been altered when you next vist that site......
A cultural thing....
Tony Mc
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Garry Adams
Yo Tony
You cant always get what you want, you get what you need...just because the brickies like it that way, disi meen it right...what about the other trades ?...furthermore, Tony...I am surprised at yi bytheway, condoning unauthorised removal of Scaffolding component parts and breaches of statutory requirements tut tut
Garry...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Chris Duffy
Well,
Back to Scaffolding.
With regards to Scaffolding Training as it is in effect the Scaffolders that are not erecting them properly.
What we need is NASC and those closed shop boys at CITB to allow Scaffolders to complete a NVQ to get them a CISRS card and to encourage training rather than Scaffolding Contractors feeling trapped as they have to send their lads to Erith, Bircham Newton (or similar centre) and pay for
1. The course it self
2. Accommodation
3. Aages
4. Transport
5. Food etc
6. and for to cover the work that they are losing getting done while they are there.
MCG, CITB, NASC....mmmm
Why do we have all these work at height accidents?????
All views welcome
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Garry Adams
Chris
well yes lets get back to Scaffolding, in particular regards to Scaffolding Training.
Pre HASAW, CITB and ECITB
I have served the Scaffolding Industry since 1972. I started with SGB as an improver and progresses to Scaffolding Erector after a stringent regime of inhouse training and Mentoring.
In 1978 I was obliged to attend a CITB 2 week course ...this course was intended to lend credence to the Scaffolder, on completing of the course I received a Scaffolders Record of Training Card...and little else...
CITB, ECITB and NASC are historically linked to the Scaffolding Industry and are embedded in the psyche of Organisations and HR Managers as a compulsory requirement to gauge the competency/capability of a Scaffolding Erector... This is an urban myth, If an individual can demonstrate that he/she can erect a Scaffold Structure to the required Design(Statutory requirement) with the competency/capability required to do the task in compliance with the requirements of the HASWA then there is no reason why they cannot do so.
Chris, you are quite at liberty to engage a (competent/capable) Scaffolder to train Operatives if you wish, then you can devise a curriculum to teach your Staff to erect your Scaffolds Properly.
However, I do agree with you and I am not the only Scaff to voice this concern, regarding Course Fees...Scaffs have to be re-certified on a regular basis, most Scaffs are nomadic by the nature of the work and hold no allegiance to a Scaffolding Service Company, this being the case we have to pay these fees out of our own pocket.
Best regards, Garry...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Joe McCluskey
TO get back onto the guarding / ladder access issue :
Whatever happened to risk assessment here?
Putting TG's and the NASC aside (bearing in mind these are guidance sheets), using the simple matter of asking " has the risk been reduced to an acceptable level? the answer would be no, and it would have to be reviewed.
In the organisation Iam employed, in Scotland we would only accept an external ladder access on a low level scaffold but even that would need to be protected at the top. All scaffold on site is system ( either Cuplock or Kwikstage style) and these are costed with "ladder bays" which is fully enclosed staged ladder access, a level at a time if possible. If its a flatted development, the access is by stairs rather than ladders.
TO bring it to brass tacks you could rely on senior management's need for "rectal protection" - ie If you found someone shaving £400 off the price but creating such a hazard I wouldn't be messing about - Take it to the MD and make sure he is clearly aware, and let him make the "reasonably practicable" decision. I would challenge any MD to put himself at risk of a manslaughter charge for £400. :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Garry Adams
Chris
Good pragmatic advise...well said Joe, nae messin right to the jugular.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Gabe
Having just read this thread, I went back out and had a look at scaffolding erected by contractors yesterday. Access is by external ladder, but to get onto the platform you would either have to duck under the handrail or climb over it. The ladder end of the platform only being protected by a rail at waist height. All this at approx 6 meters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By patrick carr
Hi Chris
For further information, go to Archives,'Gates on scaffold access points' posted by Andy Tetlow on Thurs 20 March 2008.
best regards
Paddy
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Antony McManus
A cultural thing......
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
Joe
Agre with you except to say the norm should always be stairs and ladders used by exception.
Whatever happemns I do think it time the HSE targetted these external ladders as potentially one of the most insecure access arrangement for any scaffold above two lifts.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By GFM
Yes,
I agree, I think that that Scaffolding Companies should be made aware of the potential danger and should, like the double gaurdrail have these items added as part of the remit
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Joe McCluskey
I have spocken to HSE inspectors on site about the ladder/stairs issue.
In general, They feel that ladders are fine on 2 storey houses but ladders must be provided on flats. They would prefer stairs on houses also however as long as its properly assessed ( with a WAH assessment etc) then they will be content.
Its back down to the old favourite " reasonable Practicability" and companies placing themselves at a financial disadvantage by fitting stairs all over the place if its not required by assessment
Joe
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
Joe
I think you meant stairs for flats, or should we strictly say appartments nowadays?
Any ladder traversing more than a single lift is however a poor choice IMHO.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Joe McCluskey
Robert
Oops my mistake - yes your right Stairs for flats
Joe
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
Joe
Appartments, dear boy, Appartments. What will the client say? :-)
Back on track though I do think the HSE are ducking out of this one as they know that ladder access is so often misused that one cannot really rely on operatives to use them properly in almost any external context.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By MickN
All,
I have worked with scaffolding on many jobs and as far as I'm aware there's nothing wrong with an external scaffold. Obviously it is safer to have it internally and safer still to have a stairwell but we live in a world where 'cheaper' wins contracts. Why then are we surprised? Management don't see the connection between saving £400 and increased risk. External ladders are an industry standard, there is nothing illegal about them, why shouldn't management save money? It's a rhetorical question, of course.
I'm all for doing it the safer way but then I've never really had an issue with the external scaffold ladder access. Many pharmaceutical plants will have access ladders to tanks that are much longer although I will conceded that these are used less often. Where are the stats to show me/mgt. that people habitually fall from these type of access ladders?
Mick
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Paul Bourne
Hi Chris,
As a scaffolder of 27 years I can see your concerns regarding the opening in the edge protection at the top of ladders.
The practice of tying ladders while they are leaning against the ledger is unacceptable on any of my jobs, a tube fixed to both ledgers at right angles to the scaffold is more acceptable, main reason being that you step on and off sideways rather than stepping on backwards, this is then backed up with a spring loaded ladder gate which only opens one way, these are only about £40/£50 each.
There is a hierarchy of access to scaffolding, they are as follows:
stair access
ladder tower with single-lift ladders
ladder tower with multi-lift ladders
internal single-lift ladders
internal multi-lift ladders
external pole ladder
I read that the cost of the stairs can be expensive for smaller firms so the ladder tower might be a better alternative for short term work, but on a few of our larger jobs stairs have been requested, so stairs they get.
hope that helps
Paul
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
Paul
Could not agree more - one might debate the heirarchy a little but would that everybody had this approach in their selection. I would only add the need for progressively more detailed RAs as the heirarchy is descended.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.