Construction sites are by definition potentially hazardous environments.  Working at height, using power tools, grinders, saws of various description.  Quite often on small builder sites there is a small work force, often without a designated site manager.  Thats another issue.  Operatives often move between sites leaving other operatives lone working.  Is this acceptable? Can this be mitigated by risk assessment?  I'd be interested to hear from peers working in this industry.  My personal feeling is that there should not be any lone working.  I have considered training, experience and knowledge of individuals but feel that this is not a situation that can be mitigated by risk assessment.

Contractors I work for send one man initially to set up the site, collect keys, meet with Landlord, assess delivery procedures etc. and to force a second man to work with him doubles the cost to the company who is already submitting the lowest price as possible to win the contract.  He is there to accept initial deliveries.

During the projects there will be times when the PC will not have actual work to do but Subbys will be on site.  Our man stays there alone to meet with the subbys, Induct them, accept their RAMS and show them round the site he then goes into the site office to either do his paperwork or fall asleep, whatever he needs to do.  He will issue hot work permits as required.

End of the day he ensures the site is left safe, locks up and leaves.

He is a competent joiner so if there is joinery work to do he will work alone uless he needs a second man to assist. He can fit a kitchen on his own.  He is also a Jack of all trades, and will do small jobs alone.

He has a mobile phone to call for help if need be.  

Is this acceptable, it is for my contractors.

mholloway I don't think you work in construction where stuff gets done safely with controls in place but practical to enable the work to proceed.

All construction sites are not equal therefore the question of lone working is very site and task specific.

It is the fundamental flaw with generic RAMS submission which has resulted in the one size fits all OTT approach to site H&S adopted by the major contractors.

If there is nothing going on overhead why should the worker wear a hard hat?

If there are no traffic movements why should the worker be in Hi-Vis?

If they are not working over / near water why should the worker be in a life vest? (Yes I have read RAMS which stipulated this for a domestic refurbishment, and embarrased the contractor when he arrived without)

As to supervisors / managers unless they are also working the tools many tenders fail to make provision.

I am just looking for some advise surrongding this topic. As we all know tackling Lone Working can be very challenging. 

We are currently under way with introducing new Lone Worker devices to all Field Service Engineers with the plan to expand further once the training etc has all gone to plan. 

If anyone currently uses Lone worker devices what type of wearibility have you found to be the best? As we are finding this to be the most dofficult to overcome. As with our engineer working inside engines and small spaces straps such as watches, lanyards and belt clips have all fallen off and not stood the test. 

Overall i am looking to see if there is anything on the market i could bring to the table that i have missed?

Look forward to all your replies!

Kirsty 

Personally I think lone worker alarms are further example of inappropriate application of technology.

When they first appeared the worker tended to be relativley close to a source of monitoring and aid similar to the SOS talisman in sheltered accommodtaion.

Now companies issue devices to people who will be at the other end of some remote dirt track in the middle of a communication blackspot and assume they have done all that is practicable to protect the worker because they have an APP on their phone.

Telecoms providers do not advertise 100% coverage for a reason, it is a pity some APP & device suppliers are not as equally honest.

Mholloway

Sorry you  thought I was being unhelpful. Having spent years in H&S in I can be sure of 2 things-1) lone working poses a greater risk to employees and 2) nobody will ever get rid of it completely; the best we can do is manage it  to the best of out abilities. There is of course no one solution  to the issue as Roundtuit said it will be site and task  specific. In fact you can have arguments as what constitutes lone working. A single worker alone in the corner of a large site  with hundreds of people on it can be as alone as the guy fixing the telephone line  in the middle of a field.

Technology can provide a direction rather than an answer. As Brian  points out  issuing the device is only half the solution; it’s what happens then, that is the issue. Who goes to help the lone worker? Is it actually too late when the alarm goes off? Does it actually protect the worker or just take it easier to recover them after the accident?

There are few  simple answers in H&S and no oven ready ones.

And finally there was your comment “but feel that this is not a situation that can be mitigated by risk assessment.” As you were new to the forum, it made me wonder if you appreciated what risk assessment is for: Its what we do to find all of the answers but it’s not an answer in itself but  think you know that it but perhaps you have filled in too risk assessment forms  for the purpose creating the correct paper trail rather to enable people to make the right choices that makes you wonder about risk assessments.

Nothing that might enable a manager to avoid responsibility for them looking after their colleague surprises me.