
 
        
         
		FOCUS      HEALTH & SAFETY 
 SPEED TEST 
 Facilities Managers are dealing  
 with myriad pressures in their  
 roles - not least the pressure to do  
 more, with less. The di  iculty arises  
 however when cost-cutting becomes  
 a by-word for poor standards. When  
 it comes to safety any slippage in  
 standards presents a real risk that  
 real victims may su  er life-changing  
 injuries or even death.   
 Unfortunately, many professionals  
 working in the Working at Height  
 industry have noted a worrying trend  
 that is bringing this very dilemma to  
 the fore; ‘drive-by’ compliance testing  
 of essential Work at Height equipment  
 and PPE. That is, the independent  
 testing of essential safety equipment  
 being completed in eye-watering  
 record time... 
 Before we get into what that means  
 in practice, let’s step back and remind  
 ourselves why Work at Height is still  
 such a prominent issue for facilities  
 professionals.  
 In July the HSE published its annual  
 workplace fatality figures showing  
 that deaths due to falls from height  
 have risen 11 per cent in the last five  
 years, 14 per cent from last year. In  
 2018/19, 40 fatal injuries to workers  
 were due to falls from a height. 
 Falls from height continue to be the  
 biggest workplace killer. What these  
 figures mean is 40 people dead, 40  
 families grieving and 40 organisations  
 dealing with the potentially  
 devastating personal and professional  
 consequences of losing a colleague in  
 circumstances that were more than  
 likely, preventable.  
 Of course, there is legislation in  
 place to prevent such incidents when  
 Working at Height, the basics of which  
 cover: 
 FALL PROTECTION SYSTEMS  
 Current Health and Safety legislations  
 dictate that Fall Protection systems  
 should be in place when employees or  
 contractors carry out work at height  
 (two metres or higher).  
 46    NOVEMBER 2019 
 SAFE EQUIPMENT  
 Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)  
 is a vital part of protecting against  
 the risks posed whilst Working at  
 Height. This includes items such  
 as safety harnesses, lanyards and  
 karabiners – legally required when  
 using some Personal Fall Protection  
 Systems, (EN365 – Personal Protective  
 Equipment against falls from height). 
 Let’s not forget, as an employer it is  
 your duty to ensure that employees  
 are fully trained when it comes to  
 selecting the correct PPE for the job,  
 (Health and Safety at Work Act and  
 Work At Height Regulations).  
 INSPECTION, TESTING AND  
 COMPLIANCE  
 The importance of regular assessment  
 and testing of equipment should  
 never be underestimated. It can be  
 easy to be enthusiastic about new  
 equipment and there may be initial  
 well-meaning intentions to ensure it is  
 kept in pristine condition. Of course,  
 reality then takes over and equipment  
 can be misused, pushed to its limits or  
 just forgotten about.  
 PUWER (Provision and Use of Work  
 Equipment Regulations 1998) state  
 that regular maintenance and testing  
 of Work at Height equipment and PPE  
 is required to remain compliant.  
 If you have not followed PUWER  
 regulations the Health & Safety  
 Executive can issue an improvement  
 or prohibition notice. Failure to  
 visibility show tagged and compliant  
 systems could not only invalidate  
 your insurance but could also lead  
 to prosecution, should an employee,  
 contractor or trespasser su er injury. 
 The frequency of testing of Work at  
 Height equipment is not stipulated by  
 the regulations, instead leaving it to  
 the employer’s discretion. However,  
 in deciding the regularity of testing  
 it’s essential to assess the level of  
 risk to a user’s health and safety from  
 malfunction or failure. Considering  
 that falls from height are Britain’s  
 biggest workplace killer, the risk of  
 using faulty equipment when Working  
 at Height is considerable.  
 DRIVE-BY TESTING’S FALSE  
 ECONOMY  
 PUWER stipulates that testing of  
 equipment must be performed by a  
 ‘competent person’. For some less  
 complex equipment you may have  
 the necessary experience in-house  
 to perform the required checks - for  
 example, simple visual examination  
 of a hand tool. However, when it  
 comes to specialist equipment such  
 as Building Maintenance Units and  
 Abseil Rails, it’s good practice to hire  
 a third party to carry out a specialised  
 inspection. Not only does this ensure  
 you’ve met the ‘competent person’  
 threshold but it provides evidence of  
 objectivity and validity if there is ever  
 a related incident.   
 Unfortunately, when it comes to  
 third-party testing providers, not  
 all show the same level of care and  
 responsibility. Over the last year,  
 the Work at Height industry has  
 seen an upsurge in suppliers testing  
 Fall Protection and Façade Access  
 equipment at unrealistic speeds.  
 Quite simply, they are claiming to  
 have carried out fully compliant  
 testing in completely unachievable  
 timeframes.  
 For example, we were recently made  
 aware that a testing provider was  
 claiming to have completed tests on  
 95 Abseil Points and nine Safety Lines  
 in just 1 hour and 20 minutes. That  
 equates to approximately 45 seconds  
 per point or line. 
 The provider claimed that all 95  
 Abseil Points were tested to BS  
 7883:2005 and BS EN 795, each  
 with an individual load reading.  
 Realistically, it is completely infeasible  
 to expect a full and thorough test of  
 this scale to be completed in anything  
 less than a day. 
 Of course, in claiming to have  
 completed the testing in such a short  
 timescale meant that this supplier  
 provided the client with an incredibly  
 cheap service. However, it’s clear that  
 cheap testing doesn’t equate to good  
 value.   
 When falls from height kill more  
 workers than any other workplace  
 accident, this drive-by practice is  
 exposing clients and their personnel  
 who work at height to massive risk.  
 While facilities clients may take  
 comfort in the knowledge that they  
 have a certificate of conformity, it’s  
 not worth the paper it’s written on.  
 In the event of an incident, the  
 compliance testing provider and  
 client’s actions in accepting this level  
 of inspection would and should be  
 brought into question. In short, fast  
 and cheap testing is neither safe,  
 ethical or value for money for facilities  
 professionals. Scrimping on testing  
 of equipment might provide very  
 short-term relief on a bottom line but  
 will cost organisations dearly in the  
 long run.  
 Victims of ‘drive-by’ testing may be paying a heavy price when  
 Working at  Height  warns  Ken  Diable  Managing  Director at  
 Heightsafe Systems Ltd