Familiarity can weaken risk perception
A ladder is nearby. The access route is familiar. The task should take only a few minutes. In these circumstances, planning can feel disproportionate, especially when the job has been completed many times without incident.
However, previous success is not evidence that risks are adequately controlled. Conditions may change, equipment may deteriorate and informal workarounds may gradually become normal. The length of the task does not determine the severity of a fall.
The first question should be whether work at height is necessary. Could the task be completed from ground level, using different equipment or by changing the way materials are stored or maintained? Where work at height cannot be avoided, employers should prioritise measures that prevent a fall before relying on measures that only reduce its consequences.¹
Select controls that reflect the work
Employers must ensure that work at height is properly planned and organised, supported by a risk assessment, undertaken by competent people and completed using appropriate equipment. Equipment should also be inspected and maintained, and risks from fragile surfaces must be controlled.¹
Ladders may be suitable for some low-risk, short-duration work, but they should not become the automatic choice. Consider:
- the height, duration and complexity of the task
- access and ground conditions
- whether tools or materials must be carried
- whether weather or other changing conditions could affect safety
- whether guardrails, a working platform or other collective protection could offer greater security
- emergency and rescue arrangements
Fragile surfaces require particular care. Roof lights, corroded sheets and other surfaces may appear sound while being unable to support a person’s weight. Where they cannot be avoided, suitable platforms, coverings, guardrails or other protective measures may be required.¹
Plan the task before anyone goes up
A suitable risk assessment should identify the hazards, who may be affected and the controls required. Planning should also confirm who will supervise the work, whether those involved have the necessary information, instruction and training, and how changing conditions will be managed.
This process should reflect how the task is actually completed, not how it is assumed to happen. Speaking with the people who perform the work can reveal access problems, time pressures or workarounds that are easy to miss on paper.
Routine jobs deserve the same discipline. A five-minute task can still have lifelong consequences.