[ftp]

Thumbing through the glossy brochure and it says ' New European laws makes working at height illegal if there is a viable alternative'

Is that true? Seems a bit vague.

[Chris Cottrell]

OMG were have you been  :

pay attention in class boy !! 

[sparklebright]

Thumbing through the glossy brochure and it says ' New European laws makes working at height illegal if there is a viable alternative'

Is that true? Seems a bit vague.

I think the rules are that 'a ladder is a means of access and not a working platform.'
But I would say it's practically unenforceable. So I can't see them banning ladders on domestic work successfully. But for commercial work I would say it's wfp all the way

[Nathanael Jones]

Thumbing through the glossy brochure and it says ' New European laws makes working at height illegal if there is a viable alternative'

Is that true? Seems a bit vague.

Thats been in force since 2005 in the UK,.. 2006 in Ireland. I've the quote from the Irish regs (Along with the full document text) on my website, and have operated a "Ladder minimisation policy" since it's implications were pointed out to me.

[ftp]

It's the 'illegal' bit that concerns me. I have a gutter vacuum and a set of ladders - if i was to decide it wasn't worth the effort of wheeling out my vacuum system and generator to dig out five feet of guttering am i breaking the law by using my ladders?

[Nathanael Jones]

This is the text from the Iris 2006 regs:
Avoidance of risks from work at height.


98. Taking account of the general principles of prevention in Schedule 3 to the Act, an employer
shall—
(a) ensure that work is not carried out at height where it is reasonably practicable to carry out the work safely and without risk to health otherwise than at height,
(b) without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (a), ensure that work is not carried
out at height unless it is reasonably practicable to do so safely and without risk to
health,
(c) where, having regard to paragraphs (a) and (b), it is necessary to carry out work at
height, take suitable and sufficient measures to prevent an employee falling a
distance liable to cause personal injury, including—
(i) ensuring that the work is carried out—
(I) from an existing place of work, or
(II) in the case of obtaining access or egress, by using an existing means of
access or egress,
in compliance with this Part, where it is practicable to do so safely and under
appropriate ergonomic conditions, and
(ii) where it is not practicable for the work to be carried out in accordance with
subparagraph (i), ensuring that suitable and sufficient work equipment, in
compliance with Regulation 100, is provided to prevent a fall occurring,
(d) where the measures taken under paragraph (c) do not eliminate the risk of a fall
occurring—
(i) provide sufficient work equipment, in compliance with Regulation 100, to
minimise the distance of a potential fall and the risk of personal injury, and
(ii) without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (c), provide such additional
training and instruction or take other additional suitable and sufficient
measures to prevent, so far as is practicable, any employee falling a distance
liable to cause personal injury.

[ftp]

Too much for me  so, if i leave my vac at home and use my ladders i'm not breaking the law because i haven't got an alternative method?

[Captain Scarlet]

I dont even have a ladder rack!!

[AuRavelling79]

I dont even have a ladder rack!!

Nor have I - perhaps we need to go to the gym!

[seandyer2003]

Probably

Hehe, there is no right or wrong answer, go back about a year on the posts on here and everyone was arguing the "are ladders illegal" point....

Bottom line is you can still use them with the right RA and MS etc... I have quoted builders cleans where they said it was fine But i chose not too, and so my quote was too expensive as i would of used cherry picker, but it begs how enforceable or even how substantial the WAHD is as it seems domestics still use them , most other trades that are users of ladder - roofers, decorators etc all still use them so it seems theres no real progress!!

[Tosh]

The principle behind the rules are; if it's reasonably practical to perform a task from the ground; then that's the way it should be done.

If it's not reasonably practical to be done from the ground, then you can work at height.

Therefore ladders can be used, for short duration, but there's caveats on how they're used.

Read the rules!

[AuRavelling79]

The principle behind the rules are; if it's reasonably practical to perform a task from the ground; then that's the way it should be done.

If it's not reasonably practical to be done from the ground, then you can work at height.

Therefore ladders can be used, for short duration, but there's caveats on how they're used.

Read the rules!

Ionics will have checked whether their wording is correct and I believe it is. It's the "viable alternative" which is open to interpretation.

Also when you use a ladder and there is an injury/damages claim is when clever insurance co. lawyer says you should not have used a ladder so we aren't paying...

[seandyer2003]

The principle behind the rules are; if it's reasonably practical to perform a task from the ground; then that's the way it should be done.

If it's not reasonably practical to be done from the ground, then you can work at height.

Therefore ladders can be used, for short duration, but there's caveats on how they're used.

Read the rules!

Ionics will have checked whether their wording is correct and I believe it is. It's the "viable alternative" which is open to interpretation.

Also when you use a ladder and there is an injury/damages claim is when clever insurance co. lawyer says you should not have used a ladder so we aren't paying...

Thats the thing, it can be argued either way but its always gonna go against you if something happens and you were using ladders as malc says a lawyer will leave you without a leg to stand on (or ladder ) thats why i wont quote a job using them on commercial stuff

[matt]

Thumbing through the glossy brochure and it says ' New European laws makes working at height illegal if there is a viable alternative'

Is that true? Seems a bit vague.

even ironics are using that " illegal " line  classic

[dd]

Could a customer be liable for a resulting injury if they employ you to clean their windows, knowing that you use a ladder when wfp is a viable alternative? (Thinking more of sole trader who is self-employed)

[telboy]

This is the text from the Iris 2006 regs:
Avoidance of risks from work at height.


98. Taking account of the general principles of prevention in Schedule 3 to the Act, an employer
shall—
(a) ensure that work is not carried out at height where it is reasonably practicable to carry out the work safely and without risk to health otherwise than at height,
(b) without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (a), ensure that work is not carried
out at height unless it is reasonably practicable to do so safely and without risk to
health,
(c) where, having regard to paragraphs (a) and (b), it is necessary to carry out work at
height, take suitable and sufficient measures to prevent an employee falling a
distance liable to cause personal injury, including—
(i) ensuring that the work is carried out—
(I) from an existing place of work, or
(II) in the case of obtaining access or egress, by using an existing means of
access or egress,
in compliance with this Part, where it is practicable to do so safely and under
appropriate ergonomic conditions, and
(ii) where it is not practicable for the work to be carried out in accordance with
subparagraph (i), ensuring that suitable and sufficient work equipment, in
compliance with Regulation 100, is provided to prevent a fall occurring,
(d) where the measures taken under paragraph (c) do not eliminate the risk of a fall
occurring—
(i) provide sufficient work equipment, in compliance with Regulation 100, to
minimise the distance of a potential fall and the risk of personal injury, and
(ii) without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (c), provide such additional
training and instruction or take other additional suitable and sufficient
measures to prevent, so far as is practicable, any employee falling a distance
liable to cause personal injury.

It dont even mention ladders let alone whether you can use them or not :

[Mr H]

Could a customer be liable for a resulting injury if they employ you to clean their windows, knowing that you use a ladder when wfp is a viable alternative? (Thinking more of sole trader who is self-employed)

The customer would be liable if you broke health and safety regulations and got injured...i.e you stood on a sloping roof and fell off.... because they are responsable for makeing sure you follow the regulations.......

The thing with the law is the bit where it says "reasonably practicable "....
Is it "reasonably practicable " to spend 10-15minutes setting up a guuter vacuum to do a job that would only take 5mins using a ladder..?
You have to take other things in to account such as dangers and safety.
So if you do have an accident you can show that it WAS "reasonably practicable" to use ladders then you can......

Regards
Mr H

[AuRavelling79]

This is the text from the Iris 2006 regs:
Avoidance of risks from work at height.


98. Taking account of the general principles of prevention in Schedule 3 to the Act, an employer
shall—
(a) ensure that work is not carried out at height where it is reasonably practicable to carry out the work safely and without risk to health otherwise than at height,(b) without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (a), ensure that work is not carried
out at height unless it is reasonably practicable to do so safely and without risk to
health,
(c) ...

It dont even mention ladders let alone whether you can use them or not :

That para highlighted in red is the catch-all paragraph it says you should not work at height where it is practical to not do so.... it doesn't mention ladders, pogo-sticks, harnesses or jet-packs because it implies you don't work at height if at all possible.

Ergo, wfp makes it practical to not work at height in most cases.

The rest of the regs are only applicable if it is not practical to avoid working at height.