[jonah]

Am relying on you to help me out with wfp mate  

[L.J.Thorpe]

Am relying on you to help me out with wfp mate 

who me
i am an amachure
mr sol knows all
and he dont use barrels or a car
so he MUST know all

[NWH]

4 jobs that i do have banned me from using ladders on there property,it will come slowly but surely it will come.Ok you use ladders on your 2 up and 2 downs day in day out but that kind of work dosen`t earn you top dollar,

[poleman]

THERE IS NO LAW!!!

Just to clear this matter up!

Working at Height regulations, was a european directive and each member state had to implement this into law, this directive was layed before the house of Commons and was ratified into UK law on April 2005   

[mr D]

yes its law you have to abide by the wahr but the wahr dont say you cant use ladders!

[groundhog]

I'm wfp, but no one is going to tell me how to go about my business!! If I wanted to use a ladder then I would!!!!!!!!!!! 

[mr D]

that is JUST the point. the the powers that be can not stop an indervidual using a ladder. if they did thousands of people would lose there jobs including the ladder manafactures. it would be against our citerzanz rites to be told we can climb a ladder.

[TennetClean]

Wow, i get in from a night out and your still arguing about me in my absence

To put the record straight: this is not a wind up, I am deadly serious I will be reporting ladder users.  Maybe a test case is just what we need in order to clear things up.  I wonder who the lucky one will be.

If that's the case I'm ruling out other safer alternatives because:-

I don't like water fed pole systems
I'm crap with a telescopic pole and squeegee

So ladders will have to do then.  Completely within the law.

Foxman, I'm glad you've dropped the "I'ma health and saftey officer" baloney, especially in view of the less than perfect safety record of your company.

You cant just rule out alternatives for no good reason.  The regulations say

  (2) Every employer shall ensure that work is not carried out at height where it is reasonably practicable to carry out the work safely otherwise than at height.

Just because you dont "like" waterfed poles does not make them impractical.  Say it went to court, how could you argue that wfp is not practical when hundreds of people use em for this sort of work every day.  You couldnt.  I dont "like" having to wear a seatbelt.  I still have to.

Also, squeaky clean, not owning a WFP system does not make them impractical either.  That is effectively saying that you did not have the equipment needed to work legally. LOL how far will you get with that!

Foxman, the best thing to do is to use a mewp dont you think?  Oh better not do that after the prohibition order eh?  Once again, do you suppose you are the best person to be advising on H&S after those 5 breaches?

It IS wrong to say that ladders are banned, they are not.  The way I understand it YOU CAN use ladders for windows that you wouldnt be able to do with WFP.  Fine, I'm happy for ladder monkeys to use them for NON WFPable windows (like over a garage roof I suppose) for the other 99% of windows that they clean, I will have my camera at the ready

Why does everyone keep saying its a wind up, LOL I really am gonna do it.  I may even post the pics up here to show you.  Seriously, if you use ladders near coventry, you should be worried.

[Wayne Thomas]

cathrin jenkins. mmmmmm

class and arse. 

I'd have to agree. I'd give her 1, (out of 1 for musical talent).

[TennetClean]

that is JUST the point. the the powers that be can not stop an indervidual using a ladder. if they did thousands of people would lose there jobs including the ladder manafactures. it would be against our citerzanz rites to be told we can climb a ladder.

Sorry to be contrary mate but er, yes they can, and yes they have.

Since when has it been a citizen's "right" to climb a ladder? LOL it aint.

if they did thousands of people would lose there jobs including the ladder manafactures.

So, you think that its ok to put peoples safety at risk to keep ladder manufacturers in business.  No offens mate but somehow I dont think that is a top priority of the Health and Safety bods.  Saving lives might rank a little bit higher.

FAO MATT: (The matt who calls me tuppence clean)
Only just seen your email matey, its sorted!

[mr D]

good luck in the dole que son when they ban wfp's due to exess water use. xx

[Wayne Thomas]

good luck in the dole que son when they ban wfp's due to exess water use. xx

I think it will be quite interesting if that happens and I for one would like to see that one argue'd in court on Health & Safety Issues. I'm sure the media would love it too.

[TennetClean]

I think you are just having a laugh, but just in case your not.
If you have an alternative method, to clarify a bit more you don’t have to run off and buy a WFP system. The law has not single out window cleaners because they use ladders.

Window cleaners DO have a alternative method.  They have WFP, and the HSE even says so on the table here: www.hse.gov.uk/falls/window.htm

This differs from roofers and the like because they DON't have an alternative method to work at height.

Just because you dont happen to own a pole system, it doesnt mean that the windows you clean cant be done with one.  In other words, just because your poor, it dont mean the law doesnt apply.  It does.

(ergo my advice that caused so much argument: "if you cant afford a pole system, dont become a window cleaner.")

[TennetClean]

No, you’re wrong. I have recently done the iosh course. The use of ladders was covered and they are legal. (For Now)

Any window cleaner who doesn’t have (or want) a WFP system. Will not have an alternative way to clean at that given time.

You are confused, with there being an alternative and having an alternative.

Ewan

Sorry dont agree.  I dont see how not being able to spend the necessary money makes you immune to the law.

Its like saying, "I want to be a motorcycle courier but I cant afford a crash helmet."  Then expecting the plods to say "oh its ok then".  The law is the law, it dont matter what your current financial circumstances are.

ESPECIALLY as wfp allows you to earn more money, and everyone knows that.  You could not argue that using WFP was uneconomical.

AND dont forget this: I wont just be reporting for not having a WFP, my eagle eyes will be on the lookout for ladder clamps too.  If your using ladders without stabilizers of some sort or someone footing them, that is YET ANOTHER breach.

How does that song go... "If the left one doesnt get you, then the right one will"

I defy anyone to argue that point.  How many ladder boys use ladder clamps at every window?  I dont think i've ever seen any window cleaner use them cos they are a pain in the neck to set up at every window.  Time is money.

I'm fired up for this now, cant wait till monday.  Hope I see someone

[TennetClean]

LOL saying "You Lose" dont make you right matey.

In order to decide what you intend to do about a risk, you need to do a risk assessment.  The risk assessment will be the basis for the precautions you take.  The HSE Leaflet "Five steps to risk assessment says:

"The law requires you to do everything ‘reasonably practicable’ to protect people from
harm. You can work this out for yourself, but the easiest way is to compare what
you are doing with good practice."

Note that it does NOT say, "choose whatever happens to be available to you at the time"  If you did that you would not be planning the work at height properly.

Organisation and planning
     4.  - (1) Every employer shall ensure that work at height is -

      (a) properly planned;

If the HSE investigated, what would they find to be current "GOOD PRACTICE" in window cleaning?  They would of course say waterfed pole.  Therefore they would say that a risk assessment would have shown that the best method to employ is WFP.

Therefore, "sorry mr ladder man, you should have got a WFP system as that is current good practice" is what the result would be.

You lose. I win (the contract)

Also, the economics of WFP are a consideration.  If someone came up with a device that did away with the need to work at height but it cost £5 million quid, or made the job take 5x longer, then that would not be considered reasonably practical.  The point i am making is that WFP makes the job MORE profitable, therefore "I didnt use WFP cos i cant afford one" would never stand up in court.

[TennetClean]

I think you are misunderstanding me (and maybe vice versa)

You seem to be saying that saying "I dont have a pole system available to me" is a good enough reason to rule out this alternative to work at height.

What I'm saying is, a risk assessment is not restricted to what methods happen to be available to you at the time. It has to include other reasonable possibilities too, hence the question "what is good practice".

In other words, if you did a risk assessment, you would have to ask yourself "what is accepted good practice for this task" as well as "what is reasonably practical" and if you did that you cant get away from WFP, even if you dont have one it will still be viewed as good practice.

[Moderator David@stives]

Tennent

Ladders are used at Sandringham
Wfp is not allowed.

Do you think they would allow ladders if they were banned ?

[Sir Squeaky]

I'm fired up for this now, cant wait till monday.  Hope I see someone

I wouldn't if I were you.

I will see to it that you were the grass.

[Derek_Walker]

If anyone wants to be extremely illegal, why not do what I saw a window cleaner doing the other day.
Using a water fed pole at the top of a ladder. So not only was he wasting the natural resources ie water, but he was also balanced on top of an unfooted ladder.

[Paul Coleman]

I think most of it hinges around the term "reasonably practical".  That could be stretched to mean a lot of things.
Maybe it could be reasonably practical if investing in new equipment would cause adversity with cashflow.
Maybe if windows were oxidising it could be argued that working at height is needed.
Maybe it would be enough just for a customer to dislike WFP so you would need to work at height in order to keep your business.

The problem with wishy washy terms like "reasonably practical" is that no-one can be certain until it's tested in a courtroom.