[windows_chepstow]

Foreword by Ian_Giles (Moderator) -   If I've done this correctly I will have merged a posting Tosh (Windows_chepstow) started concerning Ladder use under the newly revised Health & Safety regulations.
The main debate was between Tosh and Philip Hanson.

I have deleted all other replies (including my own) from the posting as I believe that between them they covered many salient points, including links to Government Health & Safety documents to back up their arguments.

I further believe that all window cleaners on the forum should read this debate, therefore I am also making it a locked as well as a sticky post.

My apologies to all of those who have had their posts removed, but the original post by Tosh had slipped back several pages.

For those that feel the need to offer comment on this topic I'm afraid you will have to start a fresh thread, otherwise this one will only become very cluttered.

So, read on and take in a well thought out and well written debate about something that concerns us all....

Regards,

Ian

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tosh's work as follows:  (OI, where's the picture of me and my dog?)

There's been many posts regarding the use of ladders and their legality recently.  But I would like to point out that using ladders is NOT illegal and that they are considered safe if used properly and with some common sense.

Firstly, is using a ladder risky?  HSE information sheet MISC613 (page 3) says that a ladder used correctly (it gave a long example – but I've shortened it to 'correctly'),

'will often be sufficiently safe without further securing.'

So, I deduce from that paragraph that a ladder, used correctly is sufficiently safe. In other words not risky.

Let's continue with the an extract from the 'new regs' covering ladders…

SCHEDULE 6
Regulation 8(e)

REQUIREMENTS FOR LADDERS


     1. Every employer shall ensure that a ladder is used for work at height only if a risk assessment under regulation 3 of the Management Regulations has demonstrated that the use of more suitable work equipment is not justified because of the low risk and -
(a) the short duration of use; or

(b) existing features on site which he cannot alter.

Blah, blah, blah, blah

So, from the above short paragraph, we can interpret this in more than one way. 

But the way I choose to interpret it is that ladders used correctly are 'sufficiently safe' (backed up by MISC613) and because it doesn't take long to clean each window (short duration of use); then LADDERS ARE JUSTIFIED FOR OUR WORK.

Disclaimer:  I am a Geordie and no Health and Safety Guru.  Use ladders at your own risk.  But they are NOT, repeat NOT illegal and you can still fully comply with current H & S regulations by using them.

If anyone disagrees, please do so in a logical manner, with references to back up your statements as I have.  Thanks.  I look forward to the debate.

References:

http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/si/si2005/20050735.htm (The regulations)

http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg401.pdf (A 'brief' guide to the new regulations)

http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/misc613.pdf (A MUST for all window cleaner's to read – it is purely about window cleaning and the use of ladders).

[Philip Hanson]

Its great to see window cleaners taking these regs seriously!

But the way I choose to interpret it is that ladders used correctly are 'sufficiently safe' (backed up by MISC613) and because it doesn't take long to clean each window (short duration of use); then LADDERS ARE JUSTIFIED FOR OUR WORK

Not correct I'm afraid.  MISC613 along with all other existing work at height regulations are completely rescinded by the new regulations.  Notice that MISC613 refers to The
Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 but Schedule 8 (Revocation of instruments) of the 2005 Regs specifically revokes that work at height provision.

Ladders can be used for window cleaning, but:
Sched 6 (2) of the new regs says (and the self employed are included here)
"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."

The real question then is, is it possible and "reasonably practicable"  to clean windows safely by not working at height?  If the answer is "YES" then that method must be used, otherwise you are in breach of the regulations.

Really then it all comes down to what is judged to be "reasonably practicable".  Do the HSE believe that there is a reasonably practicable method to clean windows other than working at height?

Page 68, paragraph 33 of the original guidance document provides us an insight as to what they might consider to be reasonably practicable:
"pole-cleaning systems may be used for cleaning windows so that the work can be carried out from the ground"
[Read the original document HERE]

Windows Chepstow Said:

But they are NOT, repeat NOT illegal and you can still fully comply with current H & S regulations by using them

This is only true if you can demonstrate that a safer system of work was not reasonably practicable.

For example, if you are doing work on a builders clean, WFP isn't usually any good to get cement off, so work at height could be justified.  But normal houses?  People clean normal houses with WFP all the time, it would be very difficult to argue that it wasn't practical.

If you employ someone and they fall off their ladders, injure their spine and never walk again, they will, understandably, sue you.

In the investigation that follows, if it's found that the work you were doing from ladders could have been done with a pole system, then you will have been found to be acting illegally, and will be criminally negligent.

Even if no accident occurs, if an HSE inspector decides to examine you working (even without you knowing about it) and sees you working at height where a different method is practical (eg WFP) then you will be breaking the regulations and will be served a prohibition notice.

Not only that, but aside WFP the HSE is fast cottoning on to the fact that there are many tools (ie the "BackFlip") that allow window cleaning to be done from the ground with an extension pole, and may also consider these a practical alternative.


All in all, we can argue about what's practical till the cows come home.  The fact is that window cleaners are using WFP on houses and commercial work all the time, and it is only going to get more difficult to justify work at height as a result.

EVEN IF WE DO USE A LADDER and there are times when it will be justified, above 2 metres (about head-height) and it has to be secured by:

(a) securing the stiles at or near their upper or lower ends;

(b) an effective anti-slip or other effective stability device; or

(c) any other arrangement of equivalent effectivenes

So you've got to take measures, ie using a stability device(eg Rojak Stopper) on every occasion, no matter what.  Schedule 6.5 makes this clear.

-Philip

[windows_chepstow]

Philip,

Good post.  I'll need some time to peruse it properly and I've currently been detailed to clean the kitchen by the 'Long-haired Sergeant Major'.

To everone else who reads this; I'm not arguing that ladders are safe; I'm saying they're legal to routinely work from to clean windows, however, after reading Philips excellently thought out post, I must admit I'm having second thoughts.

--------------------------------------------------------

My initial feelings are that

MISC613 along with all other existing work at height regulations are completely rescinded by the new regulations.

Is not correct.  MISC613 was wrote before the EU regulation came into force but was known about.  MISC613 refers to the 1992 Workplace (H & S Welfare) regulations only once on the first page and does not say that it's the authoritive document MISC613 is based on.

It also says 'the recent Eurpean Directive on work at height will further 'tighten the law' and the Work at Height Regulation 2005 only rescinds the 1992 regulation.

In essence, I am unsure if MISC613 can be consigned to the bin.

Also:

Really then it all comes down to what is judged to be "reasonably practicable".  Do the HSE believe that there is a reasonably practicable method to clean windows other than working at height?

Page 68, paragraph 33 of the original guidance document provides us an insight as to what they might consider to be reasonably practicable:
"pole-cleaning systems may be used for cleaning windows so that the work can be carried out from the ground"
[Read the original document HERE]

Philip, that document you refer to is only the Consultative Document and holds no weight in law.  The link to the document I provided is The Law, and it seems strange that no mention of alternative ways of cleaning windows using a water fed pole is mentioned.  It seems the consultative document has been watered down ('scuse the pun).

And lastly (before Wor Lass beats me for not doing the dishes)...

EVEN IF WE DO USE A LADDER and there are times when it will be justified, above 2 metres (about head-height) and it has to be secured by:

(a) securing the stiles at or near their upper or lower ends;

(b) an effective anti-slip or other effective stability device; or

(c) any other arrangement of equivalent effectivenes.

So you've got to take measures, ie using a stability device(eg Rojak Stopper) on every occasion, no matter what.  Schedule 6.5 makes this clear

The first line of Regulation 8(e) Paragraph 5 reads:

A portable ladder shall be prevented from slipping during use by - [followed by Philips a, b, or, c

.

Sorry, Philip, but only YOU make this clear.  Schedule 6.5 says 'an effective anti-slip or other effective stability device'.  That could be the normal 'yellow feet' you get when you purchase your ladder.  I've used them thousands of times for two years without a fall, therefore they must be effective!  (I'm playing devils advocate here)  It gives no examples of 'Rojak ladder stopper' or any other device.  Therefore ribbed yellow feet is an effective stability device.

Last thoughts before I put my marigolds on:

You are correct when you say we can argue about what's 'practical' till the cows come home.

More clarification is required about what is an effective anti-slip device.

I'll have another look around the HSE website and see if I can contact someone for further clarification.

Also, (gosh, me asking this - I know I'm normally the worst offender) to keep this thread 'pure' REGARDING THE LEGALITY OF ROUTINELY USING LADDERS, and if other subjects spring to mind from it, such as insurance; or personal safety, could you start a new post.

Cheers.

[windows_chepstow]

(b) an effective anti-slip or other effective stability device; or

(Dishes done!)  Philip,

I've had a look about for the defination of a Ladder Stability Device.  You won't find one.  There is HS fact sheet here:

http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrpdf/rr205.pdf

and on page 24 it says:

There is a very small amount of research relating ladder stability devices, and even less to ladder footing. This is curious given the apparent capacity for benefit these interventions may have on ladder use and accidents. It is also the case that the citing of these techniques in relevant legislation and guidance would normally be evidence based.

This does not appear to apply in this instance.

I thought it was strange that my Rojak doesn't have a BS or EN test number.  No-one really knows how safe LSDs are.

Before anyone jumps in, I know a University has tested the Rojak, but how accurate was the testing?  Is it government approved?

How can they legislate with words like 'an effective anti-slip or other effective stability device' when no-one knows what one of these is?

And as you say, what's practical?

After a brief look at the 168 (or so) pages from the consultation document that you posted to the 20 pages of what is the definitive document, the regulations seem to have more holes in them than my underpants.

If the interpretation of the regulation is, "Ladders should only be used as a last resort; with ladder stabiliation devices", then we'd understand perfectly.  Why didn't they just say that?

But the rules don't say this.  Effectively they say you can use ladders if it is:

the regs:

...demonstrated that the use of more suitable work equipment is not justified because of the low risk and -
     
     (a) the short duration of use; ... blah blah

So for the purposes of window cleaning, when the average upstairs residential window takes no more than a few minutes; ladders routinely used DO comply with the new legislation.
... I think!
-------------------------------
PM to Philip.

I'm not arguing with you.  You clearly know far more than me when it comes to this sort of stuff.  However I spent 17 years in the army and during my latter years it was a regular occurance for me to read, understand and apply regulations.  Often, the best way was debate; just like this. 

[Philip Hanson]

I have to say that I am very pleased to see the work at height regs being discussed in a pro-active way.  Having spoken to a number of window cleaners in the last few months who don't seem to care at all about the regs, its really refreshing to see that there are window cleaners who are interested to know what they need to do to comply.

I agree tosh that debate is very healthy, and I respect your understanding of these regs.

that document you refer to is only the Consultative Document and holds no weight in law

Yes, this ConDoc contains draft guidance notes to the draft regulations.  Though the HSE have released the Final regulations, it has not yet released the final guidance notes, so for the moment its all we have to go on.  However, as the parts of the regs to which those guidance notes refer have not changed from the draft to the final status, I think its fair to say that the guidance is accurate.

Also, as the crux of the matter is what the HSE would consider "reasonably practical", and the point I was making was that the HSE's own draft guidance mentions using pole systems, and hence it would be a fair to say that they would expect them to be used where they are practical.

The A,B and C I spoke of for ladder stability are not mine, they are in the actual final regulations as linked to by your good self.

But you raised a very good question regarding stability devices.  Are the yellow rubber feet considered to be stability devices?  Again, the only thing we really have to go on for the moment is the draft guidance, so what does it say about these?  The guidance note which refers to these devices is note 121

Draft Guidance 121, page 92:
"It is also important that not only is the ladder
standing on a firm level surface, but also that the rungs
remain horizontal whilst in use. There are a number of
devices that now help solve this problem allowing for
safer working on uneven ground or sloping surfaces.
However they should be carefully selected and used as
directed by the manufacturer."

Of course, rubber feet will not keep the ladder straight on uneven ground, a leveller is needed for that.  I would argue that rubber feet are not a 'device', but part of the ladder itself.  This is bourne out by the fact that the guidance goes on to talk about workers having to "purchase" ladder stability devices as a result of the new regs, which I do not think would be necessary if we were talking about rubber feet.

Misc613
---------
Has been the general guidance for window cleaning for some time, and is basically a helpful document.  But it contains things which are now obsolete, For example:
"On every job, ladders should be secured as far as site
conditions permit." is no longer true, as the 2005 regs require securing in all circumstances.  So, though it is helpful, I would not rely on it, as some of the recommendations now contravene the current law.

It also says 'the recent Eurpean Directive on work at height will further 'tighten the law'  and the Work at Height Regulation 2005 only rescinds the 1992 regulation

The 2005 regs revoke a vast amount of previous legislation, and indeed it is my opinion that the HSE wanted to bring together all work at height legislation together in one place: "The proposed WAHR will consolidate all existing requirements into one place, and make them more easily understandable" says the intro to the ConDoc on page 8.

Again, this is good debate, and is very positive.  I respect Tosh's position, and I genuinely think that discussion such as this will help us to bring our industry forward.  The TWAH regs 2005 are the biggest piece of legislation affecting our industry for many decades. 

PS. Note about work duration.

I spoke with a member of the HSE work at height team in London recently, and this "short duration" is meant from the standpoint of a worker who would not normally work at height (for example, a shopkeeper who goes out and cleans his own windows every 6 months) not a tradesman whose job routinely involves work at height, like a window cleaner or painter.  This is not short duration, because its done whenever the worker is working.

-Phil

[windows_chepstow]

Philip,

I have to say that I am very pleased to see the work at height regs being discussed in a pro-active way. 

Thanks, I'm cagey because I know I have a reputation of being argumentative; although I dispute that!

I would argue that rubber feet are not a 'device', but part of the ladder itself.  This is bourne out by the fact that the guidance goes on to talk about workers having to "purchase" ladder stability devices as a result of the new regs...

Good point.  I've read that document too.

...the 2005 regs require securing in all circumstances.

I don't agree with you there.  The list was given as a, b, or c, indicating at least one of the criteria should be followed.  So 'b' 'effective anti-slip or other effective stability device' should be okay.  (However, it appears to be badly written.  It could read that 'a' and 'b' should always be applied at the same time, with 'c' as a woolly alternative.)

PS. Note about work duration.

I spoke with a member of the HSE work at height team in London recently....

This is not clear in the regulations.  It says 'short duration'.  Literally, this means for a short time; obviously.  Regulation should be written in such a manner that we don't all have to speak to some expert from the HSE team to understand them.

I've not read the guidance notes in the document you provided, but I will.  Also, do you know when the 'Final Guidance Notes' will be published?

I've the brief guide 2005 and I will concede it says its overiding principle that 'You must do all that is reasonably practicable to prevent anyone falling'.

So would giving an employee (I only have Wor Lass and she says I'm not her employer) a Rojak Ladder Stopper and all the necessary training and supervision protect you in court if he/she had a fall?

I doubt it.  But you'd have a valid argument because the regulation is open to interpretation.

The bottom line is, I'm guessing, is that ladders aren't illegal to use if used with a ladder stabilising device (they may also have to be secured - I'm not sure).  However, if you have an employee who falls and takes you to court.  You're in cack-creek without a paddle.

[Philip Hanson]

I think that with the WAHR, we're in danger of getting bogged down with ladder stuff, when really the important part for window cleaners is to with alternatives to work at height.

For the moment, lets disregard special circumstances like builders cleans and access over a flat roof.

For normal, everyday window cleaning of normal houses, is it reasonably practicable to use a water-fed pole system?

Though I hate to bang on about it, the simple answer for the vast majority of situations is YES.  I moved my entire residential window cleaning round from ladders to poles in the space of 6 weeks, and not only did I find it "reasonably practicable" to do so, I found it was far better than using ladders.  And I know I'm not alone in this.

I could access more windows at greater heights, and could do the work at a faster rate.  For me, and arguably for almost every normal window cleaner, this was reasonably practicable.

The HSE knows this, and my guess (and it is only my opinion) is that there is every reason for them to expect pole systems to be used for the vast majority of normal window cleaning work, with ladders only used in special circumstances (like builders cleans)

When discussing normal window cleaning work, I've yet to hear a good reason not to use a pole system that actually turns out to be valid in practice.  Really, this is what it all boils down to as far as the TWAH regs go.

Even without the regs, the fact is, window cleaning is going the way of the water-fed pole for economic as well as safety reasons, and in 5 years time, we'll all wonder why it took so long!

-Philip

[windows_chepstow]

Interesting this topic.

We all make individual assesments of risk and what is reasonably practical.

Thanks Bear and I agree with you; we do make our own individual assesment.

But when making any decision, it's always best to try to gather as much information as possible; then make your decision based on that information.

I suppose that's one of good points about this forum.  If you don't know about a particular given subject; there'll always be plenty here that do.

When I first read the regulations on Sunday I thought for sure that ladders weren't 'that bad' and as sole traders you could use them like we always have done.

But, as Philip's articulate posts pointed out, I'm wrong.  I think!

Can anyone else add their point of view regarding the regulations?  Preferably those that've read them.

[windows_chepstow]

HSE aren't stupid; they know window cleaners will use ladders.  All you have to do is drive round a few estates and you'll see a window cleaner up a ladder where a WFP would do the job.

But, they see themselves (quite rightly) as life savers.  All my family come from a history of heavy engineering (ship building) or mining.  Without a doubt thousands of lives have been saved due to good Health and Safety legislation.

I'd say the people who have to worry are those who employ others and 'tool' them with ladders as their only option.

My opinion is that people like myself who are sole traders or partnerships and use ladders needn't worry about HSE inspectors.  I've read recently that there's only around 600 of them for the whole of the UK and they've got better things to be doing than checking up on 'Micky Mouse Tosh and his ABC Window Cleaning'.

But in the long term, I'd like to legitimately employ others; therefore a thorough knowledge of the regulations is a must and where there is a grey area, then you must err on the side of safety.

It seems the only way you can do it is to provide alternative means of access; other than ladders; and keep them as a last resort.

Seems fair 'nuff to me.

[DASERVICES]

  Just an idea for you Mods, could you not approach whoever is responsible
  for the WAHR in the HSE and ask if he/she would be willing to come onto
  this forum.

  Bit like some other forums where a celeb comes on for about an hour and
  answers the questions from the forum users.

  This I feel would be of benefit to everyone on this forum if they were invited
  on for an hour or so to answer and clarify the WAHR rules.

  Cheers

  Doug

[windows_chepstow]

Doug,

That's a good idea, but Mods carry no more weight than yourself; all they do is keep this forum in good nick.

But it was naughty of vt to ressurect an old thread.  In internet forum geek-terms, this is classed as bad manners.

What vt should have done is start a whole new thread; not hi-jack one over a year old; and then add his point of view.

Thread locked.