[seandyer2003]

Had an interesting chat with one of one of my customers today, he works for a company that fit and service lifts, they cant or (wont i think is more accurate) use ladders, and he was trying to insinuate that i shouldnt either but i tried to tell him the actual story but he wont have it! However he did say he isnt going to have any probs with me going wfp:) so hopefully he wont mind the price either:) But he said the cost to there business is an extra 25% a year just in access equipment!! mental!!

[Chris Galloway]

Put simply, the HAHR say that if a task can reasonably be done
without the need to work at height, then it must be done that way.
They also require that when ladders are used (and a risk assessment must
show that work at height was unavoidable) then those ladders must be
"secured".

It is now illegal to work at height where a risk assessment would show that
it is reasonably practical to complete the task from the safety of the
ground.

Obviously they can do their job without using ladders. So as they employ people they have to use non ladder methods.

Personally i dont think extra costs to keep employee's safe is mental.

With all this no win no fee poop going on, its the safe thing to do.

[Paul Coleman]

Put simply, the HAHR say that if a task can reasonably be done
without the need to work at height, then it must be done that way.
They also require that when ladders are used (and a risk assessment must
show that work at height was unavoidable) then those ladders must be
"secured".

It is now illegal to work at height where a risk assessment would show that
it is reasonably practical to complete the task from the safety of the
ground.

Obviously they can do their job without using ladders. So as they employ people they have to use non ladder methods.

Personally i dont think extra costs to keep employee's safe is mental.

With all this no win no fee poop going on, its the safe thing to do.

And for the Man U fans around here, if memory serves me right Rod Hull was trying to get a better reception to watch the 1999 European Cup Final.

[seandyer2003]

Put simply, the HAHR say that if a task can reasonably be done
without the need to work at height, then it must be done that way.
They also require that when ladders are used (and a risk assessment must
show that work at height was unavoidable) then those ladders must be
"secured".

It is now illegal to work at height where a risk assessment would show that
it is reasonably practical to complete the task from the safety of the
ground.

Obviously they can do their job without using ladders. So as they employ people they have to use non ladder methods.

Personally i dont think extra costs to keep employee's safe is mental.

With all this no win no fee poop going on, its the safe thing to do.

All i meant was the extra costs involved are really high, not that they should use ladders mr health and safety