369e3e6b

Unquestionable Anchors, Questionable?

PH449742 — Tue, 29 Apr 2025 11:14:12 GMT

Unquestionable Anchors, Questionable ?

We will all be familiar with the term "an unquestionable anchor" but do we all fully understand?

Solid anchor points are fundamental to safe working at height, You can h ave the best equipment on the market, but this will do you no good if it is ultimately attached to a loose rusty handrail or fall arrest post!

Load or Pull testing each and every potential anchor point is impractical, therefore the majority of decisions made about what is safe are based on experience and common sense.

What is meant by "unquestionable"? Who determines whether it is unquestionable and what does the law and association say?

Definition - Unquestionable: not able to be disputed or doubted

One of the first factors to be considered is the load that the anchor point is intended to take. Even one persons bodyweight can exert a wide range of forces depending on the intended use, equipment used and setup of the anchorage system.

During a site survey as a supervisor, this should be high on your list of things to look at. What do we have in the way of anchors? Have you properly assessed them? Can you observe where they are attached to the sub structure?

How and where we attach to the anchor can affect the strength. Tying to the base of the anchor will reduce the leverage on the anchor.

So what does IRATA say?

IRATA ICOP 2.7.9.2 "..... Anchors and anchorages "should" be unquestionably reliable."

IRATA states that the static strength of an anchor (with the exception of some deviation anchors) should be at least 15kN (1.5 tonne). They arrive at this figure by implementing a safety factor of 2.5. The maximum impact load on the user (force applied to the body) in the event of a fall should not exceed 6kN. ( IRATA ICOP 2.11.2.6)

As above, IRATA informs us that anchors should be of an adequate strength, bearing in mind the mass of the user including any equipment worn or carried (IRATA ICOP 2.7.9.5)

Ok so we have “unquestionably reliable” we have “15kN” and we have “ should be of an adequate strength” but as an IRATA Level 3 How do we know??

I believe the answer lies in a little document called the TACS or to give its full title “ TRAINING, ASSESSMENT AND CERTIFICATION SCHEME “ It states:

Rope access operations utilise a variety of anchors, from purpose-engineered steelwork and eye bolts to temporary ground anchors, weight-boxes and natural anchors such as trees. Rope access technicians with the responsibility for selecting anchors should ensure they are competent to do so. Further Training may be necessary. (IRATA TACS 6.4.2.1)

Both BS7985 and ISO 22846 part 2 reiterate the above. Anchors should: be unquestionably reliable ( ISO22846 - 7.7.3.5 )

...... A single element of a structure, (e.g. structural steelwork), a natural geological feature or a tree might have adequate strength to provide a place for anchor points for both the working line and safety line. This should be verified by a "competent" person.(BS7985 - 12.3.1.3)

What do we mean by 'Competent Person"? A competent person is someone who possesses the necessary knowledge, training, and experience to assess, choose, and verify suitable anchor points for rope access work. Their expertise ensures the safety and effectiveness of the system, while complying with industry standards and regulations.

A competent person in this case might be a structural engineer. They perform several types of calculations to determine the strength and safety of a structure. These calculations depend on the type of structure (building, bridge, etc.) and materials used.

To determine what forces the structure must support, such things as dead loads (weight of the structure itself), live loads (Temporary or movable loads ie people) and Environmental loads (wind and snow loadings) will be considered.

“If you are in doubt in regards to the strength of an anchor then you should consult a competent person”.

I would suggest doing your homework before employing or seeking help from some of the people and companies that "claim" to be expert consultants, Just recently I was involved in a work scope where a third party was drawn in to carry out some testing and inspections. I won't go into details but lets just say "Piss Poor".

Whilst writing this I thought it wise and beneficial to not only rely on the standards and codes of practices, but to speak to Level 3s from numerous sectors and differing experience levels. Real world answers to a question that should be easy to answer...

So as an IRATA level 3 are we “competent” to decide what is and isn't unquestionable?

IRATA provides essential and quality foundational training/instruction (in some centres!!) With anchors within a controlled training environment being mainly engineered or professionally installed, but having the competence in identifying unquestionable anchors in the field is tied up in other factors and should be supported with additional training, operational experience and critical decision making skills, which can be learnt over time.

I asked several connections for their opinion and interpretation to the question of having the competence to decide what is and isn't unquestionable. The majority believed that with the experience and knowledge that they had built up, they were comfortable in making this decision.

In my opinion, For me, I am comfortable in deciding whether or not an anchor is unquestionable. If strength is becoming an issue, then common sense would dictate that it's probably not strong enough. Experience and further learning through courses, work shops and having a great group of mentors has aided me and others to come to such conclusions.

Im not for one instance suggesting within this that all Level 3s should be structural engineers, Nor am I saying that every job requires the consultation of a structural engineer or the like, but they should be competent in the selection of anchors. This also includes the ability to follow procedure and guidelines on equipment. As you will have notably seen from the pictures there is a definite pandemic of mis-use when it comes to anchors but equipment on a whole!

I hope this can start some conversations in regards to competency, equipment use, further training with industry professionals.

Please feel free to comment and share your thoughts, its only by expressing yourself through honesty will things ever change.

IRATA training cost: Race to the bottom

PH449742 — Mon, 02 Jan 2023 19:25:08 GMT

IRATA training cost: Race to the bot tom

I recently asked a couple of questions regarding the cost of IRATA training in the UK.

Looking at 24 random IRATA training companies the average cost for a course is £64 6.16 plus VAT. The lowest being £550.00 plus VAT and the most expensive found at the time was £710.00 plus VAT.

I also looked at the cost from 15 international IRATA training centres, £1003.19 being the average cost. The most expensive being £1523.49 plus tax (USA) and the cheapest being £439.61 plus tax (S.Africa).

It used to be the case that courses in Europe, the Americas and Australasia were more expensive due to the fact that instructors and assessors would have to be brought in mainly from the UK. But these areas now have their own instructors and assessors yet the price is still greater than the UK.

If we look at similar associations and the cost of training:

ITRA level 3 is £1220.00 plus TAX 5 days training 1 day assessment

ISO 22846 £745.00 plus VAT 4 days training 1 day assessment

R3 Rope Rescue operator £950.00 plus VAT 5 days

Sprat £1220.00 5 days training 1 day assessment

Italian Rope Access module B £880.00 plus TAX 4 days training 1 day theory

FISAT £1047.00 plus TAX 4 day training 1 day assessment

SOFT £2400.00 to £2900.00 7 days training 1 day assessment

Is the UK cost of training a contributing factor to the problems we find within the industry?

Some seem quite happy with the current cost of training and state of the industry, stating courses are expensive enough as they are. If we take the average cost of £646.16 that works out as £215.00 plus VAT a year or £17.94 a month.

So what are the problems in the industry?

There is a worrying cerebration that there is no problem, in my opinion there are a number.

There is a definite lack of knowledge at all levels, Im not saying people need to know all the below off by heart, but they need to be aware that they exist at least!

Work at Height Regulations 2005
IRATA code of practice and the Training,Assessment & Certification Scheme
Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 (PUWER)
Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations 1998
Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999
Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974
ISO 22846 Parts 1 & 2 :2012 Personal equipment for protection against falls — Rope access systems

The recently released Work & Safety Analysis Report 2022 stated:

"At the individual level, and applicable to all grades, ‘Lapse of Concentration’, taken together with ‘Lack of experience’ and ‘Failure to follow rules’ continued to be a major concern and were important factors in 14 injuries, five being serious and also possibly, at least two fatalities. "

Part of the current TACS for Level 3s "6.2.3.2.2 Level 3 candidates shall demonstrate understanding of the risk assessment process, and shall be capable of identifying hazards that may affect rope access activities ".

This needs to be covered in far more detail than it currently is, It is glossed over far too quickly or squeezed in when watching the IRATA video (https://irata.org/media/videos/safety-awareness-video-edge-and-rope-management)

To be fair the TACS does state that "In-depth training for risk assessment is not within the scope of the document".

Poor protection of ropes is still endemic. With the canvas rope protectors still being used widely. Even the manufacturer states that it "Provides limited protection to non-moving ropes from light abrasion"

It is not for 90 degree edges! Yet we still see it.

What I can't understand is some of these non professionals choose to by a Petzl Asap Lock (£275.00 with axess absorber) yet won't spend £65.00 on a DMM rope pad.

If you have read any of the other articles/blogs you will know I talk about the four words

Negligence - Incompetence - Ineptitude - Ignorance

I was reading an article the other day and there was a quote that i feel fits quite well,

"A mistake repeated more than once is a choice"

How do we change this train of thought? Can better/longer training break this thought process?

"We offer courses that are 5 days training 6th day assessment for £1300. We've found the level of competency has increased, our instructors are on a better salary, we have more than enough gear and quality selection of that and a customed facility". (Wesley Chadwick Irata Assessor & Owner at Technical Access Group Inc.)

So what would raising the cost of the training do?

Raising the cost of training I believe would have a multitude of positive effects.

Ability to invest & improve training centres, This may come in many forms from additional steel work, additional equipment etc
Attract Level 3's into instructing and have the available funds for trainee instructors. Have a mentorship scheme for trainee instructors.
Additional time for training and theory for Level 3's in hazard identification, risk assessment, legal duties
Ability to allow for separate course for each level. So a Level 1 course, Level 2 course and a Level 3 course, thus allowing the instructor to give full attention to the needs of the participants.
Raise the rate of pay, Who doesn't want to earn a better wage?

Possible other improvements

Level 3's to complete an assistant period (apprenticeship) of a minimum of 1 year before being assessed as a Safety Supervisor.
Once Safety Supervisor status gained attendance of safety supervisor seminar/CPD annually to keep current.
Auditing of assessors (weed out Passing Pete and Blind Barry!)
Minimum age to become a Level 3 set to 22 years old, Or mandatory 3 years at level 1 and 3 years at level 2 to be accrued before Level 3 course.
Health/medical/fit to work certificate must be present at start of course
Remove the Satisfactory, Good, Very good, Excellent pass options. A more stringent assessment where it is Pass or Fail.
Lengthen the course length, minimum 40 hours training - 5 days training and 1 day assessment 1 day theory exam. (7 days in total)
Update to the TACS - Remove out of date rescue techniques ie hang n haul. Introduce more team tasks ie utilising a checklist or job planning form, identify hazards, anchor points to be used, team size required, rescue etc
Stand alone training centres specialising in Rope Access. Not just a corner of unit with a few ropes hung up.

"IRATA training has always been underpriced in the UK. Once you step out of the UK most providers are charging approximately £1200 give or take which is where it should be". (Michael Brushneen IRATA Instructor and Assessor)

Talking to a few trainers and training company owners, they said that 20 years ago the cost of training was being debated. It should've been £1000.00 back then one stated.

At the end of the day we should be demanding quality training, and with that comes a cost.

If you have any comments, questions or recommendations then please feel free to comment or message.

Have a great Christmas!

"Theres no shame in accepting failures, the failure comes from not acting upon them".

Recommendation: Act upon or Ignore?

PH449742 — Mon, 02 Jan 2023 19:21:12 GMT

Recommendation: Act upon or Ignore?

I was reading through the latest Work and Safety Analysis (WASA2022) published by IRATA when I suddenly had the feeling of deja vu.

For those that are unaware the WASA i s a report that is released each year with data and statistics of everything IRATA. From the number of member companies to the number accidents and deaths, Number of hours worked and the number of employed staff.

My main interest in these publications is at the back, the "Recommendation" section. The "Whats happened and How can we make it better".

In the latest WASA (2022) recommendation section we see:

Whilst ‘life is not without risk’, this industry depends more than most on controlling risks. Thus, risk assessment and hazard identification, including pre-start inspection of work sites, continued to be essential (examples in Conclusions). Further, continued surveillance during conduct of work, particularly when conditions were liable to change, had also been found necessary. Therefore, it is recommended that managers and supervisors should be encouraged to improve endeavours to identify potential hazards.

When reading the conclusions that precede the recommendations it is fair to say the above warrants its place. The fact that all three fatalities within the previous year were suffered by Level 3 technicians, and presumably all experienced, cannot be ignored.

Deja Vu?

I was almost certain that 'Hazard identification' was the previous years recommendation, I then looked back at earlier WASA publications 2021, 2020, 2019.... All had the recommendation regarding the identification of hazards and the assessment of risk.

Two of the recommendations in the WASA 2013 were "Prevention of rope damage and "Dropped objects". Even though the wording of "hazard identification" isn't present the fact remains that the hazards were not being identified and thus controls put in place.

So every WASA available has a recommendation that seems to be going un-acted upon and repeated year after year. All analysis is on IRATA member companies only, Although it would be unfair and together untrue to say non members are altogether immune to the same issues.

How can we change this? Training? Experience? Common Sense?

For sure training plays a major role both in the cause and in the remedy. Recently I set the question "Is IRATA training to cheap?" And in my opinion it is. Raise the cost - Raise the standard. Dedicate more time to Hazard identification and Risk assessment. If you are interested the link is here: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/irata-training-cost-race-bottom-james-hollingsworth/

Experience of the technician, A lot of people I have spoke to have raised the point of techs rushing through their tickets to get to Level 3 as quickly as possible. Is it right? well its not wrong according to the TACS, if they are 18 years old they can take their level 1, 1000 hours and years experience, can got for their level 2, same again and they can do their 3. Personally I think this should change to a minimum age to become a Level 3 set to 22 years old, Or mandatory 3 years at level 1 and 3 years at level 2 to be accrued before Level 3 course.

Common sense, apparently not so common. Some will argue you can't teach common sense, Some will say we all have the ability to learn and thus be able to learn common sense. I would say the majority of us are continually learning from our environment and the things we do, this gives us our common sense. If you run a rope over a sharp edge it will damage our rope. Ok I won't do that again, I have learnt, it now becomes part of our common sense. But some seem to differ in this process of thinking.

In 1957, Leon Festinger—one of the most influential psychologists of all-time put together a groundbreaking paper ‘A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance,’ which exposed our psychological tendencies. He noted " The Ego Effect".

It suggests that you’re prone to making the same mistakes over and over again, when you protect your beliefs instead of learning from your mistakes and changing your beliefs in response to conflicting evidence

Rather than own up to our mistakes and learn from them, we tend to invent new explanations as to why the mistake occurred, or ignore the conflicting evidence altogether.

Do they believe that because they have passed their independent assessment that it can't possibly be anything wrong with what they are doing?

The WASA is a much needed publication and credit must go to IRATA and its staff for compiling, but it needs to be understood and acted on. We must learn from the data, whether it be from the unfortunate fatalities and injuries or the recommendations.

Ultimately, the people and organizations that embrace failure and create a strong culture around learning from the mistakes, will thrive.

As always I look forward to peoples opinions, ideas and comments.

For those that are interested the Work and Safety Analysis publications are available free to download on the IRATA website as are all the Safety Bulletins.

(https://irata.org/page/work-safety-analysis-reports)

(https://irata.org/safety-bulletins)

Expert or Over claimer?

Wed, 02 Nov 2022 11:14:05 GMT

In this small article I’ll look to touch upon What makes an expert, Who deems a person an expert and the pathway that may be taken to reach the godly guru status! It will hopefully raise some questions and promote conversation.

We see it all the time, "Being EXPERTS in Rope Access" or "Our EXPERT team of Rope Access technicians". but who decides whether they are actually an expert? Are they misconstruing the word expert? or are they self proclaiming?

Expertise is what separates the amateur from the true master in almost any field.

While it might seem easy to point out who is and is not an expert, agreeing on a definition of expertise is not always so easy. Is it about how much you know? Is it about being able to perform an action well? And at what point does a person move from being merely good at something to being a bonafide expert?

Definition: expert

a person who is very knowledgeable about or skilful in a particular area.

having or involving a great deal of knowledge or skill in a particular area.

So from the above definitions we can see that to be defined as an “expert”, You have to be very knowledgeable and skilful in a particular area.

But who determines whether you have enough knowledge and skill?

Who decides who is an expert?

Clients and their perception? Peers? An Assessor? An Auditor? Self proclaimed?

Is that enough to award the accolade of expert?

Some argue that expertise comes from lived experience and not by getting a 'piece of paper', We need to be careful with the experience argument, I've seen it first hand, He's an IRATA Level 3 with 25 years experience as a supervisor. Unfortunately he's been doing it wrong for 25 years! The guy that never made it to Level 3, yet has taken on the role of Technical Authority Or the ones that have a very narrow spectrum of work experience or in some instances no work experience at all (ie an instructor that has never worked on a work site).

Researchers have tried to investigate how long it really takes to become an expert in any given field. They have sought to determine how much time someone would have to devote to the study and practice of a subject to be considered an expert.

The ??,??? Hour Rule

One belief is that the key to becoming an expert is to devote at least 10,000 hours to the study and practice of a subject. This idea is based on a 1993 study in which researchers found that the most accomplished violinists at a music academy had spent an average of 10,000 hours practicing their instrument.

Skilled Isn't the Same As Expert

Some suggest that it is sometimes around the 20,000- to 25,000-hour mark that people truly become experts or masters of a skill or subject.

Some Skills Take Longer to Acquire

Would you call an IRATA level 3 an expert? Does this depend on years of experience?

Let us look at the path a rope access technician will take in the IRATA Training, Assessment and Certification Scheme.

(Figure 1 – Flowchart showing qualification process Pg 8 TACS)

To take your IRATA Level 1 the requirements are: minimum age of 18 years; no previous experience required; has an aptitude for working at height.

Minimum 4-days training course 1-day independent assessment

Minimum 12 months experience and 1000 working hours logged to be allegeable to take the Level 2.

Again there is minimum 4-days training course in rope access, rigging and rescue. 1–day independent assessment.

Minimum 12 months experience and 1000 working hours logged, to be allegeable to take the Level 3.

Once again minimum 4-days training course in advanced rope access techniques, 1-day independent assessment

So at the end that 18 year old is now a 20 year Level 3 Rope Access Supervisor. 2000 hours, Expert? or was skilled enough to learn a succession of manoeuvres and techniques to pass a one day assessment?

Does this need to be looked at?

Should you have the ability to become a supervisor at the age of 20? Should it be that for levels 1 and 2 you have to complete the full term of the ticket validity (3 years) thus having built up minimum 6 years of experience.

(Please be advised this does not include any extra CPD that the technician may of completed)

Something else I have witnessed of late is where companies and individuals have been coming out quite publicly on social media platforms with false facts and information, trying to give off this aura of expertise when really all they are doing is “over claiming”.

The Dunning-Kruger effect is a cognitive bias (deviation from the norm) whereby people with limited knowledge or competence in a given intellectual or social domain, in this case Rope Access, greatly overestimate their own knowledge or competence.

There has been new research that reveals that the more people think they know about a topic in general, the more likely they are to allege knowledge of completely made-up information and false facts, a phenomenon known as “over-claiming”.

Over claiming can be dangerous to both the individual, third parties and to company reputations, especially if what they are saying proves to be false.

It seems sometimes to be financially driven where coming out with made up facts and techniques or just labelling themselves as experts within the field to win work or impress clients is part of the sales method.

“Find your level” (To reach one's level of proficiency, comfort, or competency in a particular area.)

So how to become an expert?

The bit that all you wanna be experts have been waiting for! Theres no one answer to this question I’m afraid. So many different studies have tried to answer this question, whether it be the amount of hours practiced, IQ of the individual, natural talent, experience gather over time. I believe it is a fusion of disparate elements, a whole mix of different things that come together.

If someone asked me how to become an expert I would only be able to give them a list of things to do that will possibility set them on the right pathway.

Learn, Do, Appreciate, Share, Respect and Achieve.

I will leave you with a quote from a friend of mine, who sums it with:

“The thing to do is never consider yourself an expert, that way you will aspire to be one and you will never stop learning from others”.

How long does competence last?

Mon, 21 Feb 2022 19:20:15 GMT

How long does competence last?

From being deemed competent, How long does that competency last?

If we look at an example of the IRATA system:

"Independent assessments are required every three years at all levels, following a minimum of four days of training, Rope access Technicians not engaged in rope access work for six months or more should attend refresher training". (TACS V4).

So from this does competence only last 6 months in the eyes of IRATA? or is this just a period that 'skill fade' can occur?

The Health & Safety Executive (HSE) describe competence as;

Competence can be described as the combination of training, skills, experience and knowledge that a person has and their ability to apply them to perform a task safely. Other factors, such as attitude and physical ability, can also affect someone's competence.

Since embarking on a new chapter in my Rope Access Life in becoming a Trainee Instructor I haven't yet seen someone come into the training area and not be totally slick and not need any intervention. This ranges from completing rescues, rope manoeuvres and simple rigging. This is not including lack of knowledge in regards to equipment and its limitations, standards, regulations and acts, Hazard identification and Risk assessment.

So we have to ask ourselves:

Do individuals & companies keep their supervisors and technicians competent and current?

When was the last time you undertook refresher training or CPD? this might be aid climbing, rigging more complex rope systems, rescue? You can have things in place to mitigate against risk, such things as pre rigged rescue bags, working system that is rigged in such a way as to raise or lower, but are we keeping the competence level where it should be?

Is three years between re-assessment too long?

Ive expressed my own opinion previously in regards to a yearly re-assessment. A one day run through of rescues and manoeuvres, any updates from IRATA (ICOP/TACS), Safety bulletins and any relevant HSE reports, and maybe even expand on rigging techniques and use of new equipment.

If we take a look at how the HSE describe competence with a combination of training, skills, experience and knowledge. Just as an example if a technician is performing the same task all the time is he building skills, experience and knowledge. For sure but it is a very limited and narrow band. ie Wind turbine blade repair technician on a wind farm carrying out the same rigging techniques and descents.

I have mentioned before if you are a re-assessing Level 3 and you need 4/5 days training before your assessment, does this mean that the week prior to the course you are a competent level 3?

Training Transfer

Training transfer is the ability to apply learnings from an artificial training situation to practical problems on the job. I think this could be a problem within the industry. For example, People learn how to complete a task in a training centre but seem to fail in real world due to: the tasks are more complex, creative thinking is needed, problem solving is needed, learning must be adapted to changing circumstances.

Skill fade - ‘the decay of ability or adeptness over a period of non-use’

Skills fade is the decay of any skill over a period of time when the skill is not practiced. Skill fade in some areas isn’t a problem, but in safety-critical jobs such as rope access it can become a significant risk. It can occur with both cognitive and motor skills.

Skills which have been developed more recently may decay faster and to a lower level in the skills spectrum. If a rope access technician has recently acquired skills (recently gone from L1 to L2), with no prolonged period of development and use, they are likely to fade more than core skills, possibly to a dangerous level.

Obviously this all depends on the individual (Some retain greater than others).

Bad Advice & Poor Practices

As the picture states, Not all advice is good advice. Rope Access is definitely full of opinions. The trouble is when opinion is not built on fact.

It is also a problem when it is built from inexperience and lack of knowledge.

Even in what "should" be the pinnacle of the Rope Access industry (The Members! both training and operational) there are examples of bad advice, poor practice, inexperience, lack of knowledge and even the 3 I's (ignorance, ineptitude & incompetence). A logo doesn't make an expert and nor does a job title.

The reason I have included the above in this is that it is a part of how we all learn and ultimately a route to competence. We learn from others. I have said this before and I stand by it, Find a mentor! Find someone who can take you to your next level and beyond. This may even be a group of people if you are lucky enough. But you need to find an individual/group who fit the narrative.

As always I hope this raises discussion and is thought provoking.

Time for change: Where is the Rope Access Industry headed?

Thu, 26 Aug 2021 09:01:32 GMT

A while ago I wrote a post asking for peoples views and opinions on the Rope Access industry. The general consensus was that things need to change. That is not to say that there were parties that feel that everything is fine how it is. And it possibly is in certain companies and how individuals work.

The Rope Access Industry is a microcosm where we find the good, the bad and the damn right dumb!

I was interested to see if people shared common views and opinions, starting from being deemed "competent" to the working practices of their own company or employer.

Things like; Is the course too short? Does the course not cover enough? is it too cheap? Should it be similar to an NVQ? Should there be a Level 4? Should more information be available to/and should a greater appreciation be shown by clients? Should there be third party auditors for all rope access works whether association members or not?

Should there be a rating system for training centres? Should Instructors and Assessors have formal teaching and assessing qualifications?

Will IRATA's RAMRASS (if it ever comes to fruition) help in ensure works carried out are done both safely and compliantly? I think it will raise awareness of the short fallings of some Levels 3's in regards to health and safety knowledge and supervisory skills. We all await eagerly for more information in regards of cost and time frames for this scheme.

Since writing the draft version of this I have embarked on a new chapter. I am currently working towards my IRATA instructor ticket. A big thank you to Iain and Mike at Belay Rope Access Ltd down in Newhaven, East Sussex, UK for giving me a fantastic opportunity. (https://belayropeaccess.co.uk) This has given me a whole new appreciation for another side of Rope Access that not every technician will see. The way in which different people learn in different ways, The difference teaching styles can have on learning outcomes. It has also shown that there are many correct/safe ways to complete a task/technique or manoeuvre but more shocking to myself is when technicians turn up having been trained else where and have been shown the wrong/unsafe ways or being at a level that is above that of their actual competency.

A question that I often ask myself after seeing posts on social media is why does it seem many have a "course/assessment" way of doing things that seems to get put away when it comes to day to day working practices? I have mentioned in a previous article Negligence? Incompetence? Ineptitude? Ignorance? These are the words I would use to describe the companies and individuals that consistently fail to act in a safe manner. But I believe there is another word.... .Laziness.

Laziness may reflect a lack of self-esteem, a lack of positive recognition by others, a lack of discipline stemming from low self-confidence, or a lack of interest in the activity or belief in its efficacy. Laziness may manifest as procrastination or vacillation. In other words not being able to complete the task safely because of an inability to choose the correct method or fearing failure to complete (ie not being paid). How many people can relate to "do the job or leave it and not get paid" So they just rig to something that isn't actually suitable.

Please feel free to make contact with me with your views and comments,

So starting with training:

Course Length & Cost

Is at least 30 hours training over a minimum of 4 days enough? Is that enough time to get a novice to a level of "competency"? Is it enough time to take a Level 2 up to a level of "competency" to become a Level 3?

In my opinion this is totally dependent on the individual and whether the instructor has employed the correct teach/learn strategy. Sure some new Level 1's get it by Tuesday, You can see they have grasped the information from the demos and can execute accordingly. Other naturally will take longer and some will find that it just isn't for them.

Competent: having the necessary ability, knowledge, or skill to do something successfully.

Everyone likes a bargain! Myself included. But cheap doesn't mean value for money. Could it be that there is an abundance of poor practice because the course is cheap? is it creating the adage "dopes on ropes"?

I have recently seen courses for £400.00 plus VAT, Does this attract the wrong type of person to the industry? What are the trainers/instructors being paid? Compare this to a ISO/BS Rope Access course (which ultimately is aimed at technicians operating in more limited scopes of work) where the price ranges from £690.00 to £864.00 plus VAT.

Are we looking for a ticket/certificate that is just an easy pass, done in the shortest amount of time or are we looking for something that is revered and seen as a real achievement. A sign of quality!

Should a revalidation cost the same as an upgrade? Everyone will have their own take on this one. If you are a Level 3 rope access supervisor and you require 4 days training before being assessed are you really a competent Level 3? Should you be completing rescue training and other CPD (Continuing Professional Development) between revalidation, in my opinion yes you should! I think it would be food for thought to may be look at offering assessment only for competent professionals.

Training centre rating: Not all centres are equal!

I've been to a few centres over the years and I can say with confidence that not all centres are equal!

Again everyone is different and will no doubt have their own opinion. For me I want to be taught something new when I go on a course. I don't want to be left alone with trainers saying "Oh you know what you are doing, just practice what you want and then you can leave at 2pm". Especially if you are paying full course fees.

Does what the training centre looks like matter?

In my opinion "Yes, most definitely".

If the centre you are training at only has one area where a rebelay/re-anchor can be rigged are you fully able to understand when and where to use it? Same could be said for single and double deviations, rope to rope etc

Training centres that have a number of areas where manoeuvres and rigging can be attempted and completed will ultimately add to the competence level of the individual. Again this goes hand in hand with the imagination and competency of the instructor/trainer.

IRATA Level 4.....

So in 2017 IRATA released some news that they were developing a Rope Access Manager /Rope Access Safety Supervisor Course (aka RAMRASS). Since then we had an update in 2018 and then again in 2019. But since then nothing. Is it dead in the water??

Ive had the discussion with a few people now, should there not necessarily be a level 4 but should the Level 3 be split?

So you can have an IRATA Level 3 Rope Access technician and then you have an IRATA Level 3 Rope Access Safety Supervisor. Whats the difference?

Well before I answer that please tell me, Does 4 days training make a Level 2 with 1000 hours at that level competent to lead a team? Again depends on the individual but I would hazard a guess a lot of the individuals would have no man management experience, no team management experience, little to no heath and safety awareness etc etc

So back to the level 3 tech and level 3 supervisor, The idea....

You level up from Level 2 to 3, well done, you now spend minimum 3 years at level 3 technician where you would attend CPD though-out the validity of the ticket. These would encompass training like heath and safety awareness, team management, Hazard identification, Risk Assessments, advanced rescue, first aid, rope protection, PPE inspection, LOLER etc

To gain Level 3 Safety Supervisor status you will have completed the above and have a annual 2 day assessment. One class room based and the second day practical.

Just an idea.

So where are we going?

Its not all doom and gloom! Like I said at the start of this the Rope Access industry is a microcosm where we have the good, the bad and the damn right dumb. There is a lot of good work that goes on by fantastic individuals and companies, most of this goes unnoticed as it may not end up on social media platforms. Some say I have an obsession with Rope Access, immersed in it, infatuated, some say its just sad! But when I see Rope Access being done well, I congratulate them, share their post, it's something to celebrate and promote. I'm not afraid to like or share another individuals or companies post. Which I might add seems to be rare in the industry.

In my opinion we need to promote these individuals and companies more, showing the correct way to work safely at height.

Then there's the bad, The individuals and companies that are repeat offenders! IRATA members and non members who continually ignore safety. We know who they are as they seem proud to post their negligence and ignorance all over social media. Perhaps they even fall into the next category.

The damn right dumb....... Well they are out there! Those that seem totally oblivious that what they are doing could result in fatality or life changing injuries.

The last two is ultimately what spurred me on into getting into training, the hope to make a difference and up the competency of rope access technicians.

Well that's it for now, I hope it hasn't bored you too much.

This an article to promote discussion and ideas, please respect other peoples opinions and ideas, even if they differ from your own.

The body content of your post goes here. To edit this text, click on it and delete this default text and start typing your own or paste your own from a different source.

The Rope Access & Climbing Podcast

Fri, 18 Dec 2020 07:55:23 GMT

To listen click the logo above or here. I had the opportunity to chat with Mikey Stevens from the Rope Access & Climbing Podcast on the subject of Rope Protection. Thank you to Mikey and his team for this opportunity.

Notes from show:

Hello and welcome back to The Rope Access and Climbing Podcast. Today I'm chatting with James Hollingsworth about a post he made on Linked In around the same time I posted about rope protection on Acceptable or NOT acceptable. (Nov 1/2020)

In this hour-long episode, we will be diving into the facts about the subject and what IRATA and SPRAT state, how we got to this point, standards, and even cover several soft and hard rope protectors.

There is no, one rope protector that does it all. But there are some that are better than others.

Please note this is a ROPE ACCESS Only subject we are not talking about other industries like fire or arborist work. Also, we are just two guys from different parts of the world dealing with the same issues.

So stay tuned.

So please make sure to chime in, in the comments I would love to see what you have to say about the setups.

*Disclaimer*

Just because I say something is acceptable or not doesn't mean you can just go and use these setups at work. Before doing anything please talk to your subject matter expert for the company you work. Also, make sure that any and all gear you use on the job is approved and has a proper risk assessment done on it.

Make sure you undergo proper training and have the proper information before proceeding with anything.

Thank you*

So make sure to subscribe to our channel here for many more videos like this, also don't forget to follow us wherever you get your podcasts.

Instagram for all the latest updates.

www.instagram.com/RopeAccess_and_Climbing

Till next time,

Mikey Stevenson

Rope Access Tips, Tricks & Chats

Fri, 18 Dec 2020 07:47:21 GMT

Click the logo above or here to listen to our chat about Rope Protection. Thanks to Leigh Greenwood and his team for this opportunity.

Notes from show:

This week we sit down with James Hollingsworth from White Dragon Access and talk about how we protect our ropes, what is competency and how do we measure it.

This chat took place a few months back after James had up published some great information on LinkedIn about Hazard identification and Risk Assessment

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/hazard-identification-risk-assessment-james-hollingsworth/?trackingId=p9bHx%2BihH4xjRVtWCg%2Bs%2FQ%3D%3D

James has added more publications since we had a chat, have a look at his LinkedIn profile for his latest information

We also have a chat about High-Q UK's, ISOH course for rope access managers and technicians.

https://www.high-q.co.uk/iosh-rope-access-training/

Rope Access Equipment - Selection & Inspection

Sat, 17 Oct 2020 12:36:23 GMT

This is a subtitle for your new post

An assessment should be carried out before each job to select the most appropriate equipment to be used. (IRATA ICoP 2.7.1.1)

How many times have we just ordered a piece of kit, that we have never used or had any experience with? Do we read the instructions? Do we get it inspected? Hopefully this will cast some light on the do's and don'ts.

So as a start we have to know the laws and regulations, Again as with the other articles I didn't want it to be a bombardment of quotes from regulation documents. But we have to know the facts. I have condensed a lot of it down and put where to find the information if you want to delve more into it.

So no doubt you have heard of LOLER

What is LOLER?

Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations 1998 place duties on people and companies who own, operate or have control over lifting equipment. This includes all businesses and organisations whose employees use lifting equipment, whether owned by them or not. In most cases, lifting equipment is also work equipment so the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations (PUWER) will also apply (including inspection and maintenance ). All lifting operations involving lifting equipment must be properly planned by a competent person, appropriately supervised and carried out in a safe manner.

LOLER also requires that all equipment used for lifting is fit for purpose, appropriate for the task, suitably marked and, in many cases, subject to statutory periodic ' thorough examination '. Records must be kept of all thorough examinations and any defects found must be reported to both the person responsible for the equipment and the relevant enforcing authority.

Lifting equipment includes any equipment used at work for lifting or lowering loads (including persons), including attachments used for anchoring, fixing or supporting it. So in our case, as Rope Access technicians, Ropes, Harnesses, Karabiners and connectors, Slings and Strops etc all fall under LOLER.

H ow do we select of equipment?

So how do you select the equipment you use? research? prior experience? recommendation? or are you just given a kit or equipment to use?

There should be an assessment before each job is carried out to find the most appropriate equipment to be used. The assessment should also pay special attention to the probability and consequences of misuse of equipment, taking into account any known incidents, e.g. as detailed in IRATA International safety bulletins. The selection and purchase of equipment should be carried out by, or approved by, a competent person, who has sufficient knowledge of the technical specifications required (IRATA 2.7.1.1)

The ICOP goes into the legal requirements and the standards that equipment should conform, I won't list all the EN numbers for all the kit but for anyone that is interested the information can be found on page 21 of the ICOP and Annex C.

If you are using a piece of Rope Access equipment for the first time you must:

read and understand all the instructions for use.
Get specific training in its proper use (You can record this within your log book)
Become acquainted with its capabilities and limitations.
Understand and accept the risks involved.

So if you come across a piece of equipment you are unfamiliar with, don't be afraid to say so, There is no shame in not knowing something, the shame comes from not asking. If you have a competent Level 3 or equivalent and they are familiar themselves with said piece of kit, get them to run through the safe operation of it. This should be noted in the Toolbox Talk that the device has been fully explained and this should be signed to say you are happy with the use and instruction.

W here to purchase?

So you may or may not be involved in the purchase of equipment. As previously stated the selection and purchase of equipment should be carried out by, or approved by, a competent person, who has sufficient knowledge of the technical specifications required.

Now as I have said in previous articles, I live in the real world, I know there are individuals out there that want to buy kit for the cheapest price possible or pick up second had stuff. Reality is you want to be using a reputable retailer/supplier of Rope Access equipment. Don't be tempted to buy off a bidding site or a social media market place. At the end of the day this is equipment that you are entrusting yours or someone else's life to.

I personally use Abaris, the link is above. Will and the guys have always got what we need and if they don't they are quick to source. I do use other suppliers but I'd say 85% of equipment I get from Abaris.

So with the equipment comes the manufacturers instructions, sales invoice and certificate of conformity (Keep these!). Ideally you want to purchase equipment that has a unique serial number. This will aid in cross referencing with respective documentation ( Traceability ).

There is more information to be found on this in the IRATA ICOP 2.8.1 and ISO-22846 6.5.1

As I have said above getting kit with unique serial numbers makes life a bit easier. (For example some karabiners come with a batch number rather than a individual serial number) If for whatever your reason go for karabiners with batch numbers, I would recommend tough tags. These are tags that you can have printed with your own serial numbers and other information. I have been impressed at their longevity on kit that has been worked hard.

Periodic Thorough Examinations

We all get told this on our IRATA and BS7985/ISO22846 courses, LOLER actually word it slightly differently to that of IRATA. But the three kinds of inspection or examination we will hopefully know about are:

Pre Use Check - consists of a visual and tactile inspection, which should be carried out before first use each day
Detailed Inspection or "6 monthly" - This is the formal thorough inspection of the equipment carried out by a competent person. (We'll go into competency shortly)
Interim Inspection - So I always remember IRATA's wording for this one, its an inspection of your kit after arduous or exceptional events, example of this would be you have been using a chemical, brick cleaner or used it in a incinerator when it was very dusty or gritty.

So do you undertake a pre use check? Do you get your kit checked by a competent person every 6 months? Do you have a interim inspection done after arduous or exceptional use?

So who's competent to inspect your kit?

For Pre use checks, As qualified Rope access technicians we should all be comfortable in what we are looking at and what to look out for. There is no need to record pre use checks (unless a defect is found or it is your employing companies policy to do so).

For the undertaking of a detailed (6 monthly) or interim inspection you have to be a competent person.

The term 'competent person' is not defined in law but the LOLER Approved Code of Practice and guidance (paragraph 294 on competent persons) states that:

'You should ensure that the person carrying out a thorough examination has such appropriate practical and theoretical knowledge and experience of the lifting equipment to be thoroughly examined as will enable them to detect defects or weaknesses and to assess their importance in relation to the safety and continued use of the lifting equipment.'

So can you inspect your own equipment?

IRATA says "2.10.1.5 It is essential that the person carrying out a detailed or interim inspection has the authority to discard equipment and is sufficiently competent, independent and impartial to allow objective decisions to be made."

But they also say that " A competent person may exist within a rope access company."

LOLER 1998 says " The person must be independent from the employer’s line management. The competent person can be in-house or from an external organisation such as an insurance company."

I think the important thing is to be professional , Do you really want to pass a piece of equipment that could jeopardise yours or others safety? Thats not just you inspecting your own kit, Do you inspect others kit? As LOLER says you should have appropriate practical and theoretical knowledge and experience of the equipment to be examined.

How should equipment information be recorded?

If you are the competent person in charge of equipment and inspection then you will probably be aware of the different ways you can record all the information of the equipment. These vary from a simple excel spreadsheet to PPE management software.

So the simplest way is an excel spread sheet, It can be a bit of a laborious task to start with but once you have created your database it is easy to update accordingly.

If you are looking at PPE management software, then you may want to look at Papertrail. They have developed a cloud based system which allows hassle free record keeping and has a good notification system where it will alert you when a piece of equipment is due for inspection. More details can be found on their website.

So I hope this has been a useful read, I hope if you can take anything from this it will be to become more professional and safer in your approach towards working.

Hazard Identification & Risk Assessment

Sat, 17 Oct 2020 12:32:17 GMT

Hazard Identification & Risk Assessment

I didn't want this just to be an article full of snippets from the Work at height Regulations or the ICOP, But unfortunately there's no getting away from it. I could just spout out my opinions but I want this to be factual and current (Thats not to say my opinions aren't factual and current). To ensure a safe working environment, there is a need to understand the exact definition of Risk.

W e will then have the ability to estimate, evaluate and take action if necessary

A Hazard is anything that has the potential to cause harm. This could be something as specialised as piece of complicated machinery, or as commonplace as a cup of coffee.

A Hazardous event takes place when someone or something interacts with the hazard and allows it to cause harm.

Every hazardous event has likelihood and a consequence.

Likelihood is the measure of the chance that the hazardous event will occur and the consequence is the outcome of the hazardous event.

Risk = Likelihood x Consequence

While the risk matrix (To the left) method is popular, it can be highly subjective, with the potential for questionable results. Consequently, if a satisfactory risk assessment is to be achieved when using this method, very careful thought has to be given when deciding on the likelihood and severity values.

The HSE call their risk assessment framework '5 steps to risk assessment' and it provides a step by step process that enables us to identify hazards and decide on suitable controls as shown below.

HSE 5 Steps to Risk Assessment

Identify the hazards
Decide who might be harmed and how
Evaluate the risks and decide on precautions
Record your significant findings
Review your assessment and update if necessary

It is not about creating huge amounts of paperwork , but rather about identifying sensible measures to control the risks in your workplace.

I dentifying the Hazards & Why things go wrong?

One of the most important aspects of your risk assessment is accurately identifying the potential hazards. Managers, supervisors and technicians sometimes underestimate things with the potential to cause harm (the hazard). They do not:

Check manufacturers' instructions or data sheets for equipment as they can be very helpful in spelling out the hazards and putting them in their true perspective
Look back at your accident and ill-health records - these often help to identify the less obvious hazards
Take account of non-routine operations
think about the issues that surround the rope access work itself;
take into account the advice and guidance available, e.g. ICOP
Remember to think about long-term hazards to health (e.g. high levels of noise, exposure to harmful substances (ie. Asbestos), common causes of work-related mental ill health)

Who conducts the hazard identification and how has it been conducted? Has the person conducting the hazard identification got the experience and knowledge to do so? Are you just working off a generic set of RAMS? Do they or you attend site to carry out a survey?

How many times have you turned up to a work site blind, never having been to the site before and just gone straight up to the roof and started work? How many times have you not known who you are working with? Is there a language barrier? there are so many possible scenarios and variables this is why Risk Assessments need to be specific rather than generic.

I use a Job Planning form which allows me to input information from the site address and client details, description of work, What anchors, Emergency and Rescue, Hazard identification, third party protection etc etc This can be used to create my Risk Assessment but also can form a good Tool Box Talk to have with my team prior to the work task.

How & Who will be harmed?

Then think how employees (or others who may be present, such as contractors or visitors) might be harmed. Ask your employees what they think the hazards are, as they may notice things that are not obvious to you and may have some good ideas on how to control the risks.

For each hazard you need to be clear about who might be harmed – it will help you identify the best way of controlling the risk

Evaluating the Risks

Having identified the hazards, you then have to decide how likely it is that harm will occur, ie the level of risk and what to do about it. Risk is a part of everyday life and you are not expected to eliminate all risks. What you must do is make sure you know about the main risks and the things you need to do to manage them responsibly. Many will have heard of ALARP (As Low As Reasonably Practicable)

Your risk assessment should only include what you could reasonably be expected to know – you are not expected to anticipate unforeseeable risks.

Recording the Significant findings

Make a record of your significant findings – the hazards, how people might be harmed by them and what you have in place to control the risks. Any record produced should be simple and focused on controls.

Reviewing the Assessment & updating where necessary

Few workplaces stay the same. Sooner or later, you will bring in new equipment, substances and procedures that could lead to new hazards. So it makes sense to review what you are doing on an ongoing basis, look at your risk assessment again and ask yourself:

Have there been any significant changes?
Are there improvements you still need to make?
Have your work colleagues spotted a problem?
Have you learnt anything from accidents or near misses?

The important thing is to make sure your risk assessment stays up to date.

IRATA released a follow up video to their "Edge Management" video. This looks at the aftermath that is caused from poor hazard identification. I would recommend anyone involved in Rope Access to watch the below video ( Even if you have seen it, watch it again ) Pay particular attention during the interview process and the role Risk Assessments and Method Statements play.

By identifying potential hazards and through effective risk management companies can produce a safe system of work.

I found the Safety Management in the Rope Access and Work at Height industry course that I attended, which has been developed by High-q directors Karl Raby & Craig Shaw to be of great use in not only reinforcing what knowledge I already had, But developing further understanding of how to meet my legal obligations. The course is approved by the Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (IOSH) and delves into the Moral, Legal and Financial reasons to why we manage safety.

I hope this has been informative, I didn't want to make it too laborious. But I feel this is a massively important part of Rope Access, and I hope this has gone some way of opening peoples eyes to the importance also.

As always if you wish to discuss anything or feel I have missed something please feel free to contact me.

Competence in Rope Access

Sat, 17 Oct 2020 12:26:01 GMT

Competence in Rope Ac cess

Competence (noun) the ability to do something successfully or efficiently.

Following on from the last article of "Rope Protection and the Failings" I would like to look at Competence within Rope Access.

Every employer shall ensure that no person engages in any activity, including organisation,planning and supervision, in relation to work at height or work equipment for use in such work unless he is competent to do so or, if being trained, is being supervised by a competent person. (The Work at Height Regulations 2005).

So with that being said, when there is bad/unsafe practice, poor incompetent supervision the law is being broken. The Working at Height Regulations 2005 come under the umbrella of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974.

Judith Hackitt, HSE’s Chair said:

‘The essence of competence is relevance to the workplace. What matters is that there is a proper focus on both the risks that occur most often and those with serious consequences.

Competence is the ability for every director, manager and worker to recognise the risks in operational activities and then apply the right measures to control and manage those risks.

I would hazard a guess that if you are reading this and are involved in rope access as a technician you are more than likely to have an IRATA certificate. That is not to say that is the only ticket in the UK. BS7985/ISO22846 are also covered in this article.

For those people who have limited or no knowledge of the IRATA Rope Access Certification scheme here's a very quick overview. IRATA training programmes comprise of at least 30 hours training over a minimum of 4 days. At the end of which will be an assessment conducted by an independent assessor (IRATA assessments shall only be carried out by IRATA Assessors who are independent of the candidate, the candidate’s employer and the organisation providing training). There are three levels of certification Level 1 being the beginner if you like, Level 2 intermediate and Level 3 advanced.

Both IRATA and ISO22846 state in regards to competence as the following: Rope access work can only be carried out in a reliably safe manner where people are competent. To be considered competent , a rope access technician needs to have sufficient professional or technical training, knowledge, actual experience and authority to enable them to:

1. carry out their assigned duties at the level of responsibility allocated to them;

2. understand potential hazards related to the work under consideration and be able to carry out appropriate workmate rescue procedures;

3. detect technical defects or omissions in their work and equipment, recognize implications for health and safety caused by such defects or omissions, and be able to specify a remedial action to mitigate those implications.

And both also state: Rope access technicians should have adequate skill and experience to:

1. understand the limitations of their level of training with regard to work practices;

2. understand the various uses of the equipment they use and its limitations;

3. select equipment correctly;

4. use the equipment properly;

5. inspect their equipment;

6. maintain and store the equipment they use.

So we clearly have the guidance to work Safely & Competently. We have been trained and deemed competent by independent assessors. So why are there still failings?

I think we have to look at failure, there are two types of human failure

Human error is an unintentional action or decision.
Violations are intentional failures – deliberately doing the wrong thing

If we look at Human error, It can happen to even the most experienced and well-trained person. But violations on the other hand are intentional failures – ‘deliberately doing the wrong thing’. The violation of health and safety rules or procedures is one of the biggest causes of accidents and injuries at work.

Typical causes of violations include:

workers thinking rules don’t apply to them;
being under time pressure;
not having enough workers to do the work;
not having the right equipment;
a lack of understanding (Competence)
perceptions that rules are too strict or unnecessary – ie the perceived benefits outweigh the perceived penalties;
wanting to take the easy option;
perception that they won’t get caught;
peer pressure.

I was recently looking at a tender document and was astounded to see that the weighting would be towards how cheap they could get it compared to the actual quality. In this instance I decided not to go any further with the tender. Does this explain why the same poor standards are seen on work sites again and again, when cost comes over quality? The saying "If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur" springs to mind.

I, like most use social media as an advertising platform. I don't post for likes or to get more followers (of course it is fantastic when you get appreciated by others in your field, who doesn't welcome that!), I post because what we do is safe, competent and professional and I like to share that fact. Whilst using social media I see a lot of unsafe acts, which if we look at that statement again from the Working at Height Regulations 2005 is a disregard for the law. I often say "Would they rig like that on their assessment?".

We have all done things in the past where when we look back we think "Yeah that was a bit sketchy" But I feel it's how we learn from our past mistakes and strive to be better is what counts. To have presence of mind and be open to criticism and advice from others. I have found that having mentors who uphold the principals, morals and ethics of a safe work culture invaluable both in the development of my company but also individually as a technician.

Competence regards us all, whether Level 1, 2 or 3, Rope Access Manager or Company owner. Are you competent in management skills or competent in supervisory skills, I think you have to be honest with yourself and if you have failings, address them.

To work as a Rope Access technician is a fantastic and rewarding job, but take pride in what you do. Treat everyday as assessment day. Take your time, prepare it right. Think of the Five P's! Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance!

Remember a competent person is not someone who simply has the competence to carry out a particular task, It is someone who has the necessary skills, experience and knowledge to manage health and safety.

Protection of Ropes and the Failings.

Sat, 17 Oct 2020 11:37:45 GMT

Protection of Ropes and the Failings.

A huge topic at the moment is the protection of ropes. With a recent accident in London the spot light will be firmly fixed on this topic that seems to crop up regularly. In 2011 a man lost his life due to this very subject. He was working for an IRATA member company offshore in the North Sea.

The HSE inspector commented after the hearing.

“Assessing the risks of that job properly would have identified that the potentially sharp edge presented a very clear danger to anyone suspended and working on ropes rigged against it. However, the company failed to do this so failed to take safety precautions ".

https://www.britsafe.org/publications/safety-management-magazine/safety-management-magazine/2015/north-sea-rope-access-worker-died-in-23-metre-fall/

On the back this tragic incident IRATA released Safety bulletin 22 (https://irata.org/downloads/2035) and in September 2013 Annex P of the ICOP was updated.

In 2017 IRATA published a poster outlining the IRAPV method (Identify, Remove, Avoid, Protect, Verify). They also released a video that was created in order to inform and educate rope access technicians about the importance of appropriate supervision, and the dangers of inadequate edge management procedures.

https://irata.org/media/videos/safety-awareness-video-edge-and-rope-management

So here we are in 2020 and has anything changed? Of course a number of companies have made good head way in regards to how they approach the protection of ropes. But there are still companies and individuals that are not taking note. Don't get me wrong I'm not saying only IRATA member companies are safe, Far from it! I have seen poor practice and un safe practices from both Members of IRATA and Non-members.

Negligence? Incompetence? Ineptitude? Ignorance? These are the words I would use to describe the companies and individuals that consistently fail to act in a safe manner. To not only work like this but to advertise the fact on social media proves that there is Negligence, Incompetence, Ineptitude, or Ignorance. In my opinion and many who know me will have heard this before, If you are failing at something so simple and basic as protecting your ropes, what other things are you failing at?????

Protection of Ropes is part of the Risk Assessment process and in an ideal world this will be assessed and the hazards identified at a site survey before works begin. I live in the real world and understand that more often than not clients don't want to pay for a survey before hand and you will likely get photographs of the roof from the company or its even been known for guys to look on google earth at the make up of a building or structure. In which case you will need to carry sufficient and suitable kit to cater for all circumstances.

Rope protection as I have stated above is just one part of a process that makes up a Rope Access Safe System of Work. You can follow failings back like a time line and it will unveil what failings within the system have occurred.

I recently posted about The Working at Height Regulations 2005. In which I stated: If you are an employer or you control work at height (for example facilities/project managers or building owners who may contract others to work at height) the Work at Height Regulations 2005 apply to you.

Employers and those in control of any work at height activity must make sure work is properly #planned #supervised and carried out by #competent people. This includes using the right type of equipment for the working at height task. So for any project manager, facilities manager, building manager or owner don't be afraid to ask questions of your Rope Access service supplier.

Has a job/task survey been carried out? Is the Risk Assessment & Method Statement specific for the job? What is the rescue plan and more importantly is it well thought out and realistic? What procedures are to be worked to? Are they competent? Is equipme nt inspected and fit for purpose? Have references been provided? Have they carried out this type of work before?

A cheap cost doesn’t mean value for money!

369e3e6b

Unquestionable Anchors, Questionable?

Unquestionable Anchors, Questionable ?

So what does IRATA say?

IRATA training cost: Race to the bottom

IRATA training cost: Race to the bot tom

Recommendation: Act upon or Ignore?

Recommendation: Act upon or Ignore?

Deja Vu?

Expert or Over claimer?

How long does competence last?

How long does competence last?

Do individuals & companies keep their supervisors and technicians competent and current?

Training Transfer

Skill fade - ‘the decay of ability or adeptness over a period of non-use’

Bad Advice & Poor Practices

Time for change: Where is the Rope Access Industry headed?

The Rope Access & Climbing Podcast

Rope Access Tips, Tricks & Chats

Rope Access Equipment - Selection & Inspection

This is a subtitle for your new post

H ow do we select of equipment?

W here to purchase?

Periodic Thorough Examinations

So who's competent to inspect your kit?

So can you inspect your own equipment?

How should equipment information be recorded?

Hazard Identification & Risk Assessment

Hazard Identification & Risk Assessment

Competence in Rope Access

Competence in Rope Ac ﻿ cess

Protection of Ropes and the Failings.

Protection of Ropes and the Failings.

Competence in Rope Ac cess