Fall Arrest vs. Fall Restraint

This post was written by Rigid Lifelines, a provider of fall protection and fall arrest systems. They provide fall safety solutions to a variety of different industries.

The terminology surrounding fall protection systems may seem complex, but it is important to understand the basic systems and terms to choose the fall protection solution best suited to a customer’s needs.  For example, the terms “fall arrest” and “fall restraint” may at first glance seem indistinguishable. Both fall under the rubric of “fall protection,” but there are important distinctions.

The main difference between arrest and restraint is an “arrest” occurs after a person freefalls through space. In other words, the system stops a worker’s fall that has already occurred, preventing impact at a lower level. In a fall restraint system, however, the worker is restrained from reaching a fall hazard. In such cases, the fall restraint would typically be provided by a fixed-length lanyard and a body harness or body belt. The lanyard acts as a leash, preventing the worker from reaching the leading edge.

Subscribe to SafetyAtWorkBlog to continue reading.
Subscribe Help
Already a member? Log in here

“unsafe” work images in the Adelaide Advertiser

Recently SafetyAtWorkBlog pointed out several instances of the media showing unsafe work practices in images to support, often, unrelated articles.  These types of photos are starting to gain the attention of OHS regulators in Australia.

On 13 July 2011, the Adelaide Advertiser published the picture in support of a sports article about a soccer and cricket player.

Jimmy Okello works as a forklift driver at FrigeIt Logistics in Woodville North, which allows him to spend his leisure time pursuing his passions, cricket and soccer. Picture: Simon Cross

Forklifts are a regular cause of workplace fatalities and standing at height on the tines of a forklift is a serious matter, even when the vehicle is not moving.   Continue reading ““unsafe” work images in the Adelaide Advertiser”

Media is ignorant of unsafe acts in the photos they use

That “a picture tells a thousand words”  appears true in regards to safety as it is in most areas.  This is increasingly so in the new online media but what if the picture is wrong?  Does a wrong picture tell a thousand wrong words?

Recently this blog has written many words about quadbikes and the increasing requirement for mandatory helmets.  Many of the agricultural newspapers are now including photos of riders with helmets where previously battered hats were usual.  This trend of pictures reflecting reality or, at least, the current safety practices seems rare.

The image above was used by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation to accompany an article on the in solar panels and rebates. Continue reading “Media is ignorant of unsafe acts in the photos they use”

Useful safety information from the US

One always has to be careful about information released on April Fools’ Day but in 2011 an important pieces of safety information from the United States was released – a video message from the Chemical Safety Board (CSB).  A reader also pointed to a set of OHS case studies from the University of Massachusetts Lowell (UMASS) released in January.

Twelve months after the Tesoro Refinery fire in Washington in which seven people died, CSB is continuing its investigation but has released a video message, by Chairperson Rafael Moure-Eraso, that is confronting and displays the exasperation of  safety regulators.

Continue reading “Useful safety information from the US”

New documentary of the politics of OHS regulation in the United States

Two years ago, Rachel Maddow in the United States reported on the performance of the Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) under President George W Bush revealed by the Washington Post.  Cavelight Films is in the process of completing a film, Cost of Construction, First video below) which looks at the big OSHA and political context as it relates to the safety performance on a major construction project in Las Vegas.

From the trailer above, and additional information available through the Cavelight website, the film  illustrates the dubious societal value of basic capitalist approaches to workplace safety. Continue reading “New documentary of the politics of OHS regulation in the United States”

OHS in procurement guideline should be the start and not the end

The Chris Maxwell Report into OHS in Victoria is of historical interest now but one concept in particular from the report continues to echo in OHS and Government circles – government departments and authorities as exemplars of workplace safety.

The latest echo of this concept appeared in a WorkSafe Week seminar in Melbourne on 25 October 2010.  The seminar was to discuss the integration of OHS requirements in the procurement of construction services by government.

Maxwell said that

“…the Government as a whole can promote compliance, by being an exemplar of OHS best practice.  The public sector is a very large employer in Victoria and it should lead the way in OHS.”

and that

“…influence can be exerted by governments on dutyholders by making improved OHS performance a condition of eligibility for them to participate in government contract/tender processes.’

Maxwell’s statement came from the application of the parental question about leading by example, role model, “walking the walk”.  How can one expect contractors to operate safely if the client does not?  How can a parent expect good behaviour from children if good behaviour is not shown by the parent?

That government-as-OHS-exemplar continues to be discussed illustrates that the Maxwell statement must have had a considerable sting for government departments in Victoria. Continue reading “OHS in procurement guideline should be the start and not the end”

Major rethink on Australian Standards needed

A recent download of a “free” guide from the Victorian Building Commission on retrofitting a home for bushfire protection raised the ongoing nonsense of Australian Standards costs.  Sure enough, this free guide is only notionally so; if you don’t hand over $100  then the guide has limited use.

The guide I got, “A guide to retrofit your home for better protection from a bushfire”, is packed with useful info, up to the point you need the nitty-gritty.  Time and time again the reader is sent off to AS 3959 – Construction of buildings in bush-fire prone areas.  Being in OH&S-World we get used to that little double-blind.  Happens all the time with regs and codes and all sorts of guidance stuff.  And it is ridiculous. Its gotta change.

As best as I know a massive cost of development of Australian Standards is born by the participating development organizations.  They are the ones that foot the salary bill to have their staff go off to meetings to formulate the Standards.  Sure, there is going to be lots of other costs, but from what I can see this critical contribution to the development of Australian Standards is a cost to the businesses and government agencies taking part (ultimately a community cost) and the double whammy comes when you want to buy a Standard.

The fact that such an important bit of guidance on protecting homes from bushfire is essentially diminished by the need to spend $100 to get the Standard really slams home the point that change has to happen.

For mine, all PDF downloads of Australian Standards should be free.  A cost recovery cost for a hard copy seems fair enough. I don’t know about the experience of others, but it borders on embarrassing to be giving a punter help on this or that OH&S issue and then have to add “Oh and I think you have no choice but to fork out $XXX for this Standard.”  I hate that, and where I can I avoid it.  But clearly there’s times when it’s impossible.

Perhaps it’s time to get fair dinkum about improved standards of safety, and fair dinkum in way that truly cuts the bullshit?  And that means nationally developed Standards become the nation’s product; PDF copies free to anyone who needs to use ‘em.

Col Finnie
col@finiohs.com

Concatenate Web Development
© Designed and developed by Concatenate Aust Pty Ltd