Low level access stuff

[IRW]

I move that we start calling that thing a Shortescope. ;)

I favour "Smallascope"

 

Sorry Glyn, that's assigned already...it's what we used to call our Model 9812 (in comparison to our 50518) at one of my previous venues!

 

(stock photo from AA website!)

Edited February 21, 2021 by IRW

[dje]

Unlike MEWPs there is no obligation to be formally accredited for access platforms, just that the users and management are competent and follow properly risk assessed procedures. However I will recommend an on-site training session for as many volunteers as can be mustered post-lockdown and that the ladders get locked away.

 

If it affects your decision at all... can I just put it out there that there is no legal obligation to be formally accredited to use MEWPs. An accreditation (in the IPAF PAL card) exists... but it is not mandated by the HSE.

Realistically, your obligation to ensure that your people are properly trained in using the podium steps is no greater or lesser an obligation than to ensure they are properly trained on the MEWP.

The Health and Safety at Work Act requires the employer to ensure that employees are suitably trained and indeed competent to use any equipment that they may need to use as part of their job.

However it does not require any particular form of accreditation to demonstrate that (nor does it require any formal accreditation or even formalised training. It just requires competence).

From a legal standpoint, there is absolutely nothing wrong with providing your staff with MEWP training which is relevant to the machine they're using and the environment they're using it in. There would be nothing at all wrong with you delivering in-house training on the specific machine and the hazards associated with the machine and the venue, and allowing people to work under that training. You might like to do your own proof of training (ie having all candidates fill out a quiz and do a short practical in front of you on the machine to demonstrate they have understood the lesson content)... I think this is a good idea, but I would say the same for anyone being taught to use the podium steps.

 

The IPAF card exists in recognition of the fact that a lot of people working with MEWPs are self employed / freelancers / casual employees and therefore work from site-to-site and machine-to-machine so therefore a generic and single 'ticket' to demonstrate proof of training is valuable to site managers ensuring that contractors on their sites are suitably trained for the machine they're using - considering that the contractor and site manager may not be known to you. But for a regular roster of theatre staff, working on the same machine, in the same building every time... the rationale behind the IPAF PAL card is not so relevant.

 

It always amazes me how many venues pick ladders so as to not spend out on IPAF training and tickets. They're voluntarily putting their staff at greater risk to avoid an expense which isn't necessary anyway!

Edited February 22, 2021 by dje

[sleah]

Personally, I think 4m is borderline between a decent set of Zarges (A-frame ladders) and MEWP, but it depends on your circumstances and how you and other uses feel about ladders.

 

We've recently moved in to a new build school where the ceiling heights in the performance spaces are around 6.2m, which is too high for my liking to use ladders.

In the previous buildings we had Zarges in one space and scaffold in another.

I convinced the powers that be to buy a MEWP for the new build (rather than existing scaffold (which is perfectly good!), I gave all the pros and cons plus I did a risk assemesment for using ladders, using scaffold and using MEWP.

The MEWP won pretty much hands down, with very few cons.

It may be worth you doing similar.