Legal Height for Platform without Railings

[Georgia Forsyth]

Hello!

I am wondering what the legal height maximum is for a platform on stage without accompanying railings for actor safety. There will be actors on the platform, students actually, so their safety is paramount but we would like to get away without safety railings if at all possible. 

Thanks in advance! 

[Andrew C]

No "legal" height, there used to be a guidance (2m from memory) - it now all depends on your risk assessment.

What many places do is rehearse with railings, teaching the actors where the edge is, perform without. You could add "edge indicators" small LEDs, a raised lip, or whatever.

[kitlane]

As Andrew stated, there is no, nor (do I believe) has there ever been, a 'legal' height under which you did not need handrails. IIRC the 2m (or was it 6ft?) figure came from a specific regulation related to the construction industry. Because there was nothing else to go on, our industry adopted this as normal practice, but it was never even an 'official' guideline.

You need to carry out a Risk Assessment, which to a large extent will consider the Working At Height Regulations. A fall from any height has the potential to cause harm. You can step backwards off a 6" high deck and fall and bash your head, resulting in serious injury or worse. Standing next to an open trap door is Working at Height as there is potential to fall. Control Measures to allow an unprotected edge might include careful rehearsal, blocking actors to keep a minimum distance from the edge and making the edge clearly visible. None of these will be as good as having a sturdy handrail of some sort, so give serious consideration to that as an option.

[J Pearce]

2 hours ago, Georgia Forsyth said:

we would like to get away without safety railings if at all possible.

This language should ring alarm bells.

”Get away with” is not indicative of good safety planning.

A good thought experiment is - what would I say in court if it went wrong.

[paulears]

If I may respond here with my moderator hat on (and ex-educator). 

 

The comments here really do spell out the situation.

Safety is NEVER about working to the regulations. So there is no legal specification here, it is the result of your risk assessment. Speaking from experience, I had a student fall from a 1.2m decking and break his ankle. I had made the assumption that 1.2m being the height of a stage was perfectly safe with no rail, but these are students and safety is NOT inbuilt into them, and even experts do silly things.

 

We have had some moderator reports on this and while our viewpoint may seem harsh and unhelpful, it probably helps prevent injury. Remember that falling off a Juliet balcony can put people in wheelchairs for life. It should always be remembered that you would also need to justify your actions in court. There could be examples where a 2m balcony could be deemed safe and a 1m one unsafe - the risk assessments are essential, and focus the mind. I've actually spent hours today doing dozens and my name and my ticks in boxes are what I would have to defend to a judge. Georgia isn't unique in wanting this info - but what she wants does not exist. If you even found one on the net, what would Judge Judy say when the person breaks their neck?

 

One thing  - we are a pedantic bunch and "get away with" is never recommended. In fact, sometimes we do fly close to the wind, when we understand and can control the processes - but we are never trying to get away with it. It does sound like what is being sought is a 'permission' to do something you want to do by following some kind of rule, and nowadays, there are rarely rules like this. Many have been removed to put the onus on the responsible person - Georgia simply has to look at the thing she wants to do and justify her decision. It cannot be sidestepped, which is probably the best policy.

In context - we used to have a fire officer visit and try to set fire to the scenery. It failed if the theatre burnt down. Now, the fire service make the responsible person the one who decides if it is safe. 

 

The advice here, though perhaps not what the OP hoped for, is valid.

Paul

Mods

 

 

[Brian]

It's not helpful but the Yellow Book says this...

D2.01 Barriers should be provided to all stairs, ramps, landings, platforms, balconies, galleries and other changes of level exceeding 380mm

Now this is referring to public areas but it shows how seriously the authorities take falls.

It is, in all other areas, completely silent on the subject.

[sunray]

2 hours ago, paulears said:

If I may respond here with my moderator hat on (and ex-educator). 

 

The comments here really do spell out the situation.

Safety is NEVER about working ti the regulations. So there is no legal specification here, it is the result of your risk assessment. Speaking from experience, I had a student fall from a 1.2m decking and break his ankle. I had made the assumption that 1.2m being the height of a stage was perfectly safe with no rail, but these are students and safety is NOT inbuilt into them, and even experts do silly things.

 

We have had some moderator reports on this and while our viewpoint may seem harsh and unhelpful, it probably helps prevent injury. Remember that falling off a Juliet balcony can put people in wheelchairs for life. It should always be remembered that you would also need to justify your actions in court. There could be examples where a 2m balcony could be deemed safe and a 1m one unsafe - the risk assessments are essential, and focus the mind. I've actually spent hours today doing dozens and my name and my ticks in boxes are what I would have to defend to a judge. Georgia isn't unique in wanting this info - but what she wants does not exist. If you even found one on the net, what would Judge Judy say when the person breaks their neck?

 

One thing  - we are a pedantic bunch and "get away with" is never recommended. In fact, sometimes we do fly close to the wind, when we understand and can control the processes - but we are never trying to get away with it. It does sound like what is being sought is a 'permission' to do something you want to do by following some kind of rule, and nowadays, there are rarely rules like this. Many have been removed to put the onus on the responsible person - Georgia simply has to look at the thing she wants to do and justify her decision. It cannot be sidestepped, which is probably the best policy.

In context - we used to have a fire officer visit and try to set fire to the scenery. It failed if the theatre burnt down. Now, the fire service make the responsible person the one who decides if it is safe. 

 

The advice here, though perhaps not what the OP hoped for, is valid.

Paul

Mods

 

 

Thank you Paul.

I read OP within a minute or two of being posted and thought about it on and off through the day. I had got to the same opinion(there must be a more appropriate word) as you and had started trying to compose a reply without sounding condescending or rude.

Thanks for saying it properly, I need to find one of those "Wot he said" emogies.

[Dave m]

Is Georgia perhaps a student asking about a school production? I just get that vibe.

could a wire barrier be a solution to an “invisible” rail?

[Gerry]

A quick delve into her profile and a Google search shows she is the theatre technician at the Macready Theatre in Rugby.

Cheers

Gerry

[kerry davies]

I think others have answered the OP, there is no legal maximum

Students are capable of all sorts of activities if the Risk Assessment takes account of inexperience, lack of maturity and level of responsibility. HSE tells me that.

In construction they use restraining harnesses and tethers to prevent people getting too close to an edge which is a bit OTT for theatre but is one option. When edge marking a platform for amateurs and youngsters I found it helped to mark an "edge" a foot or so inside the actual edge and rehearse them thoroughly. I am not a fan of raised edge markers as with amateurs and youngsters they can too easily become trip hazards.

Never, ever even think "get away with" on safety matters and add yet more negatives when it comes to students. 

[sunray]

14 hours ago, kerry davies said:

I am not a fan of raised edge markers as with amateurs and youngsters they can too easily become trip hazards.

Never, ever even think "get away with" on safety matters and add yet more negatives when it comes to students. 

In my opinion raised edges have always been a trip hazard.

For a number of years we used a floating barge as a sound stage and the edge of the deck has a raised edge of well under an inch, as insisted by the H&S for the event and the design satisfied that. every fall while loading kit on and off 12 times during the event was tripping while coming off.

 

'Get away with' must never be words used when designing safety. And hopefully not after an event either.

[paulears]

I mentioned I was doing risk assessments - one made me think a bit. It was talking about practicals, in our case mock candles, run off dimmers. The risk assessment details indicate that I have determined that the construction and state of repair were fully compliant with bla bla bla. I wasn't there and have no idea how they were constructed, but I have to be the one who states they are safe. Too often, the status of equipment, scenery, constructions and things like this do have to be considered. Georgia is starting out in this industry and could possibly be in the position of having to make these decisions, so I really understand the questions she asked. The snag (and it has been a recurring topic on here for at least 20 years) is that asking the question proves that your risk assessment and conclusion could be troublesome if something happens. I know I bang on about Judge Judy, but she uses her logic perfectly on the TV show. How can you prove competence? Difficult. However, you can prove you are not competent by simply asking. Competence to do the risk assessment must be an internal thing. I'm ancient now but constantly add to my collection of knowledge. Whenever I have to make decisions, they are based on history mostly, rarely the internet. In panto rehearsals, I have two big thick crash mats. With both, one routine is safe, with a big margin of over-the-topness. I am asked if we can do it with one. No rules on this, so I look at them and start to think one is fine, then I notice what the routine is actually doing, so I'm thinking two really is necessary. Then I note the sight lines compromise the routine, so I figure the only test will be me. Old, really bad back and over-weight compared to the turns. So I try it on me. The result makes me comfortable with my decision - one will be fine. If it comes to Judge Judy time - what will happen? I would explain what I had done, and how I tested it, and based on that test, determined the result, and I would stick to this decision. Form completed, my test and conclusion included in the notes box - move on. 

Health and Safety cannot be something a forum can decide for you. It's vital you rely on things you personally can justify. 

[the kid]

One thing to remember about railings is that having them also means having them Do their job. Your staging company will have railings suitable and strong enough when installed correctly. NO point in having a fall protection that falls apart when you lean against it, or is at such a height it helps you fall. OR allows you to get stuck (there are building guides on how they should be constructed with distances of rails etc etc).