Spotted on a job site in the UK, no idea where, a boom lift equipped with a Harness On device to help remind /ensure that boom lift operators clip on their lanyard before operating a boom lift.
However, in this case, as was always a risk, the operator has used a large wrench with podger end to fool the system and avoid clipping on. One assumes they may not have had a harness or lanyard or are just stupid. The odd thing here is that it looks as though a lanyard has been attached to the anchor point, maybe the dive was not picking up the Lanyard carabiner? In which case understandable reaction.
When using a boom lift like this without a harness and short lanyard, there is always a risk of being bounced out of the cage, particularly if the work involves driving at height, operation in the vicinity of passing traffic, or working anywhere near any other operations such steel erection, cranes and tree pruning/felling, or any work that may result in something falling on the boom.
While this gamble has low odds it is somewhat senseless. Sadly it still happens all too often.
Your right to free speech is fully supported by me, however your statement is not supported by the facts. So please allow me the right of reply, as one who has spent 18yrs Researching 1653 Crane and Lifting Incidents worldwide, all of which has killed 930 men and women.
Aerial Work Platforms of Boom & Scissor Lifts involved in 115 x Incidents in 18yrs.
And
These 115 x AWP Workplace Incidents led to 106 Fatalities worldwide in that very same 18 yr period from 2007 to 2025.
Moreover the HSE report for 2023 confirms that 138 Men and Women were killed at work in UK during 2023. With 51 x Killed in the UK Construction industry many involving Fatal falls from a Height.
Finally and in closing the photo depicted above of an Open Ended Spanner jammed into an Intelligent Anchor Point Safety device Confirms once again that Worker Safety is indeed being compromised by dangerous working practices, such as by the chancer who defeated this safety device depicted above.
Why have I undertaken this 18yrs of research….
because Worker Safety is important, very important and much too important to leave it to chance ?
o
The HSE report for 2023 confirms that 142 men and women were killed at Work in the UK with 51 Fatal Incidents in the Construction Industry many involving Fatal Falls from a Height. Thus damaging 100 or more children who are all affected for life due to the painful loss of Mum or Dad.
Worker Safety is important, very important and much
Too important to leave it to chance ?
I hope this message reaches you on your high horse.
Firstly, I am not Mr. "Fooled the System". I was merely quoting the words of the editor of this article/website.
Secondly, I too have witnessed an avoidable fatality through the lack of wearing a harness. A horrible outcome.
Thirdly, at no point did I condone unsafe work practices. What I did say is that the operator may have had to latch on to one of the many other anchor points around the basket in order to reach something close to that corner of the basket. That in itself is a perfectly safe and acceptable practice. The alternative would be to lengthen their lanyard, which would not be good practice, because if they were then thrown from the basket, the longer lanyard could lead to more severe, or even fatal injury.
With this so called safety device, there would therefore be an inherent added danger of remaining latched on to it in the case where the operator needed to reach something over the furthers corners from where this device is attached to the basket, because of the need to lengthen the lanyard. Are you condoning that?
In order to latch on to any other anchor point around the basket, while still finely adjusting the the position of the basket, an operator therefore has no choice but to "fool" this easily fooled device.
If you wish to speak about liability, let's take that conversation a bit further. There are many very well managed sites around the country, where anyone not wearing a harness will be spotted almost instantly, and will be immediately issued a warning, and sent for additional training.
Then there are other sites, where the contractors or safety managers don't want to put the correct controls and training in place, but rather insist on a device like this for no other reason other than to say they did their best, while what they are really doing is moving the liability towards the employees, rather than train and manage them properly.
I would argue the IAP is not a safety device, and the safety device is the harness and lanyard, coupled with the OEM anchor point.
The IAP is a product used for enforcement.
I'm not a lawyer, but I imagine this could be successfully argued. The IAP does not intrinsically offer any benefit other than to remind/force harness use. In itself it is another point of failure.
I also think it could be argued that because it requires a change to the use of a harness (ie shortening the lanyard to account for the additional length between harness and anchor point) that in fact it adds risk in some situations. And that's not to mention scenarios working close to or over water where most guidance suggests harnesses should not be worn.
As one man who has indeed spent many a day in the basket of a boom, rigging a Crane. Please allow me the right of reply. Your use of a Open Ended Spanner to defeat the Intelligent Anchor point on this machine depicted above is not unusual
and your explanation of the reason why in order to Reach some in-accessable spot is well made.
However, what you have failed to mention is that when you inserted the podger end of your Spanner to defeat this Intelligent Anchor point you transferred the Liability in Law from your employer ( Who is Vicariously Liable for all Employees) to you personally and in the event of a Fatal Incident could well find yourself facing Criminal charges upto and including Manslaughter.
This is because of section 8 of The HSW Act 1974, which is copied below.
Section 8.
No person shall intentionally or recklessly interfere with or misuse anything (Any Safety Device) provided in the interests of (Workers) Health, Safety or Welfare in pursuance of any of the relevant statutory provisions.
Finally as a Man who has Witnessed an Avoidable Fatal Incident first hand, may I suggest that you think about the implications for your personal Liberty before defeating any other Safety Device, all of which are fitted for your own Protection and for all other Workers in close proximity to your Boom.
Why, because Worker Safety is important, very important and much too important to leave it to chance ?
_______
Just because the operator "fooled" the system doesn't mean they didn't have a harness, a lanyard, or are stupid.
They may well have had a harness, and have clipped on to one of the many other anchor points around the basket, as if often necessary when trying to reach something from a basket, and which is perfectly legitimate.
And that is exactly why this device is a total waste of money, because nobody, even Nationwide Platforms, is going to fit one of these devices on every anchor point around a basket. Most likely the people who came up with this idea never actually did a days work from the basket of a boom, because had they done so they would have realised it isn't the right solution.
Benji
It might be as simple as the correct use of this IAP is to shorten a lanyard, but the person operating the boom doesn't want to keep adjusting lanyard between booms, and so even though they clip on, the enforced use of this IAP (because the boom will not operate without it) means they just bypass it.
This solution isn't the greatest way to address the problem, as it requires more thought than just attaching a harness.
Also, as is often the case in human nature, a rule which is enforced in totality (machine doesn't operate unless harness is in the IAP) often causes people to find a way around it.
I expect you're better off winning hearts and minds, or using a ‘softer’ approach to encouraging harness use.
Longstaff retired
We once had an HR12 which was cross-hired to a local rental company which we collected and upon arrival in our yard I was called over by our engineers to be shown the low/high-speed limit switch had been deliberately taped down allowing it to be driven at high speed whilst fully elevated.
The more you idiot-proof a machine, the better the idiot!
Master of nothing
Deliberately defeating a safety device, is it ignorance, dirty protest, hasn't got a tool belt to put the podger in, stupidity or just a death wish
o
Good Morning Mr ‘Fooled the System’,
Your right to free speech is fully supported by me, however your statement is not supported by the facts. So please allow me the right of reply, as one who has spent 18yrs Researching 1653 Crane and Lifting Incidents worldwide, all of which has killed 930 men and women.
Aerial Work Platforms of Boom & Scissor Lifts involved in 115 x Incidents in 18yrs.
And
These 115 x AWP Workplace Incidents led to 106 Fatalities worldwide in that very same 18 yr period from 2007 to 2025.
Moreover the HSE report for 2023 confirms that 138 Men and Women were killed at work in UK during 2023. With 51 x Killed in the UK Construction industry many involving Fatal falls from a Height.
Finally and in closing the photo depicted above of an Open Ended Spanner jammed into an Intelligent Anchor Point Safety device Confirms once again that Worker Safety is indeed being compromised by dangerous working practices, such as by the chancer who defeated this safety device depicted above.
Why have I undertaken this 18yrs of research….
because Worker Safety is important, very important and much too important to leave it to chance ?
Kind Regards
Mike Ponsonby
_______
And again Mr. Ponsonby,
You are not hearing what is being said/writen. You are the only one here talking about leaving things to chance.
o
The HSE report for 2023 confirms that 142 men and women were killed at Work in the UK with 51 Fatal Incidents in the Construction Industry many involving Fatal Falls from a Height. Thus damaging 100 or more children who are all affected for life due to the painful loss of Mum or Dad.
Worker Safety is important, very important and much
Too important to leave it to chance ?
Yours Sincerely
Mike Ponsonby
_______
Mr. Ponsonby,
I hope this message reaches you on your high horse.
Firstly, I am not Mr. "Fooled the System". I was merely quoting the words of the editor of this article/website.
Secondly, I too have witnessed an avoidable fatality through the lack of wearing a harness. A horrible outcome.
Thirdly, at no point did I condone unsafe work practices. What I did say is that the operator may have had to latch on to one of the many other anchor points around the basket in order to reach something close to that corner of the basket. That in itself is a perfectly safe and acceptable practice. The alternative would be to lengthen their lanyard, which would not be good practice, because if they were then thrown from the basket, the longer lanyard could lead to more severe, or even fatal injury.
With this so called safety device, there would therefore be an inherent added danger of remaining latched on to it in the case where the operator needed to reach something over the furthers corners from where this device is attached to the basket, because of the need to lengthen the lanyard. Are you condoning that?
In order to latch on to any other anchor point around the basket, while still finely adjusting the the position of the basket, an operator therefore has no choice but to "fool" this easily fooled device.
If you wish to speak about liability, let's take that conversation a bit further. There are many very well managed sites around the country, where anyone not wearing a harness will be spotted almost instantly, and will be immediately issued a warning, and sent for additional training.
Then there are other sites, where the contractors or safety managers don't want to put the correct controls and training in place, but rather insist on a device like this for no other reason other than to say they did their best, while what they are really doing is moving the liability towards the employees, rather than train and manage them properly.
Benji
Dear Mike Ponsonby,
I would argue the IAP is not a safety device, and the safety device is the harness and lanyard, coupled with the OEM anchor point.
The IAP is a product used for enforcement.
I'm not a lawyer, but I imagine this could be successfully argued. The IAP does not intrinsically offer any benefit other than to remind/force harness use. In itself it is another point of failure.
I also think it could be argued that because it requires a change to the use of a harness (ie shortening the lanyard to account for the additional length between harness and anchor point) that in fact it adds risk in some situations. And that's not to mention scenarios working close to or over water where most guidance suggests harnesses should not be worn.
o
Good Morning Mr ‘Fooled the System'
As one man who has indeed spent many a day in the basket of a boom, rigging a Crane. Please allow me the right of reply. Your use of a Open Ended Spanner to defeat the Intelligent Anchor point on this machine depicted above is not unusual
and your explanation of the reason why in order to Reach some in-accessable spot is well made.
However, what you have failed to mention is that when you inserted the podger end of your Spanner to defeat this Intelligent Anchor point you transferred the Liability in Law from your employer ( Who is Vicariously Liable for all Employees) to you personally and in the event of a Fatal Incident could well find yourself facing Criminal charges upto and including Manslaughter.
This is because of section 8 of The HSW Act 1974, which is copied below.
Section 8.
No person shall intentionally or recklessly interfere with or misuse anything (Any Safety Device) provided in the interests of (Workers) Health, Safety or Welfare in pursuance of any of the relevant statutory provisions.
Finally as a Man who has Witnessed an Avoidable Fatal Incident first hand, may I suggest that you think about the implications for your personal Liberty before defeating any other Safety Device, all of which are fitted for your own Protection and for all other Workers in close proximity to your Boom.
Why, because Worker Safety is important, very important and much too important to leave it to chance ?
Kind Regards
Mike Ponsonby
_______
Just because the operator "fooled" the system doesn't mean they didn't have a harness, a lanyard, or are stupid.
They may well have had a harness, and have clipped on to one of the many other anchor points around the basket, as if often necessary when trying to reach something from a basket, and which is perfectly legitimate.
And that is exactly why this device is a total waste of money, because nobody, even Nationwide Platforms, is going to fit one of these devices on every anchor point around a basket. Most likely the people who came up with this idea never actually did a days work from the basket of a boom, because had they done so they would have realised it isn't the right solution.
Benji
It might be as simple as the correct use of this IAP is to shorten a lanyard, but the person operating the boom doesn't want to keep adjusting lanyard between booms, and so even though they clip on, the enforced use of this IAP (because the boom will not operate without it) means they just bypass it.
This solution isn't the greatest way to address the problem, as it requires more thought than just attaching a harness.
Also, as is often the case in human nature, a rule which is enforced in totality (machine doesn't operate unless harness is in the IAP) often causes people to find a way around it.
I expect you're better off winning hearts and minds, or using a ‘softer’ approach to encouraging harness use.
Longstaff retired
We once had an HR12 which was cross-hired to a local rental company which we collected and upon arrival in our yard I was called over by our engineers to be shown the low/high-speed limit switch had been deliberately taped down allowing it to be driven at high speed whilst fully elevated.
The more you idiot-proof a machine, the better the idiot!
Master of nothing
Deliberately defeating a safety device, is it ignorance, dirty protest, hasn't got a tool belt to put the podger in, stupidity or just a death wish