Choosing access starts with the work that needs doing. The ladder in the store cupboard might be familiar. The tower might already be on site. The hire company might have a scissor lift available tomorrow. None of those facts settles which equipment is suitable for the job. Start with the work that needs doing, then consider the access options.
First ask whether the task can be completed from ground level. If work at height remains necessary, plan how falls will be prevented. HSE guidance favours protection that benefits everyone using the work area, such as guarded working platforms, before measures that rely on an individual person's equipment.
HSE says ladders may be appropriate where the assessment shows higher-protection equipment is not justified because of low risk and short use, or fixed workplace features. A quick job alone does not make a ladder suitable. Think about the task itself: will the worker need both hands, exert force, carry materials or keep moving sideways? Repeatedly climbing down and repositioning may also change how the job should be approached.
A mobile tower and a MEWP each bring their own planning questions. What working area is needed? How will people and materials reach it? Can the equipment be positioned where the work actually is? What do the ground, floor, doorway and nearby obstructions allow? The answer needs to include safe access and departure, not simply maximum working height.
Imagine maintaining several signs along a building frontage. Before selecting equipment, describe the reach, tools, pedestrian route and position of every sign. That short brief helps a competent planner and equipment supplier understand the requirement; a request for 'something that goes high enough' leaves much more unanswered.
Training should follow the equipment and responsibilities selected. Ladder users, tower users and MEWP operators do not all need the same course. Managers also need to understand the arrangements they are supervising. Tell Harris Safety what your team does and which access equipment is involved, so we can discuss relevant training options.
Compare how each realistic option would work from delivery to completion. For a tower, consider assembly space and the work positions it can serve. For a MEWP, include the travel route and arrangements for people nearby. For a ladder, consider whether the task and its duration remain suitable when delays or repeated visits are included. The assessment should reflect the way the job will actually happen, including interruptions and interaction with other trades.
A useful planning exercise is to explain the proposed method to somebody who has not visited the site. Show where the equipment will stand, how the worker reaches the task and where tools and materials will be placed. If your explanation depends on reaching awkwardly, borrowing another contractor’s equipment or moving barriers during use, there are unresolved decisions. Identify them before hire or delivery so the plan can be reviewed by someone competent.
Ask what happens if the preferred method becomes unavailable. The alternative still needs assessment; it should not become acceptable simply because it is already in the van. A supervisor should know who can authorise a revised arrangement and when work should pause. Discuss foreseeable changes such as deliveries blocking an access route or a work area remaining occupied longer than expected. Practical contingency planning reduces pressure to improvise.
Employers in Worcester can use Harris Safety’s locations and contact information to discuss training after the access method has been considered. Explain whether you need steps and ladders training, PASMA tower training, IPAF operator training or support for people managing powered access. Ask the team to confirm the appropriate course and delivery location. Training should equip people for the method selected, while the site assessment and equipment instructions govern the particular job.
Discuss your task and access-training needs with Harris Safety.
