• Enlarge

A Tower Crane National Register is good in principle but what about in practice?

Scafftag’s Business Manager, Jonathan Edwin, explains why he thinks the HSE’s new proposal for a tower crane register is a good idea but doesn’t go far enough.

Since 2000 eight people have been killed and several more seriously injured from incidents involving tower cranes . The number and severity of the incidents have resulted in the Health and Safety Executive’s (HSE) recommendation for a national tower crane register to be introduced.  This has led to the current consultation period.

We believe that in principle the register will help towards improving the control and management of cranes and therefore safety. However, we also feel that the proposed scope of the register is too limited and that it does not represent a “silver bullet” solution.

The HSE is only proposing to register conventional tower cranes but feedback from our customers is that it should be extended to cover all cranes except hiabs and similar smaller cranes. From talking to our customers, these types of crane have as many accidents associated with them as tower cranes.

There is also currently no consideration being given to the competence of the crane operator.  These are skilled and knowledgeable individuals and regular re-training on safety practices could confirm their competency at all times. A register on operators may be as vital as one on the actual cranes.

As one of our close industry contacts Ian Fyall at Simian Risk says “the HSE need to go further by following the asbestos regulations and having only HSE approved Instructors and training companies followed by HSE approved Maintenance and Manufacturers.”

Much more research and knowledge dissemination to industry stakeholders is also required.
Crane design should be given some bearing and research could be conducted into the wind loading on certain designs to ensure continued safe operation. Also best practice guidance on inspections and maintenance such as that produced by the Strategic Forum for Construction needs to be publicised as available.

Practicalities surrounding the policing and use of the register are also vague such as:
How will the HSE enforce companies to submit details to the register?
If data is submitted will sites be visited to verify it is accurate?

The cost of the register is restrictive - we shouldn’t let cost dictate principle. The HSE is proposing an investment of £420,000 and an ongoing charge of £20 per crane for each registration if just tower cranes are included but much higher costs if the scope is extended to other crane types. Focusing solely on conventional tower cranes will only tackle part of the problem. Surely this is an important issue and one that deserves the more substantial investment the HSE mentions so that the entire issue can be addressed? Certainly it is believe the industry would be willing to contribute if the register helps to improve safety knowledge and practices. Again, quoting Ian Fyall at Simian Risk “a registration fee of around £20 is peanuts compared to the amount a crane costs daily on site or an accident”

If this register is adopted it will need the help and cooperation of the industry and the HSE to make it an efficient and effective process and it would be more economical for the HSE and the companies involved for information to be recorded electronically.  An electronic system would be a streamlined and productive process, it will allow operators and inspectors to fill in the information quickly and all information can be stored and easily accessed. This type of recording would make registration easy and ensure the register was fully comprehensive.

Whilst the register is a good idea in principle, it is a short-term solution that won’t solve the problem. Long-term solutions need to be recognised to ensure the safety and health of workers and the public around the majority of cranes.