Don’t risk cutting corners

Most UK employers with responsibility for overhead lifting equipment will be aware of the need to ensure it is subject to periodic thorough examination. This requirement is set out in the Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations (LOLER), which have been in force since the late 1990s.

However, LEEA has recently felt the need to alert UK employers to the dangers of being misled as regards their obligations in this respect. This reflects growing concerns within the lifting industry that some companies are being tempted to cut costs by not conducting thorough examinations as frequently as required by LOLER. As a result, they put themselves at risk of prosecution, and their staff and the public at risk of accidents caused by safety-critical equipment that is not fit for purpose.

Over the past few months, a number of LEEA members have reported incidents of lifting equipment owners being advised that money can be saved by routinely extending the intervals between thorough examinations to 12 months. This is plainly wrong. LOLER clearly states that, once in service, lifting equipment for lifting persons or accessories for lifting must be thoroughly examined by a competent person every six months. And it should be borne in mind that the term ‘lifting accessories’ includes numerous commonly used items such as shackles, steels, hooks and round slings. 

Only for lifting equipment that does not fall into one of these two categories is the period extended to every 12 months.

There also appears to be a risk that the potential offered by LOLER to specify different intervals between thorough examinations, using what is known as an examination scheme, is being misinterpreted. If an employer does want to go down this route, the examination scheme must be formally drawn up by a competent person. Any extension to intervals between thorough examinations must be based on a rigorous risk assessment.

While thorough examinations are usually conducted by external companies, responsibility for compliance with LOLER lies with the owner of the equipment, not suppliers of examination and inspection services. In the event of prosecution, the fact that incorrect advice had been given by an inspection company would not provide the employer in question with a means of defence.

Irrespective of legal obligations, a regular programme of thorough examinations is a vital element of any safe lifting operation, providing a cost-effective insurance policy against the implications of equipment failure. To avoid being misled, and optimise both safety and efficiency, employers are therefore well advised to keep themselves acquainted with the key requirements of LOLER. In the event of doubt, a number of helpful resources are readily available, including the HSE website, the Approved Code of Practice that accompanies LOLER, and LEEA’s own range of end user publications.