Rethinking Ladder Safety

From the incident data, we can see the traditional approach to ladder safety isn’t working. What is the solution?

Key Takeaways

  • Traditional rule-based ladder safety training is often ineffective; a shift toward risk management is necessary.
  • Hardware solutions like industrial-grade ladders and accessories improve stability and safety but do not eliminate misuse.
  • Most ladder-related injuries result from misuse, especially at heights less than 10 feet, highlighting the need for better safety practices.
  • The zone method breaks down safety checks into manageable segments, focusing on hazards for each body zone and environment to enhance safety awareness.

The traditional approach to ladder safety training is to cite a bunch of rules and expect people to remember them. This isn’t working. Each year, half a million people are treated for ladder-related injuries in the United States, and falling off a ladder is a leading cause of workplace fatalities.

Our focus here is on portable ladders, but many of the concepts also apply to fixed ladders.

Hardware

Hardware-based solutions include:

  • Buying only industrial-grade ladders solves the weight limit problem. They cost significantly more than consumer-grade ladders but are more stable and more durable.
  • Adding multi-position ladders to the ladder inventory reduces the “I couldn’t find the right size ladder” excuse for using too short of a ladder.
  • Providing ladder accessories allows users to make a ladder significantly safer in a given application.
  • Requiring a sign-out protocol makes users responsible for pre-use ladder inspection.

Misuse

Hardware solutions don’t stop people from misusing ladders however. Most ladder-related deaths are from less than 10 ft above grade, which strongly indicates most fatal incidents involve ladder misuse. It’s one of the many clues we have that ladder misuse is rampant. The question is how do we reduce it?

Companies have tried various solutions, such as more frequent training, signs posted at ladder corrals, and more aggressive enforcement. Do we need bigger “Do not stand on top rung” warnings on step ladders? Do we need more warnings about other dangerous ladder usage (see Photo on page 24)? Consider that even though every step ladder bears a decal or other marking saying not to stand on the top rung, many people still do.

Simply banning the use of ladders would take misuse to zero, but this is not practical. Reducing the need for ladders is quite practical. Let’s go to the hierarchy of risk control methods [NFPA 70E Sec. 110.3(H)(3)]. Elimination is the first of six strategies. You can take some steps to eliminate the need for ladders (e.g., locate junction boxes within reach of someone standing at grade). You can also take steps to eliminate the tipping hazard of portable ladders. A ladder that is welded in place isn’t going to tip over, but somebody can still fall off of it.

A company’s management can continue down this list to reduce (but not eliminate) ladder dangers. You still have to get people to use ladders safely.

Awareness and self-discipline

OSHA focuses on the employer’s responsibilities. This is a limited tool set. The employer can:

  • Ensure ladders are contractor grade.
  • Ensure ladders are inspected at prescribed intervals and removed from service if damaged.
  • Ensure employees are trained in ladder selection and use.
  • Enforce ladder safety training through a variety of means.

That leaves everything else up to the ladder user. For electrical safety programs, NFPA 70E, Standard for Electrical Safety in the Workplace, puts fairly heavy responsibility on the employee. As you move into NFPA 70E from the front cover, this becomes clear as early as Sec. 110.3(D), which is titled “Awareness and Self-Discipline.” This theme arises repeatedly as you continue through the standard. Why should ladder safety be any different?

When this aspect is missing from the ladder safety aspect of your safety program, people misuse ladders — and it’s usually missing.

A ladder, in simplest terms, is two rails connected by crossbars. What can possibly go wrong? What “goes wrong” is the ladder itself is only part of a dynamic system. In this system, the user must account for such things as:

  • The height needed.
  • The horizontal reach needed.
  • The suitability of the surface the ladder is on. Slick tile floor? Loose gravel? Slanting grade?
  • Lateral forces generated by load shifting, climbing, and reaching.
  • Transportation of tools and materials from grade to the elevated location.
  • User fatigue, user distraction, user errors in set-up, unanticipated foot slippage on rung, user error in downclimbing.

For all but stepladders:

  • The amount of pressure exerted by gravity versus the amount of adhesion generated by the ladder feet at one end and the ladder stabilizer and/or top at the other.
  • The surface the top of the ladder is leaning against and how much adhesion is practical.
  • The angles formed between the top resting point and the work, the grade, and the top resting point.

That’s a lot to account for. Absent a methodical approach, most of it won’t be accounted for. It’s typical to assume the ladder is safe until you spot something unsafe. That’s backwards from how you should look at it. We can again go back to NFPA 70E to draw on an electrical safety principle that we can apply to ladder safety. You assume it’s not in a safe condition until you verify certain conditions have been met [Sec. 110.2].

The zone method

One of the ways to address PPE adequacy is to break the body down into zones, such as eyes, ears, chest, hands, etc. You look at each zone to determine if it’s adequately protected from the dangers identified in the particular environment about to be encountered.

This is a good approach for safe ladder use, too. Instead of trying to recall a bunch of rules before using a ladder, you go one zone at a time and identify the possible dangers in that zone based on the conditions you encounter. Either the applicable rules will emerge from your memory, or you’ll know you need to look them up. What changes is those rules won’t be buried and mixed in with all the other things you have to remember and think about.

Start with the application. You have a base on which to set the ladder and a target higher up where the ladder needs to reach. These are some distance apart. Depending upon that distance and the size of the base, you will determine whether to use a step ladder or a straight ladder. Once you have chosen between these two types, you now know whether both ladder supports will be on the base (stepladder) or if one will be on the surface against which you will be leaning the ladder (straight ladder).

At this point, you’ll know how tall of a ladder you need. Do you have one that tall? If not, is “close enough” a valid choice? Only if you are overshooting with a “too-tall” ladder that still allows you to get a steep enough angle to avoid a “slide out.” If your ladder is too short, you need a taller ladder. This is negotiable only if you think you can win an argument against gravity. So far, nobody has managed to do that.

Once you have established the two end points, make a list of the potential dangers you see as you examine the situation. It may seem outdated, but a pocket notebook is perfect for this. Just write down everything you see, such as loose gravel, grade slants left, or grade slants back. Then use this as a checklist.

For example, if you noted loose gravel then you might solve this by digging down a little way into the gravel. If it’s sharp gravel, it will hold the ladder securely. If it’s smooth (e.g., river rock), it won’t. In the latter case, laying a plywood sheet on top may work, or maybe you will need to dig down past the layer of loose rock.

Since a ladder has only two ends, does that mean you have only two zones? No, because a ladder has a middle. It also has a human on it. For the middle of the ladder, inspect the rungs and any locks or extenders. What else do you see in this zone?

Human limitations

As a user, keep your human limitations in mind. Odds are you don’t have an extra set of arms with which to carry tools while also climbing up and down a ladder. So how will you safely get tools and materials up and then back down? The rope and bucket system is a common solution.

If you’re fatigued, now is not the best time to get on a ladder, so be extra aware. But if you are severely fatigued, stay off the ladder until you have had a chance to rest. It’s better to come back tomorrow than to fall today.

What dangers might be present if you do get on that ladder? Every conscientious electrician wears ANSI-rated safety shoes, but are yours slip resistant? If you are going to use a ladder, it’s best that they are.

The work itself is a distraction from ladder safety awareness and vice-versa. You should ensure you can trust your ladder and forget about it while you are checking that luminaire for 277V. Only when the circuit is locked out or the covers are back in place can you refocus your attention on the ladder and climb safely back down. 

About the Author

Mark Lamendola

Mark Lamendola

Mark is an expert in maintenance management, having racked up an impressive track record during his time working in the field. He also has extensive knowledge of, and practical expertise with, the National Electrical Code (NEC). Through his consulting business, he provides articles and training materials on electrical topics, specializing in making difficult subjects easy to understand and focusing on the practical aspects of electrical work.

Prior to starting his own business, Mark served as the Technical Editor on EC&M for six years, worked three years in nuclear maintenance, six years as a contract project engineer/project manager, three years as a systems engineer, and three years in plant maintenance management.

Mark earned an AAS degree from Rock Valley College, a BSEET from Columbia Pacific University, and an MBA from Lake Erie College. He’s also completed several related certifications over the years and even was formerly licensed as a Master Electrician. He is a Senior Member of the IEEE and past Chairman of the Kansas City Chapters of both the IEEE and the IEEE Computer Society. Mark also served as the program director for, a board member of, and webmaster of, the Midwest Chapter of the 7x24 Exchange. He has also held memberships with the following organizations: NETA, NFPA, International Association of Webmasters, and Institute of Certified Professional Managers.

Sign up for our eNewsletters
Get the latest news and updates

Voice Your Opinion!

To join the conversation, and become an exclusive member of EC&M, create an account today!