In the last post, I asserted that in many examples related to fall protection PPE, less is more. But, when managing a fall protection program, there are also times when more is less.
In our personal lives, we can look at the example of buying a new home as a time when more is less. More up-front assessment of needs and evaluation of choices equals less heartburn and headaches from making a bad decision on a critical purchase.
The same concept applies when evaluating your fall hazards and their respective abatement options. Sometimes the choice is obvious, but sometimes it is not, especially considering the cost of hazard abatement. What to do?
Just like the variables of cost, location, size, and style that are considered when purchasing a home, evaluating fall protection abatement options requires the same discipline. You must still consider budget, as well as variables like productivity, ease of use, life-cycle costs, and sometimes even aesthetics.
In life, some purchases are simple to make—like a gallon of milk or a movie ticket. But, there are decisions where it pays to do more analysis to make sure you make the right decision the first time.
More is less when you spend more time making sure you have the right solution. More evaluation that results in greater productivity for employees and more savings associated with the recurring costs of training, inspection and maintenance. More effort in the initial stages reduces risk for workers at heights. More planning is lower cost.