Live Working

[Essex]

I recently submitted some RAMS for a relatively everyday task that we as electricians do day in, day out.

However the Principle Contractor knocked them back due to their 'no live working' policy.

Well I almost fell off my chair. Now I am looking forward to the face to face meeting with their safety guy.

So I wondered what are people's views on live working on here?

[Steve M]

We have a no live working policy, slightly different industry doing electrical installs.

We are however allowed to do live testing, because apparently, that is not working, just testing.

I totally support the no live working policy, if it can be done dead, then it must be done dead.

[bernicarey]

Depends on the reason for it.
Is it necessary for the work or just to save 5 minutes?
What's the degree of complexity of the task?
It should be unreasonable to make it safe before live work is carried out.

Just because you might do a particular practice at home is no reason to do it at work.
For example, changing a light switch. It's 2 (or 3) wires and a simple, single task, so you know what you are doing and the 'risk assessment' you do in your head says not a significant problem.

But take that same task and do it in the workplace, where it's repeated many times and over familiarity creeps in; then it spreads to a slightly more complex task like changing a ring main socket with the power on....


I won't go into the details here as it will drag on a bit, but I've got a tale of 'familiarity' that got me 200v AC across the palm of my hand which made me tingle for an hour or two. It happened working on an aircraft electrical system back in the late 70s, when I made a careless mistake because of the circumstances I was working under.

[Stevie Johnno]

I'm not an expert in this field but I will add my own anecdote.

I was working in my Kitchen carrying out a total refit including updating the Sockets , pre the days you had to get a Certificate from a qualified tradesman.
One Socket that I was keen on replacing was the single one high up on the Wall above the built in Fridge/Freezer (which was being replaced), it was a single old fashioned, plastic thing that was difficult to reach to switch off and on when defrosting.
I unplugged the old Fridge and removed it ready for disposal,flipped the circuit breaker in the Box and double checked that the ring running around the worktops was dead, no problem up to now.
I climbed on the Worktop (naughty, naughty), proceeded to take the front cover off the Socket and disconnect the Wires inside.....Bang..next thing I knew I was in the Sink with the Taps sticking in to my Back.. turned out that the Socket I was working on wasn't part of the Kitchen Ring it had been dropped down through the Floor from the Bedroom by the previous owner.
I was lucky that day and ever since either turn all the power off or at the very least use a Multimeter to check for current.

[Essex]

We have a no live working policy, slightly different industry doing electrical installs.

We are however allowed to do live testing, because apparently, that is not working, just testing.

I totally support the no live working policy, if it can be done dead, then it must be done dead.

So this is the exact sort of thing I am talking about.

Testing IS working. Are your guys at work when they are carrying out testing?

No electrical installation can be commissioned as safe to use without live conductive parts being exposed so that live testing can take place. This is a fact.

Also fault finding. How can an engineer fault find on an electrical circuit fully without having the option to live work?

The trouble with this ‘policy’ is that it clearly cannot be written by anybody with even the smallest amount of electrical knowledge.

[Essex]

I'm not an expert in this field but I will add my own anecdote.

I was working in my Kitchen carrying out a total refit including updating the Sockets , pre the days you had to get a Certificate from a qualified tradesman.
One Socket that I was keen on replacing was the single one high up on the Wall above the built in Fridge/Freezer (which was being replaced), it was a single old fashioned, plastic thing that was difficult to reach to switch off and on when defrosting.
I unplugged the old Fridge and removed it ready for disposal,flipped the circuit breaker in the Box and double checked that the ring running around the worktops was dead, no problem up to now.
I climbed on the Worktop (naughty, naughty), proceeded to take the front cover off the Socket and disconnect the Wires inside.....Bang..next thing I knew I was in the Sink with the Taps sticking in to my Back.. turned out that the Socket I was working on wasn't part of the Kitchen Ring it had been dropped down through the Floor from the Bedroom by the previous owner.
I was lucky that day and ever since either turn all the power off or at the very least use a Multimeter to check for current.

I think it is important to ensure the person carrying out the task is fully competent to do so.

If not. They should not even be employed within the role.

[Steve M]

We have a no live working policy, slightly different industry doing electrical installs.

We are however allowed to do live testing, because apparently, that is not working, just testing.

I totally support the no live working policy, if it can be done dead, then it must be done dead.

So this is the exact sort of thing I am talking about.

Testing IS working. Are your guys at work when they are carrying out testing?

No electrical installation can be commissioned as safe to use without live conductive parts being exposed so that live testing can take place. This is a fact.

Also fault finding. How can an engineer fault find on an electrical circuit fully without having the option to live work?

The trouble with this ‘policy’ is that it clearly cannot be written by anybody with even the smallest amount of electrical knowledge.

As I have said we have a strict no live working policy, however, we have a procedure that requires the equipment to be tested whilst live, there is no reference to the no live working policy in that procedure, it does need to be tested and safe because it is for domestic appliances in peoples homes.
My suggestion was to include the terms "live working must not be performed with the exception of tests required for certification", and then the safe procedure for testing, ie, only company approved equipment to be used with fully insulated hands-free test leads or words to that effect.

For your situation, you could include "for fault finding" and the appropriate precautions.

[ddlh]

I think the Principal contractor is right here to challenge the proposed work. I appreciate that live testing cannot be avoided but live working can. I also get the impression that you do this type of work all the time and while I am not accusing you of any malpractice, complacency does set in with contractors doing "routine" work.

I did the same recently rejecting the contractors RAMS and prompted a bit of heated discussion but stood my ground. Some serious discussions involving the contractor and my management team ensued. We were all agreed that live testing was required as part of the commissioning - but I as concerned at the lack of supervision by a "competent" supervisor from the contractor and the reference to "live working".

The upshot was that the contractor did this type of work "all the time" - but the stoppage resulted in their management supplying a supervisor from a non related contract checking the work site, RAMS, mitigation's and overseeing the work. The RAMS were then amended with more precautions put in place (we killed power to half the plant which had not been considered as "it would have caused you hassle to reset and restart" and the work supervision and man power was increased.

The company actually admitted that the challenge was well warranted and when you accept you dont get second chances when working with live energy it s worth the chance to step back and discuss!!

Dave