Risk assessments sit at the heart of safe working at height. On paper, most sites have them in place. The issue we see time and time again is not whether a risk assessment exists, but whether it truly reflects how work happens on site.
At Safety Pack, we have spent nearly two decades working alongside site managers, safety leads and operational teams across construction, transport, logistics, power stations and specialist environments. One pattern comes up again and again. Falls rarely happen because no assessment was done. They happen because the assessment missed something practical, assumed ideal behaviour, or was never updated when conditions changed.
Below are some of the most common fall protection risk assessment mistakes we encounter, and why they leave sites exposed.
Treating short duration work at height as low risk
One of the biggest misconceptions around working at height is that short tasks are somehow safer. Climbing onto a vehicle to remove a tarp. Stepping up briefly to inspect equipment. Accessing a platform for a quick adjustment.
Because these tasks are routine and often last only a few minutes, they are frequently under assessed or excluded entirely. In reality, the duration of the task has no impact on the severity of a fall. A slip or misstep during a two minute job can be just as catastrophic as one during a full shift.
Risk assessments that focus only on long duration or complex work leave a significant gap. Temporary tasks often take place under time pressure, in poor weather, or at the end of a shift when fatigue sets in. These conditions increase risk, not reduce it.
Effective fall protection planning must treat all work at height as a potential fall risk, regardless of how quick or familiar the task feels.
Assuming PPE alone is enough
Another common issue is over reliance on personal protective equipment. Harnesses, lanyards and PPE-based controls have their place, but they are not a universal solution.
Risk assessments often state that PPE is required without fully considering whether it is practical, appropriate, or consistently used in the real working environment. Harness systems rely heavily on correct fitting, proper anchorage points, user training and ongoing compliance. If any part of that chain fails, the protection fails with it.
In many environments, especially transport yards, loading bays or temporary work areas, PPE alone does not adequately control the risk. Collective or passive systems that do not rely on individual behaviour can provide a more reliable layer of protection.
Assuming PPE solves the problem can create a false sense of security. A strong risk assessment looks at how protection works in practice, not just what is theoretically available.
Failing to reassess when site layouts change
Sites are rarely static. Vehicles move. Access points change. Equipment is relocated. Temporary structures are added and removed. Yet risk assessments often remain unchanged for months or even years.
A fall protection system that was appropriate when the assessment was first written may no longer be suitable after even small layout changes. A new loading position might introduce a gap. Ground conditions might change after resurfacing or drainage work. A new workflow might bring people closer to an unprotected edge.
When risk assessments are treated as a tick box exercise rather than a living document, these changes go unnoticed. This is when near misses and incidents occur.
Regular review is not about paperwork. It is about ensuring that the controls on site still match the reality of the work being done.
Not matching fall protection to surface conditions
Surface conditions are often underestimated in fall risk assessments. Hardstanding, concrete, uneven ground, confined spaces and temporary flooring all affect how a fall protection system performs.
Assessments sometimes focus solely on height without considering what happens beneath the working area. A fall onto a hard surface dramatically increases injury risk. Limited space may restrict the use of certain systems. Uneven ground can affect stability and coverage.
Failing to account for surface conditions can lead to selecting protection that looks compliant on paper but performs poorly in practice. Effective fall protection must be chosen based on both the fall height and the landing environment.
This is especially important for temporary or mobile work areas where conditions vary from site to site.
Treating risk assessments as paperwork rather than planning
At their best, risk assessments are planning tools. At their worst, they become documents written to satisfy audits rather than protect people.
When assessments are copied and pasted, filled with generic language, or written without input from those doing the work, they miss critical details. The result is a document that looks thorough but does little to control real risk.
The most effective assessments are practical, task specific and grounded in how work actually happens on site.
Building stronger fall protection assessments
Avoiding these mistakes does not require more paperwork. It requires better alignment between planning and reality.
Assessments should consider all work at height, including short duration tasks. They should look beyond PPE and evaluate collective and passive protection where appropriate. They must be reviewed when conditions change and matched carefully to surface and space constraints.
Above all, they should prioritise solutions that are realistic, repeatable and easy to implement.
A practical approach to fall protection
At Safety Pack, we work with organisations to move beyond generic risk assessments and towards practical fall protection strategies that stand up to real world conditions. Our experience across multiple industries has shown that effective protection is not about complexity, but about suitability and consistency.
If you are reviewing your fall protection risk assessments, now is the time to ask a simple question. Do your controls reflect how work is actually carried out on site today.
If you would like support selecting practical fall protection solutions or reviewing your current approach, speak to our team. We are here to help you protect your people properly and reduce risk where it matters most.