Understanding Near Miss Reporting and Safety Standards: Seeking Guidance on Key Questions

Dear seniors,

I have two different queries that have arisen in my mind after experiencing a Near Miss. Please guide me.

1. Is Near Miss Reporting a Leading Type performance indicator or a Lagging Type performance indicator? Please explain briefly.

2. What is the logical basis for defining working at heights above 1.8 meters?

Thank you,
Abhay

Dear Abhay, regret to see yet no reply to your post. Why doubt? Reporting "near miss" is a leading type performance indicator for the simple reason that only a safety-conscious and determined management could demand seriously reporting all near misses, whereas it is only a ritual for others.

Severity of Falls from Different Heights

Coming to the second one, I have already answered this for another posting. Think, one falls to the same level. The chance of sustaining a head injury is minimal. Now think of falling from a height of 1 foot, then 2 feet, 3 feet, and so on. Consider the severity in each case. Serious research has been done on this in the past and it continues. Head injuries, severity, and fatality in cases of falls from a height over 1.8 meters are alarming, whereas around 1.2 meters, they are very few or negligible. On the basis of research findings, only the height of 1.8 meters for fall protection is mandated. Hope you have the answer now.

Regards,
Kesava Pillai