How Do I Review RAMS?

One of the most common questions we receive is ‘How do I review RAMS when the contractor knows more about the job than I do?’ It is a fair question. Many businesses appoint specialist contractors precisely because they do not have the expertise, equipment or competence to carry out the work themselves. If you don’t know how to do the job, how can you judge whether the RAMS are suitable?

Key takeaways:

• You don’t need to be an expert in the contractor’s work to review their RAMS. Start by checking whether the method statement clearly explains how the work will be carried out safely from start to finish.
• The risk assessment and method statement should support each other, with the hazards and controls identified in the risk assessment reflected in the contractor’s planned method of work.
• Focus on whether the work could affect your employees, other contractors, visitors or the public, rather than judging RAMS by their length or technical detail.

Assessing Whether RAMS are Suitable: Start with the Method Statement

If you’ve ever been responsible for approving contractors, you’ve probably found yourself staring at a set of RAMS and wondering:

“How do I know whether these are any good?”

It’s a fair question.

After all, many clients subcontract work precisely because it falls outside their own area of expertise. If you’re employing a demolition contractor, asbestos removal contractor, lift engineer, piling contractor or specialist M&E company, you’re unlikely to understand every technical aspect of their work.

So how can you assess whether the RAMS are suitable?

Many people begin with the risk assessment. I would suggest doing the opposite. Start with the method statement.

The method statement should explain how the work will actually be carried out.

Not simply list activities.

Not copy sections from previous jobs.

And not rely on the workers making critical decisions when they arrive on site.

As you read it, ask yourself:

“Could a competent person complete this job by following these instructions?”

If the method statement leaves key decisions to be worked out when the team arrives on site, it is probably not complete.

A good method statement should set out:

• The sequence of work.
• The equipment being used.
• The competence required.
• The precautions that will be taken at each stage.
• How significant risks will be controlled.
• What happens if circumstances change.

If the document simply says things like “remove equipment”, “install new system” or “complete works as required”, it is probably describing a task rather than a method.

The method statement should tell the story of how the work will be completed safely from start to finish.

Then Review The Risk Assessment

Once you understand how the contractor intends to carry out the work, the risk assessment becomes much easier to review.

The purpose of the risk assessment is to identify the hazards associated with the work and explain how those risks will be controlled.

Most importantly, the controls described in the risk assessment should be consistent with those described in the method statement.

The method statement should tell me how you will do the work. The risk assessment should tell me what could hurt someone while doing it and how those risks will be controlled. If the two documents tell different stories, further questions are needed.

For example:

If the risk assessment identifies a risk of falls from height, does the method statement explain how that work at height will be carried out?

If exposure to silica dust is identified, does the method statement describe the extraction, water suppression or respiratory protection that will be used?

If vehicle movements are identified as a hazard, does the method statement explain the proposed traffic management arrangements?

The two documents should support each other.

If the risk assessment contains controls that never appear in the method statement, or the method statement introduces activities not considered by the risk assessment, something is missing.

Focus On The Risks That Matter To You

Many clients focus on whether the contractor’s employees are protected.

That is important.

But it is only part of the picture.

You should also consider:

• Could this work affect your employees?
• Could it affect neighbouring contractors?
• Could it affect visitors?
• Could it affect members of the public?
• Could it damage the structure, services or environment around the work area?

Ultimately, you are trying to understand whether the contractor’s activities introduce risks that need to be managed by everyone sharing the workplace.

Quality Over Quantity

One of the biggest mistakes made when reviewing RAMS is assuming that more pages automatically means better management of risk.

In reality, some of the best RAMS are relatively short.

A concise document that clearly explains the work, identifies the hazards and sets out practical controls is often far more effective than a 100-page document full of generic wording.

Remember that the people doing the work need to understand and use the information.

If the workforce cannot easily understand the controls, the document is unlikely to influence behaviour on site.

Remember, the purpose of reviewing RAMS is not to assume responsibility for the contractor’s work or to redesign their method. It is to satisfy yourself that the work has been properly thought through, that risks are being managed and that the contractor’s activities will not adversely affect your employees, other contractors, visitors or members of the public.

The Final Question

Before approving any RAMS, ask yourself one final question:

“Do these documents give me confidence that the work can be completed safely without exposing the contractor’s workforce, my workforce or others to unacceptable risk?”

If the answer is yes, the RAMS are probably serving their purpose.

If the answer is no, don’t be distracted by page counts, colourful matrices or lengthy appendices.