Slips and Falls - Prevention

I was recently asked to review some recent incidents for a fairly small business (restaurant). All three were slips and falls. They had suffered one incident late last year, one in the summer and one last week. The business owner initially asked me to reveiw the latest incident prior to submission.

Firstly I want to point out the business owner is far more concerned about his employees welfare than about the costs or any other consequence! That was a very positive initial observation. The findings and corrective actions after the first two incidents were ok but they certainly missed the root causes.

The corrective action for the third incident was a monthly management check of all employees slip resistant footwear. The requirement for slip resistant footwear was actually made after the first incident. What made me scratch my head was the fact the first employee involved in the slip and fall was actually wearing slip resistant shoes and the investigation report stated they were in good condition. Other actions included stand downs ref cleaning up spills (wet floor during second incident), signage and the good old training word.

I do appreciate a lot of time and effort went in to these investigations. Especially after the first incident. I also doubly appreciate them reaching out for support.

One particular area I did raise was the question of their flooring. This question certainly raised an eyebrow and I was very quickly informed the floor was approved by the public health inspector. This was followed up with details of three previous visit in the last 2 years and the statement they have no issues with the floor. The floor is tile and apparently atleast 15 years old. Traffic over the floor where the incidents occured is desribed as moderate. I asked whether there was a slip rating, or atleast if he knew the type of tile, and the after much shoulder shrugging and face pulling the answer was a firm no. The owner was very interested when I stated we could do measurements on those areas of flooring and compare them to areas where transit is much less. More to follow.

Fact - the better the traction the less the likelihood of a slip. Traction from good slip resistant footwear is vital. Traction from your flooring also makes a huge difference as well though. Regs in BC for commercial food establishments does state floors must be non-slip along with several other requirements. This is where it gets rather confusing as there are no standards set for the slip resistance of flooring. This is the same in Alberta and indeed south of the border in the US. ANSI (A326.3) does give a recommedation for dynamic coefficent of friction measurement (DCOF) of 0.42 or greater (wet testing). There are some 'recommedations' in W. Canada that floors should have an R rating of 11. R is short for ramp and can be found on tiles and flooring and basically gives a slip resistance when walking on a ramp. Higher the rating, the steeper the ramp before a slip occurs, meaning better slip resistance. A huge fact to remember is that like shoes, floors are subject to wear! Employee transit, cleaning chemicals, equipment traveling over the floor all cause wear.

Coefficient of Friction - without designated standards I understand the reluctance to measure and then monitor the slip resistance of your floors. We do know however that there are far too many preventable slip and falls that lose businesses countless dollars and far more importantly cause so many preventable (potentially life changing) injuries. Why arent we ensuring that our floors are doubling the protection of our employees and providing nother layer of safety? 

It's absolutely not just about footwear, housekeeping processes and awareness? As employers we have a legal duty of care of our employess and we are required to identify hazards. It is reasonably practicable in most workplaces to identify slips with subsequent falls and assign controls to minimise the likelihood. Mandating suitable footwear and adding processes to minimise floors getting wet and increasing slip risk is good but more can be done.

Floors are subject to wear. How do you know when they have lost their effective slip resistance and are offering far less traction? Being proactive rather than reactive can and will save you from what can be devastating incidents. 

Identifying your high transit areas that have less grip is a great starting point. Having initial measurements that can be benchmarked and / or used for floor degredation is vital. Many may now be worrying reference floor relacement costs! It really doesnt need to go to that extreme unless your floor really is poor. Patch covering high transit areas can save you and your business so much hard earned monet when you compare that with the cost of an employee injury. It also shows your employees how much you value them, their safety and their business.

I am happy to help by reviewing your incidents and assisting with controls based on immediate and root causes. Please remember there may be more than one root cause (multi-causation factors). I am also more than happy measuring the traction your floor provides to your employees. The tests are conducted dry and wet and gives you a start point for your high transit areas ie areas where risk is at its highest. Detailed reports provided. 

The cost of repairing or covering the areas of worn flooring giving greater traction is far more cost effective when compared to the cost of an injured employee.

If you want more details please reach out. Its putting your business and your employees first!