From Paperwork To Practice: The Lifting Industry’s Safety Challenge

It is an uncomfortable truth that the gap between “paper compliance” and “site reality” for lifting equipment remains real, measurable and persistent, even though it varies significantly depending on the region and maturity of the market. Lifting Africa spoke to LEEA Audit Compliance Officer Steve Bowron to find out more.

Ask anyone in the lifting industry what best practice looks like and the answer will differ depending on where they stand. To the inspector, it is the confidence that the equipment in front of them will perform safely. To the manufacturer, it is a product that delivers exactly what the certification promises. To the end user, it is quite simply getting home safely at the end of the day.From a LEEA perspective, says Bowron, the goal is aligning all of these expectations – a process that begins long before a company ever displays the LEEA logo.

“Compliance fails most often not in the creation of rules, but in their translation into practice under pressure, variability and limited oversight,” he says. “The common thread isn’t a lack of procedures, it’s a lack of real-time supervision, adaptive decision-making and the consistent application of standards in changing conditions. That’s why improving outcomes requires focusing less on what’s written down and more on what’s actually happening at the point of work.”According to Bowron, the industry still relies too heavily on certification and documentation, and not enough on how lifting operations actually play out on site. While paperwork remains essential for compliance, it can create a false sense of assurance if it is not supported by real-world verification and oversight.

Improving safety, however, does not mean abandoning documentation. Instead, it requires active supervision during lifting operations, regular observation of how tasks are being performed, encouraging operators to stop and reassess when conditions change, and validating competence through behaviour and decision-making rather than certificates alone. “Documentation is necessary, but it’s only a starting point. The industry’s ongoing challenge is shifting from ‘Is the paperwork in place?’ to ‘Is the lift being carried out safely right now?’ because that’s where outcomes are ultimately decided,” he said.In the lifting equipment sector, margins are tight and pressure to keep projects moving can be intense, particularly during equipment shortages or when timelines are accelerated.

In these situations, there can be a temptation to prioritise speed or lower costs. However, cutting corners on equipment quality or supplier standards can introduce significant safety risks and long-term operational consequences.According to Bowron, difficult market conditions should not become a reason to compromise on safety or compliance. Instead, buyers should remain focused on quality, proven reliability and working with competent suppliers. “Choosing trusted suppliers helps ensure equipment is fit for purpose and that lifting operations can still be carried out safely, even under pressure,” he said.

Bowron also challenged the perception that stricter safety standards negatively impact productivity.“The idea that stricter safety standards reduce productivity is common, but in practice poor safety is what actually slows operations through injuries, downtime and staff turnover,” he said. “Companies improve efficiency when safety becomes part of how work is done rather than being treated as a separate compliance exercise.” He also warned that human factors such as fatigue, poor communication, overconfidence and a lack of situational awareness could quickly escalate relatively minor issues into serious lifting incidents.

Building competency across the industry

According to Bowron, one of the most effective ways to improve safety standards across the lifting industry is through ongoing education and competency development. “It is worth pausing on this point: our actions, or our inaction, may have consequences that ripple out to people we have never met and considerations we have never weighed. That is the nature of the work we do,” said Bowron. “Ensuring that employees are genuinely competent in the roles they are hired for is critical. Competence is not something that can be reduced to a simple tick-box.It is built through a combination of proper training, relevant practical and theoretical knowledge, and real hands-on experience in the task.”

He believes the gap in competent supervision and properly trained personnel on lifting sites is neither small nor isolated. Instead, it is a systemic challenge facing many parts of the industry. “It is less about a shortage of rules and more about a shortage of consistently competent supervisors, properly trained and assessed personnel and on-site verification that safe systems of work are actually being followed,” he said.The impact, according to Bowron, is significant. Where supervision and competence are weak, the risk of serious incidents during lifting operations increases substantially.He said this was why education, training and ongoing industry guidance remained central to LEEA’s approach to improving safety standards across the lifting sector.

“LEEA’s mission to educate, influence and enable means we work with industry to encourage approaches that eliminate accidents, injuries and fatalities, while helping create a safer working environment for everyone involved,” he said.

Achieving and maintaining the LEEA standard

Bowron said many companies approaching LEEA for the first time often viewed the audit process as intimidating, particularly given the technical terminology, compliance expectations and concern around whether they would meet the required standards.However, he stressed that one of the biggest mistakes companies could make was trying to present themselves as something they were not.“One of the biggest red flags is when businesses try to second-guess what the auditor wants to see,” he said. “Don’t dress your business up to look like something it isn’t. Present yourself honestly and allow the audit team to have a realistic discussion about where improvements may be needed as your membership journey progresses.”

According to Bowron, in many cases businesses already have acceptable systems in place or require only minor adjustments to meet requirements. “The audit is not a trap, it is a useful starting point,” he said. He added that achieving LEEA’s Gold Standard should not be viewed as a once-off exercise, but rather as an ongoing process of improvement. “As your scope of work changes, as management and staff move on, the bar moves with you and we move with you too,” said Bowron.

LEEA,

mail@leeaint.com,

www.leeaint.com