False Sense of Security: Common Misuse of Fall Arrest Gear

Introduction

Falls are one of the most serious hazards in industries such as construction, maintenance, utilities, and warehousing. Personal fall arrest systems, including harnesses, lanyards, anchors, and connectors, are critical for preventing serious injuries or fatalities. Yet, their mere presence does not guarantee safety. A false sense of security can arise when workers, supervisors, or facility managers assume that wearing fall arrest gear is enough, without understanding its proper use, limitations, and regular maintenance requirements.

1. The Illusion of Protection

1.1. Over‑Reliance on Equipment

A key factor in cultivating a false sense of security is over‑reliance on equipment. Workers may believe that simply strapping on a harness and hooking into an anchor equates to being fully protected. However, fall arrest systems are only one layer of defence, and the fall protection hierarchy prioritises fall prevention over fall arrest:

• Elimination (remove the hazard)

• Substitution (e.g., using elevated work platforms)

• Engineering controls (guardrails, nets)

• Administrative controls (training, procedures)

• PPE/fall arrest (last‑line measure)

When fall arrest is treated as a substitute for the above controls rather than a fail‑safe, missteps occur. Equipment is fallible; anchors can break, harnesses may be improperly fitted, and loads may exceed design limits. Misplaced trust in gear without addressing hazard elimination creates illusions of safety.

1.2. Compliance Mentality

Another contributor is a “checkbox compliance” attitude. Organisations may require harnesses to be worn because regulations demand it. Workers might wear them to avoid citations, but not necessarily because they understand how they operate. This superficial adherence often fails to translate into meaningful, safe practice. Gear may still be used incorrectly- poorly adjusted, not connected correctly, used with inadequate anchor points, or simply not removed from service when damaged.

1.3. Misunderstanding Limitations

Many users lack awareness of what fall arrest systems do not do:

• They arrest falls, but don’t guarantee zero injury — forces can cause trauma.

• Anchor points must be rated; improvised anchors (like handrails, pipe railings or scaffolding) may fail.

• Shock loads, free‑fall distances, and gear integrity factors are often misunderstood.

• Rescue planning and suspension trauma are overlooked.

Workers may assume “wearing a harness = safe,” without appreciating these critical caveats.

2. Common Misuse Patterns

Let’s explore how fall arrest gear gets misused in practice:

2.1. Improper Anchor Point Selection

Anchors must fulfil specific requirements:

• Be able to withstand 15 kN)per worker (or other ratings depending on jurisdiction).

• Be independent and stable (not part of a fragile surface).

• Be located overhead or in a direction likely to prevent swinging (pendulum effect).

Common misuses include anchoring to:

• Guardrails, parapets, or toe boards (insufficient strength, not rated).

• Mobile scaffolds, trucks, or machinery (could shift or detach).

• Structural elements not designed for fall loads: piping, lightweight trusses, sheet metal.

These poor anchor choices can fail catastrophically during a fall.

2.2. Incorrect Harness Fit and Adjustment

Even with correctly rated gear, fit matters:

• Shoulder straps that are too loose allow “submarining”- slipping through the harness during a fall.

• Chest straps too low lead to the harness riding up and improper force paths.

• Thigh straps that are too loose result in ineffective load distribution.

• Side D‑rings are being used instead of dorsal or chest D‑rings for fall arrest, creating rotational hazards.

Rushing donning procedures, neglecting cross‑strapping, or failing to double back buckles are all too common. These mistakes compromise harness integrity.

2.3. Ignoring Free‑Fall and Shock‑Absorber Constraints

Lanyards and self‑retracting lanyards come with specifications:

• Lanyard length plus deceleration distance must keep the worker from hitting the ground or lower level.

• Anchor height must be sufficient to limit free fall to OSHA’s 6 ft (1.8 m) limit in the U.S., or 2 m in many other jurisdictions.

• Shock absorbers must deploy properly; bundling shock‑absorbed lanyards can disable them.

Misuse occurs when:

• Workers connect at waist height, yielding a fall over the limit.

• Wrapping around an object and choking the lanyard reduces ratings.

• Using non‑shock‑absorbing lanyards in fall arrest roles.

2.4. Poor Rescue Planning and Suspension Trauma

Arresting a fall is just the first step. Workers can suffer suspension trauma (orthostatic intolerance, loss of consciousness) within minutes if not rescued promptly. Misuse or neglect in rescue planning includes:

• Not carrying retrieval lines or rescue gear.

• Assuming coworker can simply “pull them up”- too slow, unsafe.

• No training in rescue, leading to a delayed response.

A rescue plan is non‑negotiable; without it, fall arrest gear can mean incapacitation rather than protection.

2.5. Not Inspecting, Maintaining, and Retiring Gear

Fall gear is subject to wear, abrasion, UV exposure, and chemical contamination. Misuses in maintenance include:

• No daily pre‑use inspection — missing frayed webbing, broken stitches.

• Ignoring retirement criteria as per the relevant standards and legislation.

• Storing gear improperly in sunlight, corrosive atmospheres, or heat.

• Using gear after arresting a fall without proper service — compromising strength.

Use‑life mismanagement erodes reliability.

2.6. Inadequate Training

Untrained users may:

• Select the wrong gear for the task.

• Overtrust equipment beyond the standard environment.

• Misinterpret labels and instructions.

• Fail to recognise red‑flag wear or damage.

Training must be thorough, hands‑on, and repeated- not a one‑off brief orientation.

3. Real‑World Consequences of Misuse

The misuse of fall arrest gear often doesn’t immediately lead to incidents- that’s how the false sense of security grows. When failures do happen, consequences can be severe:

• Fatal falls, sometimes with gear still attached, but improperly rigged.

• Serious injuries, such as broken bones, spinal trauma, internal injuries, even if the fall is arrested.

• Suspension trauma, leading to incapacitation or death if rescue fails.

• Psychological impact on coworkers, risk‑averse behaviour, or legal liabilities.

• Regulatory fines and reputational damage from investigations (e.g., OSHA or WorkSafe citations).

Case in point: a construction worker in the U.S. attached to a guardrail anchor thought to be secure. During a fall, the guardrail failed. The worker died — the harness was not at fault, but the use of the non-rated anchor was. This underscores that gear itself is only as effective as its application.

4. Why Misuse Persists

4.1. Cost and Convenience Pressures

Anchors require time and structural consideration. Employers or workers may take shortcuts:

• Use the nearest structure as an anchor to save time.

• Skip proper attachment altogether if work seems “low‑risk.”

• Recycle old gear beyond its service life to save replacement costs.

These pragmatic trade‑offs dangerously undervalue safety.

4.2. Normalisation of Deviance

Over time, small deviations from correct procedure can become accepted “norms”:

• The gear was worn improperly because no incident had yet happened.

• Anchors reused without testing are now considered “good enough.”

• Inspections skipped because no apparent damage.

Cumulative overconfidence insulates recklessness.

I wrote an article on normalisation some time ago- read it at this link- https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/normalising-versus-fixing-preventing-luke-dam

4.3. Organisational Culture

When safety programs focus on paperwork, metrics, or “counts” rather than behaviour, misuse thrives:

• If wearing a harness is enough to get paid, workers may just go through the motions.

• Supervisors lacking technical training may not be able to identify misuse.

• No feedback loop or reporting culture; near‑misses go unreported, learnings lost.

Training and compliance must cultivate vigilance, not blind adherence.

4.4. Over‑Simplistic Messaging

Training slogans like “Always wear your harness” lack nuance:

• They fail to convey that a harness is not a substitute for hazard elimination.

• They don’t teach about anchor selection, free-fall calculations, or the necessity of a rescue plan.

• Simple slogans risk breeding a mindset: “If I wore the harness, I’ve done my part.”

Better training must go deeper.

5. Strategies to Undercut the False Sense of Security

To shift from complacency to competent use, organisations and workers should adopt multi‑layered strategies:

5.1. Shift from Fall Arrest to Fall Prevention

• Prioritise engineering controls and elimination strategies — guardrails, scaffolds, platform access.

• Use fall arrest only where higher‑level controls are infeasible.

This reframing changes the role of gear from “main protection” to “last resort.”

5.2. Ensure Proper Component Selection and Inspection

• Use only certified, rated anchor points or install dedicated anchors.

• Establish daily pre‑use inspections by workers and periodic competent person inspections.

• Retire gear based on inspection checklists and following manufacturer timelines.

Education on what to inspect (webbing damage, hardware deformation, shock pack deployment) is essential.

5.3. Conduct Real‑World Training Drills

• Hands‑on sessions where workers inspect, don harnesses, select anchors, and connect correctly.

• Perform mock fall scenarios in safe environments to understand forces, proper attachment heights, and equipment behaviour.

• Rescue practice drills: timed, realistic, with typical coworkers to make them second nature.

Competence breeds confidence, properly grounded.

5.4. Embed Rescue Planning in Every Task

• Every operation requiring fall arrest systems must have a predetermined rescue method (self‑rescue, assisted, or external rescue).

• Rescue plans include who rescues, how, and within what timeframe.

• Gear for extraction (retrieval devices, ladders, A‑frames) should accompany every setup.

• Assigning roles avoids confusion during an incident.

Focus should be on timely rescue to prevent suspension trauma injuries.

5.5. Leadership and Culture

• Supervision and management should model correct use and actively coach field behaviours.

• Reward safe practices, not just compliance checklists.

• Encourage reporting of near misses or hiccups with fall arrest gear.

• Share lessons learned from incidents, both internal and industry-wide.

A learning culture will always win over the normalisation of deviance.

5.6. Use Clear Standards, Visual Aids, Reminders

• Post diagrams showing correct anchor types and unsafe anchor “don’ts.”

• Use visual warnings for free‑fall distances on job-site maps.

• Provide on-site inspection checklists, harness-fitting posters, and rescue flow charts.

Visual cues reinforce training in everyday use.

5.7. Leverage Technology

While not a substitute, technology augments safety:

• Self‑retracting lanyards with controlled deceleration reduce fall distance.

• Load indicators built into harnesses/lanyards alert after a fall event.

• Online tracking of gear inventory, usage, and inspection history ensures accountability.

• Wearable sensors that monitor body position and fall events can alert rescue teams immediately.

Tech should support, not replace, vigilance.

Conclusion

Fall arrest systems play a vital, life-saving role, but only when properly understood and used as part of a multi-layered safety strategy. Misuse, through poor anchors, incorrect fit, incompatible components, overlooked rescue, inadequate maintenance, and flimsy training, breeds a hazardous illusion of safety.

To counter a false sense of security, organisations must shift toward prevention-first thinking, embed competence through realistic training, instil robust rescue planning, and build a culture that reinforces safe practices over superficial compliance. Only then can fall arrest gear do what it’s meant to: be the reliable final defence, not a misunderstood crutch that's hiding vulnerabilities.