Is Stepladder Training Required?

A recent decision of the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory has provided guidance on the extent of an employer’s duty to employees performing ‘simple and commonplace’ tasks.

In ‘Cowie vs. Gungahlin Veterinary Services Pty Ltd’, Ms Cowie fell from the second step of a three-step stepladder while attempting to place blankets onto a shelf at ‘eye level’. Ms Cowie could not explain the exact cause of her fall, but the Court found it likely that the ladder tipped as Ms Cowie inadvertently overreached to place blankets on the shelf.

Ms Cowie alleged her employer was liable for the fall because it had not provided her with any training on the safe use of the stepladder. They had not conducted any risk assessment of her duties or the workplace, and should have used an alternative method of storage that would have negated the use of a stepladder altogether (like having all products accessible from the ground).

At first instance, the Magistrates Court held that no instruction was required for the use of a stepladder, due to the simple and commonplace nature of the task and it would have been unreasonable to require the employer to totally eliminate all storage options not accessible from the ground.

On appeal, the Supreme Court was required to determine whether it was reasonable to have a system of work that carried with it some increased risk of injury, or whether an alternate system of storage was reasonably required.

The Court held that:
• The system of work involving the stepladder was reasonable because the task was a relatively simple, domestic one that did not require specialised training; and
• A reasonable employer would not have adopted the alternate method of storage (i.e. that would have negated the use of the stepladder)

Ms Cowie’s appeal was therefore unsuccessful. It reaffirmed the Magistrates Court’s view that assessing reasonableness involves a factual determination that takes community standards into account, but does not necessarily require the elimination of risk.

It is reasonable to assume a similar ruling would equally apply in New Zealand.