In this blog post, we’ll discuss the importance of being proactive vs reactive when it comes to water safety. Managing risks is a crucial part of running any organization, whether it’s an e-commerce business or a small school.
We’ll explain why it’s important to take a proactive approach to water safety by highlighting the disadvantages of a reactive approach and the advantages of being proactive so you can make an informed decision.
Image: Canva Pro
Proactive Vs Reactive Water Safety
Main Issues With A Reactive Approach
The single biggest issue with a reactive approach to water safety is that the risk of incidents occurring increases drastically. By definition, a reactive approach entails making changes after an event has happened rather than before – in the context of safety, this is an untenable position to take.
Even if the incident that’s reacted to doesn’t result in injury or ill health, the risk of such an outcome will be high. As we’ll see, a proactive approach takes all of the dangers of a reactive approach into consideration, switching priorities in the opposite direction.
Proactive Water Safety
Proactive approaches to any safety-related issue rest on the basic fact that it’s better to prevent something bad from happening in the first place than it is to clean up the mess afterward.
Not only are the results of a reactive approach far more dire in terms of their human impact, but they also end up costing more than simply preventing them in the first place.
By carrying out ongoing risk assessments and implementing a water safety plan, organizations can strategize based on a proactive risk management philosophy in a way that both optimizes efficiency and ensures regulatory compliance.
The Law
Besides the mere practical benefits of taking a proactive rather than a reactive approach to water safety, it’s also a legal requirement.
Employers in the UK have a legal responsibility to provide people who spend time on their premises with reliable access to wholesome drinking water.
If something goes wrong with the water system and people get sick, the organization has to prove that they did everything they could to prevent it.
This will include showing evidence of the presence of an effective water safety plan, and historical evidence of regular environmental testing and risk assessment.
While it’s not always an explicit legal stipulation, in most situations it will be practically impossible to prove this in a court of law without ongoing help from specialist water hygiene providers.
The only way to prevent water safety-related incidents is by taking a proactive approach. This is true not just from a practical perspective, but also in terms of your legal duties as a business owner or employer.
In the case that an incident does unfortunately occur, it’s really important that you’re able to clearly illustrate that you took every reasonable measure available to you to avoid such an incident, to avoid legal liability.
It’s important to focus on preventing problems before they happen with water safety, rather than just reacting after something goes wrong. This shows a strong commitment to keeping people safe and avoiding incidents.
Do you have anything you want to add to my post about Proactive vs. Reactive Water Safety? If you do, please leave me a comment below. Thank you!