Most "sign-in" sheets I have seen include some form of "I acknowledge have been informed of and understand the hazards and controls required for this site" statement on them, the thinking being if someone is injured then you can always point to them signing this to claim it was their fault and not the company's... although (without digging up any actual cases) I would expect this defense would only work for very rare/specific circumstances.

I can think of some specific circumstances where a "sign-in sheet" would be useful / practical evidence, but this would be as a record of an agreed conversation between two people rather than the generic "name, company and tick the boxes (without even looking at what you're ticking)" sheet that are very common.

One other reason to have one is if there is the potential to need to inform people of an exposure to a hazard that may not be immediately obvious, delaying immediate notification and therefor needing a record of those that could have been exposed within a certain date/time period.

So much of this is site-specific, and not all sites are loaded with technology options. Sometimes pen and paper works and is quick and easy.

Having a sign in sheet at reception helps to make sure there is human contact when coming on site, good to check on purpose and who else on site might need to know.
I use the sign in sheets to crosscheck that contractors have been inducted, it helps to capture the apprentice or newbie who comes in with someone else.
Contractors can be in roof spaces or in random places that the fire warden might not check.
It is also useful when checking invoices later, a record of when people are on site.

Think you have come up with three valid reasons why knowing who is on your site, what their status is (inducted contractor or their employee, visitor, etc) and where/who with they are on your site, and are they charging you the correct number of hours.

In November 2007, a warehouse in Warwickshire UK collapsed during a fire killing 2 firefighters who were searching the building for 2 unaccounted for members of staff. It turned out that the 2 staff had gone off site and not signed out.

Not all businesses have emergency wardens, not all visitors are supervised. A sign in sheet keeps a record of who has entered and left the building, and can be used as a roll call register in the event of an evacuation. It doesn't matter if its a building or a construction site.

I'd suggest that Health and Safety at Work (General Risk and Workplace Management) Regulations 2016, Section 14 Duty to prepare, maintain, and implement emergency plan is the Regulation that would cover this, and the sign in sheet is part of the risk mitigation.

OP Garth seems to be suggesting that "Inducting a contractor" is sufficient Principal/Responsible Person oversight of that contractor, even for an office situation, there are likely to be odd spots that such a contractor could be in and not be found in an emergency situation- Electrical Switch Rooms, Server Rooms, Air Con spaces, along with Jane's suggestion of ceiling/roof spaces

Thanks for the excellent answers everyone.

So it seems that sign-in sheets have a place where there aren't other systems that cover the same function.

We have established and trained wardens and head wardens and regular drills. That is better practice than a sign in sheet. We have an emergency plan that is covered in all inductions.

We have an induction system for contractors so that they know where to go in an emergency, and have a contact person that knows where they are. And we know how many staff the contractor is bringing to site. Those are things that a sign in sheet won't do. I may modify the induction form so that the fire wardens in the area of work are alerted about people working in server rooms / crawl spaces.

But construction sites are another matter. The level of compliance for signing in on some building sites I've visited makes them less useful than not having them. I've seen the team lining up to sign in only after the safety inspector arrived and a check of the book showed less than 5% were signing in on other days. But building sites never have fires so she'll be right (he said sarcastically thinking about the Sky City fire...)

Sounds like you are also talking about a cultural issue? In my industry it is the workplace norm and culture to sign in when coming on someone else's site to work, but for the construction sites you are talking about it sounds like it is not the culture.
This means we can attach greater significance and role to the sign-ins, that you may not be able to.

I went into a department store the other day. The site was full of hazardous objects - knives, glass up on shelves, unsupported racking, trip hazards and no pedestrian management. All the movement corridors were designed to draw people deeper into the retail areas, while prevent a direct exit pathway. And lots of young children. Probably a staff:customer ratio of 1:100. No sign in sheet, no induction, training or site orientation.

Site sign sheets / systems do have a place, however they are commonly used zealously without critical thought. WHY are we requiring people to sign in? And if it is essential that we know who is on site, how does the system, from sign in to sign out function, is it robust and will it work? If it is required for an emergency evacuation, is there a single assembly point and how reliable is it that everyone will report there (versus folk wondering off to a cafe). A system that creates an illusion is often more problematic (dangerous?) than the original situation - as clearly demonstrated by @Stuart Oakey 2007 Warwickshire Fire example.

A couple of scenerios I've considered where 'Sign-in' is beneficial:

• Where the site is access restricted for specific security requirements (think bank, prison, laboratory)
• When specific site related information, orientation and / or practices must be shared (the traditional contractor induction)
• Where the emergency evacuation has a level of complexity that an untrained / unaccompanied person wouldn't know how to respond.
• Where there are multiple entry / exit points and a sign-in system is required, the entry / exit points need to actively communicate between each other.

A simple piece of paper or screen tick of the box doesn't provide a lot of rigor / quality to many of these in my experience. It becomes more of a record that the 'conversation and checks' may have occurred. The behavior of the person meeting and greeting the visitor or guest (organizational cultural) is so much more important. And a comprehensive, multi layered clearance plan representative of the nature of a 'reasonable to expect' emergency (imagine designing the fire evacuation plan for a prison).

The behavior of the person meeting and greeting the visitor or guest (organizational cultural) is so much more important. And a comprehensive, multi layered clearance plan representative of the nature of a 'reasonable to expect' emergency (imagine designing the fire evacuation plan for a prison). — Matthew Bennett

This is true Matt, the only problem with not having a record of having done the meet, greet and brief, if there is an issue that drags WorkSafe from it's office, how will you prove what was done, and how well it was done.

When I was an inspector I was handed many a piece of paper and equally found many pieces of paper to be absent - I was able to 'prove' the event based on interviews and verification of the interviewees information by interviewing others and the examination of other facts. The piece of paper makes people more comfortable, however it is not a mark of quality.

Again, I'm not advocating for abolishing the sign in sheet (or any other piece of paper), rather the critical examination of the purpose and functionality. The piece of paper can very quickly become perceived as more important, creating an illusion of safety.

Think we're on the same page Matt, as a former contractor supplier of an electrical safety service, I was always amused that in some instances, we would have to request a signing in book, or if it was on a counter,it was covered by "other stuff" and the last signatures/details were ours from our last visit.

We had contracts with some well recognised national companies, so not some Mom & Pop operators, and was therefor surprising that we had a better understanding of their H&S procedures than some branches did..

Fun activity: Whenever you are asked to sign in that you have understood the Hazards on site, ask the person at reception what they are.

My other favourite is asking what the HSAWA regulations that you must follow when you see this sign.

un activity: Whenever you are asked to sign in that you have understood the Hazards on site, ask the person at reception what they are. — MichaelWilson

A development of this Micheal, is to ask what controls they have implemented to reduce/eliminate those hazards. In a lot of instances (hopefully) they'll be able to tell you. Matt is quite right, just having a check in sheet/sign in system isn't enough, there has to be a heap of real work done in the back ground.

My other favourite is asking what the HSAWA regulations that you must follow when you see this sign. — MichaelWilson

Well the obvious answer is "all of them" :roll:

We only have those signs on the outside of our premises due to needing to pass an audit once, I asked the auditor the "what regulations specifically" question, they only looked bewildered and carried on. For the few dollars it cost it was cheaper to do that than argue the point of value or function.

Apparently the law only applies if one of those signs is erected. If not it is an independent state run by sovereign citizens.

Earlier this year I pointed out to a kitchen joinery place that the faded signs requesting all visitors comply with the HSE 1992 might be a little out of date. They just looked at me. At least they are not manufacturing engineered stone benchtops, which is a small mercy.

While dismantling our old Covid systems, I looked at going back to the legacy sign in sheet at the front office desk. But I began to wonder why we had one? The old sheet listed 'health and safety reasons' for making everyone sign in.
But it's not needed for fire safety - the wardens make sure the building is clear.
I can't find any other regulation that requires it.
Visitors are visiting someone, and so are supervised.
We induct any contractors on a separate form. — Garth Forsberg

If the "legacy sign in sheet" was part of your "old Covid systems" then the original purpose was contact tracing during the early days of the pandemic in NZ. It may be that the sign in sheet could have been not well designed. Usually due to the person not having sufficient knowledge or information to design the form. Also the construction industry benchmark SiteSafe has muddied the waters using the terminology Sign-in Register
No doubt others can/will provide the specific legislation requiring paper based forms for contact tracing. I'm comfortable listening to how tracing people who were close to a Covid positive person has relevance to "making everyone sign in" for "'health and safety reasons'".

I'm interested how using only "fire safety" as the sole indicator of ensuring a building is evacuated is relevant to all the reasons for ensuring a building is evacuated. Some other reasons include tsunamis, building collapses, volcanic eruptions. How would your "wardens make sure the building is clear"? What if it is not possible for wardens to access some areas? Do wardens know who is in the building? What if wardens do not want to put their lives at risk?

"I can't find any other regulation that requires it." I can't find any legislation that requires wardens to "make sure the building is clear".

"Visitors are visiting someone, and so are supervised." Really! Even when they go to the toilet?

"We induct any contractors on a separate form." Inductions have little relevance to physical presence in a building. Generally the PCBU providing the form has a perception that somehow a signature will provide some form of protection.

And secondly, why have a sign in sheet for a construction site and make the crew and contractors sign in every day? Visitors to the site should sign in, as part of their induction. But should workers who have been inducted and are there all the time sign in? I've seen some sites that do this, but want to find out if there's a valid reason for the requirement. — Garth Forsberg

"why have a sign in sheet for a construction site and make the crew and contractors sign in every day?" Try this from Health & Safety Documents:
'Your signing in book should be used to identify whether all persons have safely evacuated the site in the event of an emergency, for example if there’s a fire.' Remember, a fire is only one reason to evacuate a site.

"Visitors to the site should sign in, as part of their induction." An induction is usually only done once. When does a visitor need to sign in? What happens if a visitor returns on another occasion? Does this require another induction?

"But should workers who have been inducted and are there all the time sign in?" As above:
'Your signing in book should be used to identify whether all persons have safely evacuated the site in the event of an emergency, for example if there’s a fire.'

Garth, you raise some good discussion points.
Generally I've found H&S has a reputation based on poor knowledge, the wants of people divorced from the activity, non existent worker engagement, lackadaisical planning methods and an over inflated perception of roles.

Just my 20 cents worth this time.

Hi Keith,
Whenever I post here, I always seem to stir up far more discussion than I intended.

There was a pre covid sign in sheet, set up before my time. I was trying to figure out whether to start using it again.

Having fire wardens is not a legislation, but it's part of the approved fire evacuation plan for my buildings wof, so mandatory.

The fire wardens can be counted on to sweep the building, people with visitors can be expected to look after them in any emergency (even if they've popped to the toilet) and there wasn't any nned I could see. But I asked here in case anyone had a good reason otherwise. With good alternative systems in place, a sign in sheet is irrelevant.

I'm currently going through an 'all hazards' business continuity and emergency management plan, and the feedback here has been useful for that. But I still haven't seen the need for a sign in sheet for visitors to the office.

But building sites I feel may be a different matter. They don't have working fire alarms or sprinklers, often don't have designated fire wardens, and the only warning system is people yelling fire, and someone out in the car park sounding a car horn three times. Who, on the third floor, wearing hearing protection while using power tools will hear a car horn? So I'm trying to improve the culture around signing in there. But improving a culture is a difficult battle...

Daily sign in sheets or software could also be useful in the case of a situation such as the Christchurch earthquake. It would allow you to understand who is in the building or on the site and therefore who was at risk from the event.

If used well. Unless tied to pay it is unlikely that you would get good compliance from staff. Would you go in to a damaged building to look for a visitor based on the quality of your current system?

Being regularly involved in search and rescue ops i can tell you that false and inaccurate information is more problematic and time consuming than an absence of information. It sucks up resources and time verifying and chasing it down, that could be more beneficially applied to clearing the known problem.

If the sign in system doesn't have an exceptionally high accuracy rate then a rescue crew has to treat it with a extremely high level of skepticism that boarders on 'disregard it'.

But I still haven't seen the need for a sign in sheet for visitors to the office. — Garth Forsberg

How about this scenario Garth, nothing to do with your office, a visitor has some kind of medical emergency while on your premises. Wouldn't make your life easier if you had some contact details for their employer etc etc?

Most of the sign in sheets I've seen had a spot to write the visitors cell phone number or email, but not their employers contact phone. Ringing the visitors own cell phone wouldn't help in an emergency. In your scenario, the person receiving the visitor should have the contact details of the company they represent, or be able to find them.

You could use your version of a sign in sheet, electronic version to capture both the visitors cell, and their off site contact number(employer etc etc)