Warnings, Matting and Lighting

Whether it reached the person in time to matter. That means examining every approach path to the hazard, whether a sign stood on each, whether it was visible against the background and in the available light, and whether it went out promptly rather than after the incident.

On run length relative to weather and traffic, construction and backing suitable for the volume, coverage of the full walking width, and condition at the time. It also considers whether a routine existed for changing saturated mats, since a mat that has stopped absorbing has stopped working.

Lighting is normally a contributing factor to whether a condition was perceivable rather than an independent cause. Where fixtures were out of service, relamping intervals had lapsed, or glare on a polished surface obscured a change in level, that is documented alongside the condition.

A sign left in place continuously stops conveying that a hazard exists now, and both staff and visitors habituate to it. Where the record shows a sign was a fixture of the space rather than a response to a condition, that bears on whether the warning functioned as a control.

On type, stability and continuity, and on whether gaps allowed access to the work zone. The assessment also covers whether the diverted route was legible to someone seeing the space for the first time, and what condition the area was left in between shifts.

It does. A hazard warning placed among promotional signage, wayfinding and permanent notices competes for the same attention and can be missed entirely. Photographs showing the sign in its actual visual context are far more useful than a photograph of the sign alone.