Can Risk Ever Be Zero in the Workplace?

Can Risk Ever Be Zero in the Workplace? The ideal target for reducing risk is zero.

Risk is something every employer and employee encounters daily, whether they are aware of it or not. From the moment someone steps into a workplace, they are exposed to a range of hazards that must be identified, assessed, and managed. The question of whether that risk can ever truly reach zero is one that sits at the heart of health and safety practice in the UK. The short answer is no, but understanding why, and what you should be aiming for instead, is what separates a compliant business from a genuinely safe one.

Under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974, every employer has a legal duty to ensure the health, safety, and welfare of their workers so far as is reasonably practicable. That phrase, “reasonably practicable,” is doing a great deal of work in health and safety law. It does not demand perfection, and it does not require zero risk. What it does require is that employers take all proportionate steps to reduce risk to the lowest level achievable without disproportionate cost or effort. This article explores what that means in practice, why zero risk is an unreachable target, and how to use that understanding to build a safer workplace.

The idea of a completely risk-free workplace is appealing, but it does not hold up to scrutiny. Risk is an inherent feature of human activity. Even the most mundane tasks carry some level of residual hazard, and eliminating every single one would require either stopping all work entirely or controlling for circumstances that are simply beyond human prediction.

Consider a straightforward example: cleaning a hard floor. On the surface, this seems like a low-hazard activity. The worker is indoors, at ground level, using familiar equipment. Yet even with all reasonable precautions in place, such as displaying wet floor signs, wearing appropriate footwear, and using gloves when handling cleaning chemicals, risk cannot be driven to zero. A colleague might ignore the signage. A glove might develop a small tear. Water might splash near an electrical socket that cannot be isolated in an occupied building. Each of these scenarios represents a residual risk that persists despite thorough preparation.

Extend this thinking to a slightly more complex task, such as cleaning a first-floor window. The obvious hazard is working at height, and a competent risk assessment would rightly focus on eliminating that hazard first. Using telescopic cleaning poles operated from ground level removes the need to climb a ladder, which significantly reduces the most serious risk. However, it does not produce a zero-risk situation. The operative is still handling equipment overhead, still using chemical cleaning solutions, still working in proximity to pedestrians, vehicles, and door openings, and still subject to weather conditions that could affect their footing or visibility. The hazard of working at height has been removed, but a range of lesser hazards remains.

This is not a failure of the risk assessment process. It is precisely the expected outcome. The hierarchy of risk controls, which moves through elimination, substitution, engineering controls, administrative measures, and personal protective equipment, is designed to reduce risk progressively, not to eliminate it entirely. Each step down the hierarchy produces a safer outcome than the last; none of them guarantees zero.

There is also a practical dimension that often gets overlooked. Some control measures introduce new hazards even as they address existing ones. Sawing timber outdoors to reduce dust inhalation inside a workshop exposes the operative to sunlight, wind, and uneven ground. Automating a manual handling task can eliminate musculoskeletal risk while introducing mechanical or electrical hazards. Health and safety management is, in this sense, a balancing exercise; the objective is not to eliminate all risk but to ensure the remaining risk is acceptable and as low as reasonably practicable.

Can all risks be eliminated?

Rather than demanding zero risk, UK health and safety legislation sets a different standard. Employers are required to reduce risk to a level that is as low as is reasonably practicable, a principle commonly referred to by its acronym, ALARP. This legal threshold is central to how risk assessments should be approached, and understanding it helps clarify what “good enough” actually looks like in practice.

ALARP operates on the principle that risk reduction should continue until the cost and effort of further reduction becomes grossly disproportionate to the benefit gained. In simple terms, if there is a straightforward and affordable measure that would make a task meaningfully safer, you are expected to implement it. If the only remaining measure would be extraordinarily expensive or disruptive relative to the small incremental safety gain it would produce, you may be able to justify not taking it. The residual risk that remains after all reasonably practicable controls have been applied is sometimes called tolerable risk, and it is this level, rather than zero, that represents legal compliance.

The Health and Safety Executive provides guidance on how to apply this standard across different industries and activities, but the underlying principle is consistent. A risk that sits above the ALARP threshold is unacceptable and must be reduced further. A risk that sits below it may be tolerable, provided appropriate controls remain in place and the situation is kept under review. Zero risk is not part of this framework because zero risk is not achievable; the framework is built around the realistic goal of minimising harm to the greatest extent that can reasonably be expected.

It is worth noting that ALARP is not a static calculation. What is considered reasonably practicable can change over time as new technology becomes available, as industry standards evolve, and as the understanding of particular hazards improves. A control measure that was impractical or prohibitively expensive a decade ago may now be standard practice. This is why risk assessments should be treated as living documents, reviewed regularly and updated whenever there is a significant change in the activity, environment, or workforce.

Test 1: Window Cleaning

First, let’s consider cleaning a first-floor window with a ladder. The main risk here is falling from height.

You must carry your cleaning tools up the ladder and use them when you reach the window. You’re going to struggle to hold a bucket up the ladder safely. And once you get up there, you need to clean the window while balancing the ladder. While this was once common practice, it’s not great for risk levels.

Can Risk Ever Be Zero in the Workplace – Can you eliminate work at height to remove the hazard? Yes, you can.

The work could be carried out from ground level. Telescopic poles with cleaning tools attached could be used. There would be no more work at height.

Fantastic! You’ve removed the main risk from the activity. And that’s a good thing. But is the task now zero risk? No. There are still other risks.

• strains from manual handling
• trips from tools and equipment
• skin irritation from contact with cleaning solutions
• contact injuries from dropping the pole
• contact with vehicles
• navigating obstacles
• weather exposure

You still have manual handling, and you’re still using cleaning chemicals. You still need to consider where you are standing. Are there other people or vehicles that could knock into you? Are there doors that could open into where you are working? You will be looking up, so you won’t have the best ground-level awareness during the cleaning process. Is the attachment fixed securely? Could it fall?

There are still risks involved with the activity, but you have reduced the risks by eliminating the hazard of working at height.

Test 2: Floor Cleaning

Okay, next up, and sticking with a cleaning activity, what about cleaning a floor? It’s not a high-hazard activity. It’s indoors, and you are at ground level. Can the risk be zero here?

You can prevent contact with cleaning chemicals by using a mop and gloves, wearing safety footwear to prevent slipping, and putting signs out warning everyone else that there is a wet floor.

You can work in a way that greatly reduces the risk. Clearly display warning signs. Never work with the bucket behind you. Don’t overfill the bucket. Use a new pair of gloves when yours become damaged or contaminated.

But the risk is stilln’t zero. People could ignore the sign and slip anyway, walk into it, and fall over it. Your gloves could get a hole in them, or you could knock your bucket over and slip on the spillage. If you’re using water near electrical sockets, the client will not let you turn all the electricity off in an occupied building!

Why can’t all risks be eliminated?

So, we didn’t manage to totally eliminate all risks from our test activities, and you probably never will unless you don’t do the activity at all, but that’s not really how work gets done.

But there will always be some remaining risks, even tiny ones. But some risk is not zero risk.

All risks can’t be eliminated because health and safety are part of life. Even if you were to stay in bed and never get up, you are at risk of bed sores and poor health due to lack of exercise.

The world is full of health and safety risks. Electrical faults happen, even on new or well-maintained equipment. People have heart attacks while driving. Freak weather events can catch you out. Even getting to work is a risk. You could get struck by lightning. You could trip up on the pavement, fall and hurt yourself.

We like to think every accident is preventable, but we can’t always stop things from happening.

But just because all risks can’t be eliminated doesn’t mean some risks can’t be. The top control in the hierarchy of risk control is elimination. So, just like we eliminated work at height in our window cleaning example, you should eliminate the biggest risks where possible. Look at the near miss here to give you a better overview.

Do you need to be at zero risk?

Can Risk Ever Be Zero in the Workplace – You might not get to zero, but you can reduce the risk.

Maintaining equipment reduces the risk of a problem or fault. Staying healthy reduces the risk of a heart attack and other medical problems. Checking the weather forecast reduces the likelihood of being caught out by unexpected wind, rain, and storms.

At work, the goal of your risk assessment isn’t to reduce risk to zero. It is to reduce risk as close to zero as possible. To do this, think about what could go wrong and minimise the chance of that happening.

Understanding the Risk Assessment Process: Reducing Workplace Hazards

The risk assessment is essential for every business to identify potential hazards and implement control measures to minimise risks.

Once potential issues are identified, appropriate control measures can be established to reduce the risk. For instance, the risk of falling from height is significantly higher when using a ladder than a scaffold platform with proper edge protection. With a scaffold, workers can have both hands free for tasks, decreasing the chances of falling or dropping objects. While accidents can still occur, the risk is considerably reduced.

It’s important to note that eliminating all risks is not expected, as it is simply impossible. The goal is to make the workplace as safe as reasonably practicable.

Minimising Risks While Sawing Wood: Safety Measures and Considerations

When sawing wood, you can reduce the risk of wood dust inhalation by wearing a dust mask and performing the task outdoors, where ventilation is better, preventing dust buildup in the workplace. However, working outside exposes you to weather conditions, and increased sun exposure raises the risk of skin damage.

In some cases, removing one risk can introduce others; your challenge is to choose the best solution that creates the lowest risk.

Of course, the best way to control risk is to eliminate it. Where you can, you should. But you are not expected to eliminate all risks. The law doesn’t require this, and it wouldn’t be practical.

Can you use a saw or a drill without any risk? No. Can you control the risks and prevent harm by implementing safety measures? Yes!

The law requires risk to be reduced as low as is reasonably practicable. This is known as ALARP. It means controlling hazards and minimising risks as much as possible.

If there is a safer way of doing the job, you should take it. If there are control measures that will help keep your workplace safe, you should use them.

If the risk is above zero, it may be acceptable. If the risk is above ALARP, it’s too much.

The risk can’t be zero, but it can be reduced. There will always be some level of risk remaining. This is known as residual risk.

This article was written by Mathew Oldham (HSQE Consultancy Ltd). Mathew has over 20 years of experience in health and safety and an MSc (Hons) in Construction Management. Mathew is NEBOSH Health and Safety, Construction, Fire, Environment and Diploma qualified and CertIOSH.