Why Check Calls are not an Effective Way of Protecting Lone Workers

Ensuring the safety of lone workers is a priority for businesses in a wide range of industries, from manufacturing and social housing to utilities and healthcare. The traditional method of making scheduled check calls, while once a useful tool, is now outdated and inefficient. With technological advancements, there are far more effective ways to monitor lone workers and respond to emergencies quickly. In this blog, we’ll explore the history of check calls, the modern challenges they present, and why automation is the superior choice for protecting your workforce.

History and Evolution of Lone Worker Monitoring
Lone worker monitoring has been a vital element of workplace safety for decades. The traditional method of check calls emerged in a time when technology was limited, and phone communication was one of the few ways to maintain contact with isolated employees. Initially, check calls were considered a major safety method. Employers, often health and safety managers, would designate a supervisor to make hourly phone calls to lone workers, confirming their well-being and ensuring that help was nearby if needed.

However, this system was designed for a time when monitoring technology was still in its infancy. As work environments have evolved and the number of lone workers has increased, this method has become insufficient. With new safety risks emerging in hazardous industries, there is now a pressing need for continuous, real-time monitoring—something check calls cannot provide.

Are Check Calls Still Relevant in Lone Worker Safety Plans?
Despite being an outdated approach, check calls are still used by a significant number of businesses. As mentioned, this typically involves a manager or security guard calling each lone worker on an hourly basis. For organisations with a large workforce, this quickly becomes an inefficient and burdensome task. A security guard monitoring 60 lone workers could spend most of their day making calls, leaving little time for other responsibilities.

The reliance on one person to safeguard an entire team introduces several risks, including missed calls, delays in response, and potential human error. Moreover, should the manager fall ill or become unavailable, the safety of the lone workers would be compromised until cover is arranged.

Modern Challenges with Check Calls
While check calls once played a key role in lone worker safety, they now present a host of modern challenges:

1. Gaps in Monitoring: Because calls are made at scheduled intervals, lone workers can be unmonitored, for example, up to an hour. If an incident occurs shortly after a check-in, there may be significant delays before help is dispatched.  

2. Human Error: The manual nature of check calls means that mistakes are inevitable. Whether it's prioritising other activities, forgetting to make a call or not properly documenting the outcomes, human error can lead to serious safety risks.

3. Outdated Method: Technological advancements, such as monitoring handsets that provide instant alerts with indoor and outdoor location services, have rendered check calls obsolete. Modern systems provide real-time monitoring without the need for constant phone calls, ensuring workers receive assistance as soon as an emergency arises.

4. Disruption to Workflows: Lone workers might miss calls if they are in the middle of a task, further delaying response times. Even if they do answer, stopping work to check in adds unnecessary interruptions to their workflow, decreasing productivity.

The Risks and Consequences of Relying on Check Calls
Delegating such a crucial safety responsibility to a single individual carries significant risk. In addition to human error, there are several other consequences to relying on check calls. For example, if a worker is unable to answer a check call, it may take several attempts before an alarm is raised. This creates dangerous time delays, especially in hazardous environments.

Furthermore, making routine check calls is a monotonous and repetitive task, which can lead to complacency. As a result, the quality of monitoring often deteriorates over time, leaving lone workers more vulnerable.

Relying on manual check-ins can also create a false sense of security. Managers might assume that because check calls are happening, their workers are safe, when in reality, the system is inherently flawed and leaves workers vulnerable during unmonitored periods.

While check calls may seem like a cost-effective solution at first glance, they are far from being the most efficient method for monitoring lone workers. The time lost to making these calls and the risk of errors far outweigh any initial savings.

Discover Cost-Effective Alternatives to Check Calls

The most effective method for monitoring involves automation through the use of lone worker safety devices and Alarm Management Systems. These devices are adaptable to various work environments that employ lone workers and come in different forms.

Dedicated Lone Worker Devices: These 2G, 4G devices are equipped with SOS buttons, man-down sensors, and GPS, enabling lone workers to raise alerts in emergencies such as violent attacks, slips, trips, falls, or loss of consciousness.

Communication Handsets with Integrated Lone Worker Features: These dual-functioning handsets combine mobile communication and lone worker functionality in a single unit. Available in forms such as DECT Phones, IP Phones, and Digital Radio, they allow users to carry one handset instead of two. They also offer benefits like reducing total cost of ownership, maintenance, and replacement, as well as energy savings, waste reduction, and sustainability.

Lone Worker Apps: These apps transform smartphones into powerful safety devices, allowing users to raise SOS alerts and trigger alarms based on man-down situations. They are often paired with a small, separate SOS fob or button that triggers the alert without needing to access the app on the smartphone.

When an emergency occurs, these handsets/devices/apps trigger an alert and notify colleagues through the Alarm Management System. This ensures rapid response times and eliminates the need for manual check-ins. Additionally, alarms must be acknowledged within a specific timeframe, ensuring accountability and preventing escalation if left unaddressed.

Comparing Check Calls with Automated Systems
While check-calls may they seem cost-effective, relying on personnel to make these calls requires valuable time and resources that could be better spent elsewhere. Over time, this manual process becomes more expensive due to lost productivity.  Automated systems require an upfront investment in handsets/devices (though in many cases existing handsets can be used) and software, but it eliminates ongoing labour costs. These systems work continuously without supervision, reducing long-term costs.

Making check calls isn’t a reliable method of monitoring compared to automated solutions. It leaves large windows of time during which lone workers remain unmonitored, increasing the risk of delayed responses in emergencies. Automated Systems provide continuous, real-time monitoring, triggering immediate alerts when incidents occur, ensuring no gaps in coverage.

Performing regular calls requires constant attention from staff members, diverting focus from other tasks and lowering overall efficiency. With automated solutions, handsets/devices automatically monitor workers and alert the appropriate team members in case of an emergency, requiring no manual input and allowing staff to focus on their core responsibilities.

And lastly, record-keeping for check calls is manual, making it prone to errors or omissions. Whereas automated systems keep digital logs of all incidents and responses, providing a reliable and easily accessible record for auditing purposes.

Conclusion
In today’s fast-paced and increasingly hazardous work environments, check calls are no longer a reliable method for monitoring lone workers. The risks of human error, long delays in emergency responses, and the cost of manual labour make this method obsolete. Instead, automated lone worker safety systems offer a more efficient, cost-effective, and reliable solution. These systems provide real-time monitoring, immediate alerts, and significantly faster response times, ensuring the safety of your employees is always prioritized.

As technology continues to evolve, businesses must embrace automation to safeguard their workforce and avoid the potential dangers of relying on outdated methods like check calls. When it comes to protecting lone workers, investing in modern safety devices and alarm management systems is not just a smart decision—it’s a necessity.