Why most RAMS get sent back — and what to do about it
Principal contractors receive RAMS submissions every day, and many get sent back for clarification or revision. Not because the work is necessarily unsafe, but because the RAMS doesn't give the reviewer enough confidence that the work has been properly planned, the hazards understood, and the controls applied in the right way. It can read like a template instead of a project document.
The gap between what principal contractors expect and what tradespeople submit is often consistent and predictable. It isn't about the quality of the work — it's about the quality of the documentation. This checklist is designed to narrow that gap. Work through it before you submit your next RAMS and you'll have a much stronger pre-submission check.
Section 1 — Task description: is it specific enough?
The task description is the first thing a principal contractor reads — and the first place where RAMS get rejected. A task description that could apply to any job in any industry is not a task description. It's a category. "General construction work" or "electrical installation" tells the principal contractor nothing. They know immediately that this RAMS isn't site-specific.
A good task description answers five questions in full sentences — not bullet points. What exactly are you doing? Not "electrical work" but "first-fix electrical installation including cable routing, socket outlet wiring, and light switch connections." Where exactly are you doing it? The site address, the building, the floor or area. What is the building? New build, refurbishment, domestic, commercial, occupied, or vacant. At what stage is the project? Before plastering, after second fix, during fit-out. What access route will your workers use? Through the site entrance, via the stairs, to the first-floor work area.
That level of specificity is what the principal contractor is looking for. It proves you've visited the site — or at least researched it — and that you've planned this specific job, not just submitted a generic electrical RAMS.
Section 2 — Hazard identification: is it complete?
A hazard identification section listing "electrical hazards", "working at height hazards", "manual handling hazards" — without specifics — isn't a hazard identification. It's a list of categories. The principal contractor needs to know what specific hazards your workers will face on this specific job.
For each hazard, state the specific scenario. Not "electric shock" but "electric shock from contact with live conductors in the distribution board during testing." Not "manual handling" but "manual handling of 3-metre lengths of cable conduit up a stairwell with limited headroom." The specificity is what makes the hazard real and the controls credible.
The minimum hazard list for any construction RAMS includes: falls from height — what height, what access, what fragile surfaces; struck by falling objects; electric shock — live testing, accidental contact with buried or concealed cables; manual handling — weights, distances, frequency; hazardous substances — dust, fumes, chemicals present on this specific job; moving plant and vehicles — site traffic, reversing vehicles; musculoskeletal — repetitive tasks, awkward postures; vibration — which tools, for how long; slips, trips, and falls — surface conditions, cables, obstacles; fire — hot works, flammable materials, hot surfaces; noise — which equipment generates noise above 85dB.
Cross-reference your hazard list with the specific work and the specific site. If a hazard isn't relevant to this job, note "not applicable — no work at height on this job" and move on. But if you haven't considered it and it turns out to be relevant, that's a gap.
Section 3 — Risk ratings: are they calculated and shown?
A risk assessment that rates hazards as "low", "medium", or "high" without showing the calculation isn't a risk assessment. It's an opinion. The calculation must be visible: Likelihood (1–5) × Severity (1–5) = Risk Rating. And both the initial risk — before controls — and the residual risk — after controls — must be shown.
Show the full equation for each significant hazard, not just a final rating. The principal contractor wants to see your thinking. They want to verify that your initial rating is correct and that your controls genuinely reduce the risk to the level you claim.
Section 4 — Controls: do they follow the hierarchy?
This is where most RAMS fail. The hierarchy of risk control is: eliminate, reduce, isolate, control, PPE. PPE is last — not first. A RAMS that leads with PPE — "wear gloves, wear eye protection, wear a hard hat" — hasn't applied the hierarchy. It's skipped to the bottom and ignored everything above it.
For each significant hazard, state what you did at each level of the hierarchy. Can the hazard be eliminated entirely? If yes, state how and document the elimination. If no, state why — the work can't be done dead, for example, or the process inherently requires the hazard. Can it be reduced? A lower-voltage tool, a different method, a smaller quantity of hazardous substance. Can it be isolated? Lock-out tag-out on an electrical source, physical barriers around a work area, safety netting below work at height. Can engineering controls help? Local exhaust ventilation, RCD protection, machine guards. Are administrative controls needed? Permits to work, maximum exposure times, supervision, training. And only then — what PPE is required? Specify the exact type, the EN standard, and when it must be worn.
Document your reasoning at each level. If PPE is your primary control — because elimination and reduction are genuinely not possible for this work — explain why. That explanation is what makes the RAMS credible.
Section 5 — Competence: can you demonstrate yours?
The person who prepared the RAMS must be named, qualified, and identified as competent. A RAMS with no name, no qualification, and no date is not a professional document. It's a template. Principal contractors want to see: your full name; your relevant qualification — NVQ, CSCS card, ECS card, SMSTS certificate, or other industry-recognised qualification; your registration number where applicable — ECS card number, CSCS card number; and the date you prepared and signed the RAMS.
The signature confirms that you — the named, qualified person — have reviewed the hazards, applied the hierarchy, and approved the controls. Without it, there is no accountability.
Section 6 — Emergency procedures: are they specific to this job?
Emergency procedures that say "follow site emergency procedures" aren't emergency procedures. They're a reference to a document you haven't attached. The emergency section of your RAMS must describe what to do in specific scenarios that could arise from the work you are doing.
For electrical work: what to do if someone receives an electric shock — don't touch them, switch off power, begin CPR if qualified, call 999. For work at height: what to do if someone falls — don't move them, call 999, keep them warm, apply first aid if qualified. For hot works: what to do if a fire starts — raise the alarm, evacuate, call 999, don't fight the fire unless it's small and you're trained and equipped to do so.
Section 7 — Links and references: are they site-specific?
Your RAMS must reference the specific documents that apply to this site — the principal contractor's health and safety policy, the site emergency plan, any specific procedures the principal contractor has provided. A RAMS that makes no reference to site-specific documents looks like it was written without any knowledge of the site.
Also include: reference to the Construction Phase Plan — confirm that you've read and understood the CPP for this project; reference to the asbestos register — confirm that the building has been checked for asbestos and that you've seen the register if the building is pre-2000; and reference to any permit-to-work systems that will operate on this site — hot works permits, excavation permits, work at height permits.
The pre-submission checklist — run through this before you send anything
Before you submit your next RAMS, check every one of these:
Nine yes answers usually mean you've covered the main points a reviewer is likely to check. Any no answer is a gap that a principal contractor may find — and that could result in the RAMS being returned for revision.
Use the checklist to draft stronger RAMS before submission
RAMS Builder helps you draft RAMS that cover all seven sections — task description, hazard identification, risk ratings, hierarchy-correct controls, competence evidence, site-specific emergency procedures, and site document references. The output is structured around the points principal contractors commonly review, but it should still be checked and tailored to the actual job before submission.
The Most Common RAMS Mistakes by Trade — and How to Fix Them
Different trades have different RAMS failure patterns. Knowing what the common mistakes are for your trade helps you avoid them.
Electrical contractors
The most common RAMS failure for electrical contractors is an inadequate safe isolation procedure. The safe isolation procedure must reference GS38, specify a two-pole voltage indicator, require testing on a known live source before and after use, require personal lock-out, and require re-verification at the point of work after lock-out is applied. A RAMS that says "circuits will be isolated before work" without this detail is inadequate.
Plumbing and heating contractors
The most common failure for plumbing RAMS is inadequate gas safety assessment. Working on gas pipework, boilers, and appliances requires specific gas safety controls — including Gas Safe registration for anyone working on gas appliances, gas tightness testing after any work on gas pipework, and confirmation that the work has been notified to the relevant gas transporter or distribution network.
Carpenters and joiners
The most common failure for carpenter RAMS is inadequate dust control. Cutting and sanding wood produces dust that can cause occupational asthma. The RAMS must address the hierarchy of controls for wood dust — extraction first, then respiratory protection — and must specify the correct respiratory protection: FFP2 for softwood, FFP3 for hardwood and engineered wood products.
Bricklayers and masons
The most common failure for bricklayer RAMS is inadequate silica dust controls. Cutting brick, block, and masonry produces respirable crystalline silica — a known carcinogen. The RAMS must address the hierarchy of controls for silica dust — water suppression or on-tool extraction first, then FFP3 respiratory protection. Relying on FFP3 alone without engineering controls is not adequate.
How Principal Contractors Use the RAMS Checklist in Practice
When a principal contractor receives a RAMS submission, it typically goes through an initial review — a quick check that all required sections are present and that the document appears to be site-specific. If this initial review passes, the RAMS goes to a more detailed technical review — checking the risk ratings, the hierarchy application, and the competence evidence.
A RAMS that passes the initial review but fails the technical review will be returned with specific questions or revision requirements. A RAMS that fails the initial review — because it's clearly generic, has missing sections, or doesn't reference the specific site or project — may be rejected without detailed technical review.
One of the most effective ways to improve RAMS quality is to use the pre-submission checklist every time. Nine yes answers usually mean you've covered the key review points. Any no answer is a gap that could delay the start of work while the RAMS is revised.
Getting RAMS Right First Time — The Professional Standard
The difference between RAMS that pass and RAMS that get sent back isn't effort. It's understanding what the principal contractor is looking for. They aren't looking for the longest or most detailed RAMS. They're looking for RAMS that demonstrates the person who wrote it has genuinely planned the work, understood the hazards, and applied the hierarchy of controls correctly.
Site-specific RAMS — with named projects, named persons, specific plant and equipment, and specific emergency procedures — signal that the contractor is a professional who takes planning seriously. Generic RAMS — template documents with no site-specific detail — signal the opposite. Principal contractors know the difference, and they act on it.
The Cost of RAMS Rejection to Your Business
A rejected RAMS submission has consequences beyond the immediate delay to the start of work. Every day that work is delayed while RAMS are revised and resubmitted costs money — labour that can't start, programme slippage that affects downstream trades, and potentially a client relationship that begins on the wrong note.
A contractor who submits clear, site-specific RAMS consistently can build a reputation with principal contractors as a professional operator. Over time that can support smoother reviews and stronger working relationships. A contractor whose RAMS are repeatedly rejected may find that future submissions are scrutinised more closely.
The investment in writing quality RAMS — taking the time to be site-specific, to show risk rating methodology, to name competent persons, and to address all seven sections properly — pays dividends in reputation, in programme, and in reduced risk of enforcement action if an incident occurs. Principal contractor RAMS guidelines exist for a reason: to protect workers and to ensure that the people working on their sites have genuinely planned their work. Meeting that standard isn't a burden — it's what professional construction work looks like.