What should an investigation into a height-work incident or near-miss focus on identifying, beyond simply what the individual worker did?

A. Only whether disciplinary action is warranted

B. The underlying systemic factors — equipment condition, planning, supervision, time pressure, training gaps — that contributed to the event, in addition to individual actions

C. Nothing further is needed once the immediate cause is identified

D. Only whether the individual worker followed every rule exactly

A. Allow both to proceed simultaneously since they are in different physical positions

B. Allow both to proceed if the worker below wears a welding-rated face shield

C. Allow both to proceed but ask the welder to angle sparks away from the stage

D. Treat this as a combined-hazard situation: the falling sparks/hot material hazard from welding directly threatens the worker below, so the tasks should be sequenced (not run simultaneously) or the lower position relocated outside the hot work exclusion zone

A. That the control measure worked exactly as intended — the isolation and secured release mechanism prevented what could have been a serious incident, and this should still be reported as a near-miss for learning purposes

B. That the isolation/securing requirement was unnecessary in this case since no harm occurred

C. That the crew member should be disciplined for touching the lever, with no further action needed

D. That no follow-up is required since the outcome was safe