What factor is considered when determining what is 'reasonably practicable' in safety regulations?

The concept of 'reasonably practicable' in safety regulations involves balancing the level of risk against the measures required to control that risk, particularly in terms of cost and time. This principle recognizes that while it is necessary to ensure health and safety, the extent of measures that can be taken should not be disproportionate to the risk involved.

When assessing what is 'reasonably practicable,' factors such as the cost of implementing safety measures compared to the risk of harm are taken into account. If significant improvements in safety can be achieved without incurring excessive costs or delays, it is deemed reasonable to implement those measures. Essentially, this means that organizations should prioritize actionable and effective safety solutions that maintain a balance between efficiency and risk reduction, ensuring safety without imposing undue burdens.

Other considerations like legal obligations and company policies play important roles in shaping an organization’s health and safety approach but do not directly speak to the balance of cost and risk that defines what is 'reasonably practicable.' Personal preference is not a relevant factor, as safety decisions should be guided by objective assessments rather than individual choices.