Compliance Management for Groundworks Contractors
Handle excavation safety, plant operations, and underground services with digital compliance tools.
The Challenge
Groundworks contractors operate heavy plant in close proximity to buried services and people, making every day a high-risk operation. Excavation collapses, cable strikes, and plant incidents remain leading causes of construction fatalities. Safe digging procedures require systematic service searches, excavation permits, and ongoing inspections that paper systems struggle to maintain across multiple sites. When HSE investigates a trench collapse or cable strike, you need comprehensive evidence that all reasonable precautions were taken.
How Assistant Manager Solves Groundworks Compliance
Each module is designed to address the specific challenges groundworks businesses face every day.
Checklist Management
Groundworks involves multiple excavations across sites, each requiring permits, support specifications, and ongoing inspections. Digital systems must track this complexity while keeping the process simple for site operatives
The Problems
Why This Matters for Groundworks
- Excavation permits and daily trench inspections are documented inconsistently - some excavations have full records, others have nothing until something goes wrong
HSE investigation following a trench collapse finds incomplete or absent excavation documentation, leading to prosecution for failure to manage excavation risks
- Service search documentation (CAT and Genny scans, utility records, trial holes) is supposed to happen before every excavation but is often rushed or assumed from previous work
Cable and pipe strikes occur because service searches were incomplete or documentation could not prove due diligence was followed
The Solution
How Checklist Management Helps
Digital excavation permits with mandatory completion gates, daily inspection schedules with photo verification, and service search documentation linked to specific excavation locations
Every excavation has a documented permit before work starts, daily inspections are tracked and verified, and service search records are complete and linked to the specific dig location
Use Cases:
- • Excavation permit with support specification
- • Daily trench inspection with condition photo
- • CAT and Genny scan documentation
- • Trial hole records with service confirmation
- • Utility drawing review sign-off
- • Ground condition assessment records
- • Excavation backfill and reinstatement verification
Feature Screenshot
Checklist Management
Real-World Examples
Example 1: Excavation permits and daily trench inspections are documented inconsistently - some excavations have full records, others have nothing until something goes wrong
Real Scenario
"A trench side collapses, burying a worker. HSE requests excavation permit and daily inspection records. The excavation permit was verbal. Daily inspections were not recorded. The trench support specification does not match what was actually installed. Prosecution follows."
Example 2: Service search documentation (CAT and Genny scans, utility records, trial holes) is supposed to happen before every excavation but is often rushed or assumed from previous work
Real Scenario
"A mini-digger strikes a high-voltage cable. The operator claims he did a CAT scan but there is no record. The utility drawings showing the cable were in the site office but the operator never saw them. Nobody can prove the safe digging process was followed."
Employee Scheduling
Groundworks involves multiple plant types requiring different operator categories, plus support roles like banksmen that require specific training. Scheduling must match qualifications to tasks across a mobile workforce
The Problems
Why This Matters for Groundworks
- Plant operators are assigned to machines without verification that their CPCS card covers the specific plant category, or that the card is still valid
Unqualified operators use plant, and incidents reveal competency gaps that demonstrate inadequate management systems
- Banksmen and slingers are required for lifting and vehicle movements, but scheduling does not verify these roles are filled by qualified people
Lifting operations and vehicle movements proceed without qualified personnel, creating risk of struck-by incidents
The Solution
How Employee Scheduling Helps
Plant scheduling integrated with operator qualification verification by machine category, banksman and slinger competency tracking, and automatic blocking of unqualified assignments
Every operator is verified qualified for the specific plant they will operate, banksmen and slingers are confirmed competent before assignment, and scheduling errors cannot create competency gaps
Use Cases:
- • CPCS card verification by plant category
- • Excavator operator scheduling with ticket check
- • Banksman and slinger allocation for movements
- • Crane operator and appointed person scheduling
- • Plant across multiple sites coordination
- • First aider coverage for each work location
- • Subcontractor plant operator verification
Feature Screenshot
Employee Scheduling
Real-World Examples
Example 1: Plant operators are assigned to machines without verification that their CPCS card covers the specific plant category, or that the card is still valid
Real Scenario
"An excavator overturns. Investigation finds the operator had a CPCS card for a different category of machine. He had operated this larger machine before so assumed he was qualified. Nobody checked the card against the specific plant before assignment."
Example 2: Banksmen and slingers are required for lifting and vehicle movements, but scheduling does not verify these roles are filled by qualified people
Real Scenario
"A reversing dumper strikes a pedestrian. Investigation finds the banksman was a labourer drafted in to help because the qualified banksman was on another task. His CSCS card showed labourer category with no slinger/signaller endorsement."
Time & Attendance
Groundworks involves mobile plant and operatives moving between sites and between work areas within sites. Tracking must handle this mobility while providing the information needed for safety, payment, and productivity
The Problems
Why This Matters for Groundworks
- Plant and operatives move between sites during the day, making accurate tracking of who is where extremely difficult
Emergency response is hampered when you cannot locate workers, and hours worked at different sites are disputed for payment purposes
- Plant hire costs are based on hours worked, but verifying actual machine hours versus driver claims is difficult
Internal or hire plant costs are inflated by unverified hours, and programme planning based on assumed productivity is inaccurate
The Solution
How Time & Attendance Helps
Location-tracked clock-in for operatives and plant, real-time visibility of workforce and equipment locations across sites, and verified time records for payment and productivity analysis
You know where every person and machine is at all times for emergency response, plant hours are independently verified, and multi-site work is tracked accurately
Use Cases:
- • Site-based clock-in with location verification
- • Real-time operative and plant location tracking
- • Multi-site working hours tracking
- • Plant operating hours verification
- • Emergency muster with current location data
- • Working Time Regulations monitoring
- • Subcontractor hours verification for payment
Feature Screenshot
Time & Attendance
Real-World Examples
Example 1: Plant and operatives move between sites during the day, making accurate tracking of who is where extremely difficult
Real Scenario
"An excavation collapses at Site B. Your office thinks the experienced shoring supervisor is there. He is actually at Site A because he was moved this morning. Twenty minutes are lost establishing where your qualified rescue resources are actually located."
Example 2: Plant hire costs are based on hours worked, but verifying actual machine hours versus driver claims is difficult
Real Scenario
"Your hired excavator claim shows 10 hours. Your driver says he worked the full day. The principal contractor's records show the machine was idle for two hours waiting for concrete. You pay for hours the machine was not productive because you have no verification."
Training & Development
Groundworks requires a complex matrix of operator qualifications across different plant categories, plus specific safe digging competencies. Training management must handle this complexity while keeping information accessible for daily decisions
The Problems
Why This Matters for Groundworks
- CPCS cards have different categories for different plant types, and keeping track of which operators can operate which machines is complex
Operators are assigned to plant they are not qualified for, creating competency gaps that surface only when incidents occur
- Safe digging training (CAT and Genny) requires regular refresher, but renewal tracking is inconsistent
Workers conduct service searches with expired training, and cable strikes reveal competency had lapsed
The Solution
How Training & Development Helps
Comprehensive plant operator certification tracking by category, CAT and Genny training with expiry management, and competency matrix visible when scheduling plant assignments
Every operator's qualifications are tracked by machine category with renewal alerts, safe digging competency is current and verified, and scheduling cannot assign unqualified operators
Use Cases:
- • CPCS card tracking by endorsement category
- • CAT and Genny training with annual renewal
- • Banksman and slinger certification
- • Excavation shoring competency tracking
- • Working near services awareness training
- • First aid and emergency response training
- • Site-specific induction for each location
Feature Screenshot
Training & Development
Real-World Examples
Example 1: CPCS cards have different categories for different plant types, and keeping track of which operators can operate which machines is complex
Real Scenario
"An operator with CPCS for 360 excavators is asked to operate a wheeled loader. He assumes the categories are similar enough. They are not - wheeled loader requires separate endorsement. An incident reveals he was not qualified for that machine."
Example 2: Safe digging training (CAT and Genny) requires regular refresher, but renewal tracking is inconsistent
Real Scenario
"A worker conducts a CAT scan before excavation. He still strikes a cable. Investigation reveals his CAT and Genny training expired 18 months ago. He had been doing scans ever since without realising his certification was out of date."
HR Management
Groundworks uses a mix of directly employed operators, labour-only subcontractors, and self-employed specialists. Documentation systems must handle this complexity while meeting both regulatory and client requirements
The Problems
Why This Matters for Groundworks
- Groundworks contractors use labour-only subcontractors and self-employed operators, but documentation of their status, insurance, and competency is inconsistent
Employment status disputes arise with HMRC, or incidents reveal gaps in insurance cover that create unexpected liability
- Principal contractors increasingly require evidence of your workforce competency and compliance systems before you can work on their sites
Work opportunities are lost because you cannot quickly provide the documentation major clients require
The Solution
How HR Management Helps
Unified workforce documentation for employees, subcontractors, and self-employed operators with insurance tracking, competency matrices, and client-ready reporting
All workforce documentation is current and accessible regardless of employment status, insurance gaps are identified and addressed, and client requirements can be met quickly
Use Cases:
- • Operator CPCS card central registry
- • Self-employed insurance verification
- • Subcontractor EL and PL certificate tracking
- • Right to work documentation management
- • Framework pre-qualification responses
- • Workforce competency matrix generation
- • Client audit preparation
Feature Screenshot
HR Management
Real-World Examples
Example 1: Groundworks contractors use labour-only subcontractors and self-employed operators, but documentation of their status, insurance, and competency is inconsistent
Real Scenario
"A self-employed operator on your site is injured. His employer's liability insurance should cover medical costs. But he is genuinely self-employed and has no EL insurance - he only has public liability. His medical claim comes to you as the engaging party."
Example 2: Principal contractors increasingly require evidence of your workforce competency and compliance systems before you can work on their sites
Real Scenario
"A national housebuilder wants to add you to their groundworks framework. They require CPCS matrices for all operators, CAT training records, and excavation procedure documentation. Compiling this from various sources takes three weeks. They appoint a competitor who responded faster."
Risk Assessment
Groundworks risks are fundamentally site-specific and condition-dependent. Risk assessment must be a live process that responds to what is actually happening on site, not a static document written before work started
The Problems
Why This Matters for Groundworks
- Ground conditions vary across sites and change with weather, but risk assessments are written at project start and not updated when conditions change
Excavation collapses occur because risk assessments did not account for water ingress, made ground, or other conditions that developed during work
- Method statements for plant operations are generic rather than site-specific, missing local hazards like overhead lines, underground services at unusual depths, or adjacent structures
Incidents occur from hazards that a proper site-specific assessment would have identified and controlled
The Solution
How Risk Assessment Helps
Site-specific risk assessments with ground condition monitoring, dynamic updates for weather and conditions, and location-specific hazard identification for overhead, underground, and adjacent risks
Risk assessments reflect actual site conditions and are updated when conditions change, specific hazards are identified and controlled rather than covered by generic statements, and ground condition changes trigger reassessment
Use Cases:
- • Site-specific excavation risk assessment
- • Ground condition assessment with updates
- • Overhead line proximity assessment
- • Underground services risk assessment
- • Adjacent structure impact assessment
- • Plant and pedestrian interface assessment
- • Weather-triggered reassessment prompts
Feature Screenshot
Risk Assessment
Real-World Examples
Example 1: Ground conditions vary across sites and change with weather, but risk assessments are written at project start and not updated when conditions change
Real Scenario
"Heavy rain overnight saturates the ground. A trench that was stable yesterday collapses this morning. The risk assessment specified battering for dry conditions. Nobody reassessed after the rain. The excavation support was inadequate for the actual ground state."
Example 2: Method statements for plant operations are generic rather than site-specific, missing local hazards like overhead lines, underground services at unusual depths, or adjacent structures
Real Scenario
"An excavator boom contacts an overhead line. The method statement covered general overhead line precautions but did not identify this specific line, assess its clearance height, or specify goalposts. The line was visible but nobody had specifically assessed it."
Incident Reporting
Groundworks near-misses - utility contacts, trench instability, plant incidents - are critical early warnings. A culture of reporting supported by simple tools prevents the serious incidents that near-misses predict
The Problems
Why This Matters for Groundworks
- Cable and pipe strikes are often unreported or minimised because operators fear consequences, meaning trends and near-misses are invisible
The same service locations cause repeated strikes because previous incidents were not documented and communicated, and serious strikes occur that previous near-misses could have predicted
- Plant incidents involving overturns, stuck machines, and contact with structures are not always reported as the near-misses they represent
Patterns of plant risk are invisible until a serious incident occurs, when investigation reveals multiple warning signs
The Solution
How Incident Reporting Helps
Simple mobile incident reporting with utility strike specific forms, plant incident capture with near-miss emphasis, and pattern analysis across sites and operators
All strikes and near-misses are captured to prevent recurrence, plant incidents are reported as valuable warnings, and patterns across your operation are visible to prompt preventive action
Use Cases:
- • Utility strike and near-miss reporting
- • Excavation instability incident records
- • Plant overturn and contact incidents
- • Struck-by and crushing near-miss capture
- • Automatic RIDDOR determination
- • Service location update from incidents
- • Pattern analysis across operators and sites
Feature Screenshot
Incident Reporting
Real-World Examples
Example 1: Cable and pipe strikes are often unreported or minimised because operators fear consequences, meaning trends and near-misses are invisible
Real Scenario
"An excavator ruptures a gas main. Investigation finds two previous operators had encountered unexpected services in the same area but had not reported them - they had dug around and said nothing. The records that would have warned today's operator did not exist."
Example 2: Plant incidents involving overturns, stuck machines, and contact with structures are not always reported as the near-misses they represent
Real Scenario
"A dumper overturns on a haul road, seriously injuring the operator. Investigation finds the same haul road had caused three near-misses in previous weeks - soft spots, rutting, adverse camber - but nobody formally reported them. Managers had no idea the road was becoming dangerous."
COSHH Management
Groundworks exposes workers to routine chemical hazards from plant operation and potentially severe hazards from contaminated land. COSHH management must address both the everyday and the unexpected
The Problems
Why This Matters for Groundworks
- Groundworks involves fuels, oils, and hydraulic fluids that create skin contact and environmental hazards, but these are treated as routine and controls are often informal
Workers develop dermatitis or other conditions from repeated fuel and oil contact, and environmental pollution occurs from spills that were not properly contained
- Contaminated land excavation exposes workers to soil contaminants, but assessment of actual conditions often lags behind the pace of work
Workers are exposed to contaminants before controls are implemented, and environmental permits are breached by improper handling of contaminated materials
The Solution
How COSHH Management Helps
Groundworks-specific COSHH management with fuel and oil handling assessments, contaminated land protocols with stop-and-assess procedures, and mobile-accessible safety information for operatives
Fuel and oil handling requirements are clear and enforced, contaminated land triggers immediate assessment before further work, and operatives have accessible information about the hazards they encounter
Use Cases:
- • Fuel handling and refuelling procedures
- • Hydraulic fluid and oil exposure controls
- • Contaminated land assessment protocols
- • Stop-and-assess procedures for unexpected conditions
- • PPE requirements for different soil types
- • Spill prevention and response procedures
- • Environmental permit compliance for waste soils
Feature Screenshot
COSHH Management
Real-World Examples
Example 1: Groundworks involves fuels, oils, and hydraulic fluids that create skin contact and environmental hazards, but these are treated as routine and controls are often informal
Real Scenario
"A plant operator develops chronic dermatitis on his hands and forearms. He had been cleaning up hydraulic leaks and refuelling without gloves for years. COSHH assessments specified barrier cream and nitrile gloves but this was never communicated to plant operators."
Example 2: Contaminated land excavation exposes workers to soil contaminants, but assessment of actual conditions often lags behind the pace of work
Real Scenario
"Excavation reveals soil with strong hydrocarbon odour. Workers continue digging for two hours before anyone decides to stop and assess. Soil testing shows contamination levels requiring respiratory protection. Those two hours of exposure should not have happened."
Results Groundworks Businesses Achieve
Other Construction Solutions
Ready to Dig Into Better Compliance?
Join groundworks contractors using Assistant Manager for excavation safety.