Is Your Safety Plan Backwards? Why Most Theaters Get Risk Control Wrong

Theater safety programs often begin with the most visible solution—buying better gloves, upgrading harnesses, replacing outdated PPE. Yet this instinct, however well-intentioned, reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of effective risk management. The hierarchy of controls demands we start not with what protects workers during exposure, but with whether that exposure should exist at all.

Understanding the Hierarchy of Controls

The hierarchy of controls provides a systematic framework for evaluating risk mitigation strategies based on effectiveness and reliability. Developed through decades of industrial safety research and codified in OSHA standards, this five-level pyramid ranks control measures from most to least effective (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health [NIOSH], 2015).

Elimination represents the most effective control. Remove the hazard entirely and risk disappears. Consider automated rigging systems that eliminate manual linesets, or permanent venue installations that eliminate touring crew exposure to truck loading operations. When elimination proves feasible, no other control measure compares.

Substitution replaces hazardous materials or processes with safer alternatives. Water-based stage makeup instead of solvent-based products. LED fixtures instead of arc-source followspots requiring hazardous lamp handling. Ground-supported truss instead of high-level rigging points. Substitution maintains the theatrical function while fundamentally reducing hazard severity.

Engineering controls modify the work environment or equipment to minimize exposure without relying on worker behavior. Guardrails at elevated work platforms. Mechanical advantage systems reducing manual force requirements. Ventilation systems controlling airborne contaminants. These controls function independently of worker compliance, providing consistent protection (ANSI/ASSE Z590.3-2011).

Administrative controls establish policies and procedures governing how work occurs. Permit-required confined space programs for understage access. Lock-out/tag-out procedures for electrical work. Training requirements for powered equipment operation. Rotation schedules limiting repetitive motion exposure. These controls depend entirely on consistent implementation and worker adherence.

Personal protective equipment serves as the final defense when exposure cannot be controlled through other means. Fall protection harnesses. Hearing protection during sound checks. Respiratory protection during haze operation. PPE effectiveness relies on proper selection, fit, maintenance, and worker compliance at every exposure moment.

Why the Order Matters

The hierarchy’s ranking reflects both effectiveness and sustainability. Elimination and substitution address hazards at their source, providing permanent protection regardless of individual behavior or equipment maintenance. Engineering controls function passively, requiring minimal ongoing intervention. Administrative controls demand continuous management attention and worker compliance. PPE offers the least reliable protection, vulnerable to equipment failure, improper use, and worker fatigue.

Consider a common scenario: fog machine operation creating respiratory exposure. The PPE approach provides respirators—requiring fit testing, medical clearance, training, maintenance, cartridge replacement, and perfect donning at every exposure. The administrative approach establishes machine operation protocols and exposure time limits—requiring supervision and enforcement. The engineering approach installs local exhaust ventilation or uses low-lying fog fluids with reduced airborne exposure—functioning automatically regardless of operator behavior. The substitution approach selects water-based atmospheric effects or LED-based visual alternatives—eliminating the respiratory hazard entirely.

Each step down the hierarchy increases implementation complexity while decreasing reliability. Yet most theater safety programs begin at the bottom, purchasing equipment to protect against hazards that more effective controls could eliminate.

Applying the Hierarchy in Practice

Effective risk assessment begins with systematic hazard identification followed by control evaluation starting at the hierarchy’s top. For each identified hazard, ask: Can we eliminate this exposure entirely? If not, can we substitute a safer alternative? Only after examining these options should consideration move to engineering, administrative, and PPE solutions.

A technical director evaluating grid access illustrates this progression. Elimination: Can we relocate equipment to eliminate grid access needs? Substitution: Can we use motorized hoists instead of manual cable adjustment? Engineering controls: Can we install permanent walkways with guardrails? Administrative controls: Can we establish permit systems and training requirements? PPE: What fall protection equipment do workers require?

The hierarchy does not prohibit PPE or administrative controls. Rather, it demands these measures supplement—not replace—more effective options. Fall protection harnesses remain essential even with excellent guardrails. Training programs enhance but cannot substitute for engineering solutions. The hierarchy establishes priority, not exclusivity.

Common Implementation Failures

Theater safety programs frequently reverse the hierarchy, implementing controls in order of perceived simplicity rather than effectiveness. Buying harnesses feels concrete and immediate. Redesigning rigging systems appears expensive and distant. Yet this inversion creates ongoing compliance burdens while leaving fundamental hazards unaddressed.

Another failure emerges when organizations justify inadequate controls by claiming higher-level options are infeasible without rigorous evaluation. “We can’t afford to eliminate manual linesets” often translates to “We haven’t calculated the actual cost of current injury rates, training requirements, and regulatory compliance compared to automation investment.” The hierarchy demands genuine feasibility analysis, not assumption.

Documentation failures also plague hierarchy implementation. Safety programs must demonstrate that control selection resulted from systematic evaluation, not convenience or tradition. OSHA compliance requires evidence that employers assessed more effective controls before implementing lesser measures (29 CFR 1910, Subpart I). Adequate documentation protects both workers and organizations.

Discussion Question

When you evaluate safety improvements in your theater, where do you typically start in the hierarchy? What prevents you from beginning with elimination and substitution rather than PPE and administrative controls?

Learn More

Understanding the hierarchy of controls provides foundation for comprehensive risk management. Explore how these principles apply to specific theatrical hazards through our articles on rigging safety protocols, stage makeup hazard assessment, and comprehensive safety program development.

References

American National Standards Institute/American Society of Safety Engineers. (2011). Prevention through design guidelines for addressing occupational hazards and risks in design and redesign processes (ANSI/ASSE Z590.3-2011).

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. (2015). Hierarchy of controls. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/hierarchy/default.html

Occupational Safety and Health Administration. (n.d.). Walking-working surfaces (29 CFR 1910, Subpart I). U.S. Department of Labor.