A rigging training program that actually holds up under an audit needs four pieces: classroom instruction covering the required topics, a documented hands-on practical evaluation (not just attendance), records that outlive the person who ran the training, and a defined trigger for when workers need to retrain. Most employer programs have the first piece and are missing the other three — which is exactly where a program falls apart when a carrier or insurer asks to see the paperwork.
This is a practical build order, not a copy of any single standard. It follows the shape of NATE's Rigging Training Standard, built around ANSI/ASSP A10.48-2023, but it isn't affiliated with or endorsed by NATE.
Step 1: Scope the topics before you scope the schedule
Before you pick a training vendor or block out classroom days, list what your crew actually rigs. A program covering synthetic rope, wire rope, and general rigging hardware needs different depth than one that only ever handles pre-rigged panel antennas. At minimum, a communications-structure rigging program should cover:
- Rigging hardware selection, inspection, and working load limits
- Synthetic rope and wire rope characteristics, terminations, and documented inspection
- The construction plan process — how plan class gets identified and who has to sign it
- Lifting configurations and load/proof testing
- Communications during a lift, including the hand-signal set specific to structure rigging
For the plan-class piece specifically, see ANSI A10.48-2023 rigging plan classes explained.
Step 2: Classroom or e-learning first, but don't stop there
Knowledge instruction — whether delivered in a classroom or online — covers the "why" and the reference material: which standards apply, what the terms mean, how to read a plan. This part is straightforward to source and straightforward to document with a sign-in sheet or course-completion record. It is also, by itself, not enough. A worker who can define a working load limit on a written test hasn't demonstrated they can correctly select and inspect a sling in the field.
Step 3: Build a real practical evaluation, not a sign-off
The gap between "we trained on rigging" and "we can prove our riggers are competent" is almost always the practical evaluation. A defensible one documents, per worker, per topic:
Each of those needs a pass/fail result, a date, and a signature from whoever evaluated it — separate from the written knowledge test, not combined into one generic form.
A worker who can define a working load limit on a written test hasn't demonstrated they can correctly select and inspect a sling in the field.
Step 4: Set retraining triggers, not just an expiration date
A calendar-based annual refresh is easy to administer but misses the actual risk windows. Retraining should trigger on any of the following, regardless of when the last session happened:
- A worker's duties change to include rigging tasks they haven't been evaluated on
- Your crew's lifting methods change or get more complex
- A worker demonstrates a gap in understanding — near-misses, failed inspections, or a supervisor's judgment call
- The underlying standard or your own policy gets revised
Recommended certification
Basic Rigging Principles on Communication Structures
$95 · ~4.5h online · certificate issued same day · valid 2 years
Also read: Rigging on Antenna Mounts: When It's Allowed · NWSA vs NATE: What's the Difference?
Step 5: Records that survive turnover
If the only copy of a training record lives in a trainer's inbox or a supervisor's truck, it doesn't exist for audit purposes. At minimum, keep for every worker: the course/program name and content covered, completion date, the written and practical evaluation results, and the certificate issued — including its expiration date. We cover exactly what belongs on the certificate itself in what a rigging training certificate must include.
Building it without starting from a blank page
Assembling this from scratch — three courses, two evaluation forms, a records system, and a certificate template — is most of a week's work even before you schedule anyone's time. Our Tower Rigging Training Program Kit bundles three rigging-related courses per worker with the program summary, training record, evaluation checklist, and pre-lift sign-in sheet generated from your roster — built around NATE's RTS and ANSI/ASSP A10.48, but it is not a NATE certification and not NATE-affiliated. For checking a specific lift plan against the same class logic, use our Rigging Calc tool.
Sequencing the rollout across a crew
Building the program is one project; rolling it out to an existing crew without stopping work is another. A practical sequence that avoids taking your whole team off the tower at once: start with the crew leads and anyone acting as a Competent Rigger, since they're the ones who'll be evaluating everyone else's practical demonstrations once the program is running. Get their written and practical evaluations documented first. Then roll the knowledge portion out to the rest of the crew in smaller groups, scheduling practical evaluations around job commitments rather than a single all-hands training day that pulls everyone off billable work simultaneously.
What "documented" actually protects you from
It's worth being direct about why the records piece matters as much as the training itself. In the event of an incident, the question that gets asked first isn't "did this worker receive training" — it's "can you prove it, with dates, results, and a signature." A program that trained everyone correctly but kept no records is functionally indistinguishable, in an investigation, from a program that trained no one. The records are what convert real training into a real defense.
Frequently asked questions
Does classroom training alone satisfy a rigging training program?
No. A program built around NATE's RTS or A10.48 expects both a written knowledge component and a documented, hands-on practical evaluation — not attendance alone.
How often should a rigging training program repeat?
Rather than a fixed calendar interval, base retraining on triggers: a change in duties, more complex lifting methods, a demonstrated gap in understanding, or a revision to the underlying standard.
Who should conduct the practical evaluation?
The evaluator needs to be someone qualified to judge rigging competence — typically the same Competent Rigger or Qualified Person role referenced in the construction plan process, not an administrator checking a box.
Does this program certify our riggers?
No training program built around RTS or A10.48 by itself certifies a worker as authorized, competent, or qualified — that determination is the employer's, based on the documented evaluation results.
How long does it take to stand up a program like this from scratch?
Realistically, budget a few weeks for a small crew if you're building the knowledge content, evaluation forms, and records system yourself from nothing — most of that time goes into the practical evaluation forms and records setup, not the classroom material, which is more straightforward to source. Starting from an existing course-plus-documentation kit rather than a blank page cuts that timeline substantially, since the forms and course content are already built.
Sources
- NATE Rigging Training Standard, 2024 revision — program structure described from a direct read; contact NATE at natehome.com for the official document
- ANSI/ASSP A10.48 — order information
