Ok, here is my scenario,
This processing plant has been operational for 40years and during that time there has been the daily use of small forklift transportable hoppers to carry sand around in.
These hoppers hold abnout 2 - 3 tonnes and have a chute with a slide on the bottom.
Here's the controversial bit. The forklift operator uses an long metal hook and from the seated position, extends the hook between the mast uprights and opens the chute on the bottom of the hopper.
Now the DEIR regulations for the state of Queensland covering prohibited acts for forklifts states:
"An operator's arms, hands, legs, and head must not leave the confines of the cab or be placed between the uprights of the mast"
Technically speaking there are no body parts extending outside the cab during this task but the operator is holding a rod which does travel through the mast.
I'm very interested in hearing any thoughts on this. We are trying to achieve safety compliance with our forklift operation but we are finding it difficult to completely replace this act in our forklift operations
Showing items 1 - 3 of 3 results.
If the forklift operator is driving around carrying a "long hook" type of rod thing, that's a whole other problem.
I concur with Normandy's the first half of his last statement "Having said all this I personally would try to find an alternative.......... " For the following reasons:
1. There is never an issue unless something happens like an accident. Then the lawyers go to work.
2. It seems to me the potentional for an accident is there even though the operator keeps his limbs within the confines of the cabin. However, his arm is holding this metal hook that is protruding thru the mast openings. The mast has one or two moving up right sections with cross member and the carriage. Therefore, they maybe a potential for 2 or 3 members to act like a guillotine and contact the hook and the hook contact the operator abruptly and with significant force.
3. Should this happen being "cost effective" is not a good argument for the defendant but a great thing to hear for the plantiff's side.
4. Don't know how operators are "down under" but in the US many (not most) drive like demoltion derby drivers.
I guess legislation differs around the world on issues like this.
There are some obvious risks.
Normally "health and safety requirements" would relate to the Risk Assessment related to this task, the availability of an alternative and maybe the costs involved. If this means there really is no alternative then maybe the risk is assessed as low and could therefore be described as acceptable.
Having said all this I personally would try to find an alternative that could be provided within acceptable cost levels.
Forkliftaction accepts no responsibility for forum content and requires forum participants to adhere to our rules of conduct. Click here for more information.
If you are having trouble using the Discussion Forums, please contact us for help.