Rob Vetter is technical director and managing partner with the Ives Training Group, in Blaine, WA, USA, a leader in North American mobile equipment training systems since 1981.
A colleague read an item in the
Seattle Times that described the high turnover rate among forklift operator jobs as being "...characteristic of jobs requiring little or no prior or formal training".
That kind of information leaves me slack jawed and shaking my head in disbelief at how little is known, much less understood and practised, on forklift operator training requirements of the Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) and various state plans. The standards have been in place for more than seven years.
I have had contact with safety people in very large corporations who had no idea there was a federally mandated forklift operator training standard consisting of no less that 13 truck specific topics and nine workplace specific topics.
Astonishingly, these corporations were VPP (volunteer protection program) Star members, a designation given by OSHA to companies that apply for membership and demonstrate an extraordinary commitment to safety and the ability to achieve incident/injury rates that are significantly lower than industry averages. It requires adherence to strict criteria and the ability to successfully endure many rigorous inspections from OSHA over years. Apparently, the acquisition of Star status among VPP members is weighted more towards having a clean safety record than on regulatory compliance.
I asked Dan McMurdie, compliance operations manager of the Washington Industrial Safety & Health Administration's Division of Occupational Safety & Health what he though of the statement in the
Seattle Times.
"I believe it is a misconception held by many. The rule requires two types of training. First, related to the specific type of forklift the employee will be operating. Second, site specific training that takes into account the environment where the forklift will be operated. I believe most employers want to do the right thing, and most employers ensure their employees are trained in the safe operation of a forklift."
Many people would probably agree with McMurdie that most employers want to do the right thing, but the question remains are they? The corporations I mentioned earlier have entire departments staffed by safety professionals dedicated to attaining and maintaining extraordinary levels of safety and compliance. But somehow they were unaware of the training requirements. Given their VPP status there is no question these employers want to do the right thing, but don't know if they are.
The assertion of the
Seattle Times item that little or no formal training is required for forklift operators is wrong. Just one of the truck-related topics listed in OSHA's training program content, like vehicle stability, involves conveying a significant amount of physics to trainees as it relates to leverage, centre of gravity and the dynamic forces of motion, among other things. The program content does not even mention refresher training requirements that must be conducted at regular intervals (at least every three years).
Generally, the theory (classroom) portion of a typical training program takes about half a day (four hours) regardless of the number of trainees or their experience levels. However, the practical session takes one hour to complete the training and 30 minutes per operator to evaluate up to eight experienced operators. Novice operators require far more time at the practical training stage. It is impossible to say exactly how long. The training company I work for, will not evaluate any operator until they can demonstrate the required skills to successfully complete an evaluation. Although the evaluation confirms only a minimum level of competence, it is common to for us to leave a site and recommend further supervised practice before returning to evaluate.
It appears threat of prosecution and/or a stiff knee to the wallet posed by regulations is hardly motivation for safe behaviour. Motivation must arrive through education on the benefits involved not the threat of punishment for non-compliance.
Whatever we do to get the information to the trenches, we better do it soon because people are dying and it is painfully obvious that most of those who need to know don't.