Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Admin  
#1 Posted : 15 May 2006 16:55:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By R Hindle
i wonder if anyone can help me on this question on FLT Drivers, is it a legal requirement to have FLT Drivers to have a medical assessment?

if so, the how regular do the assessments take place
Admin  
#2 Posted : 15 May 2006 21:12:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By JayJay
As far as i'm aware being an ex FLT Instructor there is no legal requirement to have a medical assessment. however some large blue chip companies that i've carried out training for insist on their operatives going through a medical to see if they suffer, for instance from high blood pressure etc. sorry don't know all the answers but will try to help
Admin  
#3 Posted : 16 May 2006 09:00:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Alexander Falconer
Unfortunately got to disagree with Jay Jay, have a look at HSG 6 "safety in working with lift trucks" this has some guidance.
Admin  
#4 Posted : 16 May 2006 09:14:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By John Holland1
There does seem to be some quite good advice at the following link

http://www.ttt-services.co.uk/medic_stand.htm

Regards

John
Admin  
#5 Posted : 16 May 2006 09:28:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Alexander Falconer
The guidance supplied by John is excellent, and reiterated my thoughts (as well as refreshing my memory once again)

I am also sure that RTITB may well provide some guidance too
Admin  
#6 Posted : 17 May 2006 18:13:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By JayJay

The person posing the question asked if there was a 'legal requirement' ! HSG 6 is a 'Guidance' and not legal
Admin  
#7 Posted : 18 May 2006 08:11:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Alexander Falconer
Jay Jay, you are correct in your statement that the person asked the question, is it a LEGAL requirement.

Whilst HSG 6 offers guidance on how you meet the legal requirement, the failure to adhere to this means you cannot be prosecuted under the guidance, however you can against HaSaWa 1974. Inj this sense, it then becomes a legal requirement.

This is where I was coming from, there have been one or two case laws relating to this (cannot remember which ones)

Alex
Admin  
#8 Posted : 18 May 2006 11:05:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By George Wedgwood
The closest to a legal requirement is in "Safety in Docks – The Docks Regulations 1988, Guidance Booklet", which states that "Regulation 11 – Drivers of powered vehicles … ….must be fit to do so". So if we have a clear requirement in those Regs to ensure that drivers are fit, can we therfore reduce that in an ordinary workplace? My interpretation is that the overriding legal requirement is to conduct the undertaking safely and by risk assessment (and considering other good regulation such as above), the employer would be well advised to have fitness checks documented for all drivers. How far you go in that may be debatable but the basic check would be to ensure the driver signed a medical statement to say they have no impairment or defect that could affect performance. The next level would be to contract a health service company to do a fitness check by appointment (best arrangement) and if anything is suspect, send the driver to a doctor for qualification. The max cost (about £260) will be that consultancy for perhaps 1 in 20 drivers against the contract cost of a simple fitness check (eyes, ears, physical capability and understanding) at about £60 or a pro forma paper validation by a nurse at £23. So put those figures to a manager and ask what price his security of conscience to make the right decision! I would always start with the paper health surviellance first and see how it affects your performance, and then take it from there. G.
Admin  
#9 Posted : 18 May 2006 11:13:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By The toecap
I would deduce that fit could mean not drunk or under the influence. Therefore a random breath analysis test.
Admin  
#10 Posted : 18 May 2006 13:35:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By George Wedgwood
Yes indeed! A good SMS will include that control measure and it's not difficult once the Co. exec. agree it's needed. The HSE Guidance does not spell out the complexity of creating a suitable management guidance in practice but the help of one of the better testing companies out there can make a huge difference. The important bit is ensuring that all employees are included and all receive a good awareness session - often that alone will sort any lingering problem out. The on-going monitoring can be arranged with the testing co. and the odd random tesing is cheap and effective. Don't let managers do this themselves as that is fraught with legal difficulty in any defence. Pre-employment screening should be part of the D&A 'policy' and will save an employer taking on problems. G.
Admin  
#11 Posted : 18 May 2006 14:00:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Dave Jackson
I know its a bit off subject but what about an operator with only one eye, is he safe to drive?

We have a crew member who's sole job requires him to drive FLT's most of the shift, he lost the sight of one of his eyes many years ago and manages very well. Supposing that whilst driving around in the yard a cloud of dust is blown up and gets into his eye he would be totally blind for a short wile. Should we insist he wears eye protection under our duty to provide a safe working environment making allowances for someone with disabilities? If we do and he then turns round and says he refuses to wear protection as we do not insist that all operator wear it citing human right or that we are discriminating against for his disability.

Where do we stand


Any comments welcome

Dave
Admin  
#12 Posted : 18 May 2006 14:13:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By George Wedgwood
Yes - that's an easy one! Where your site conditions show that eye wear is helpful, have a site-wide policy for wearing eye protection - it's not expensive at about 30-50p a pair and ensure that everyone wears it, including your drivers (as well as the one-eyed one). Wearer testing is advisable to ensure a good fit so that they will actually wear it. There is no real bar to having a one-eyed driver so long as he has had an assessment on associated fitness (some can have a spatial awareness problem as a result or have sympathetic good eye problems) and an opthalmist's report should help there (He/she may need to see the hospital report to unsderstand the extent of damage). Lastly, a vehivle driver visibility assessment should be carried out to ensure that all-round vision can be achieved with additional mirrors, cameras etc. positioned correctly for that person. It will be inadvisable to allow other drivers to frequently drive that person's vehicle unless the mirrors are re-aligned. Make sure you record all your actions on the person's personal file and monitor his driving from time to time. G.
Admin  
#13 Posted : 18 May 2006 15:18:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By JayJay
Being a Health & Safety Advisor now i agree with you Alex regarding guidances and what effects these have in a court of law, but the truth is after carrying out literally hundreds of courses on forklifts, either full courses or refreshers i can count on less than 1 hand the numbers of company's that insist on health checks. as for people with disabilities driving FLT's i know of 2 instances where people have driven these, 1 who was deaf and 1 with a disabled arm that have carried out there job perfectly well.
Admin  
#14 Posted : 18 May 2006 15:34:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Alexander Falconer
Jay Jay, thank you for your kind support.

I too know only the feeling (and frustrations) of trying to get employers to implement health screening.

Whilst not an RTITB instructor (previous employer wouldnt let me do course since I had not driven a FLT for over 20 years) but however worked very closely with an RTITB qualified instructor (Materials Manager) in developing SOP's, Procedures, training material, etc it became second nature to watch some of the sloppy habits of drivers (especially in busy production areas where pedestrian walkways were in place)

Personally I feel there should be a requirement to have a medical (especially for males over 45 who can then be commonly plagued by the onset of problems like glaucoma, diabetes, etc) similar to what HGV drivers go though in order to retain their licence.

After all what has the higher risk of a driver collapsing at the wheel of his vehicle - a FLT in a busy production environment or a HGV along a dual carriageway with few vehicles.

I rest my case!

On the issue of a one eyed driver, there should be no issue in disbarring him from driving (watch out for the DDA), review the risk assessment, and consider that he is more of a risk than a two - eyed driver (apart from one or two that spring to my mind). Ensure that you take the appropriate risk controls to ensure that he has more than adequate protection of the good eye.
Admin  
#15 Posted : 18 May 2006 16:05:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By JayJay

I totally agree with you Alex regarding the Health/Medical assessments for FLT drivers ! I think all company's should do these as part of their policy, but then again in the real world i can't even get FLT/Plant operators to carry out daily pre-op/use checks and make records of this without pulling my hair out and i've got very little of that left HaHa
Users browsing this topic
Guest
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.