A few weeks ago when we were under 3 foot of snow, we used a makeshift piece of steel to attach onto the front forks of one of our fork lift trucks to help clear the snow in our works car park. This particular task was totally missed out when we compiled our list of risk assessments back in August (when the sun was blazing down and snow was far from our minds), but low and behold, when the plough was used a few weeks ago, the driver using it hit a raised bit of kerb and jolted him causing him whiplash injuries and him to hit his head on the dash. I have presumed that due to the injuries sustained, he was not adhering to the speed limit on site. Nevertheless, there was not a RA in place, and I need to do one. I know there are snow ploughs for attaching onto FLT's available to buy, but as we're a metalwork manufacturing business we made our own. As far as the RA goes, as the plough fits onto the forks and is pushed to clear the snow, I cannot see what precautions we need to ensure are in place, other than the driver is trained in the FLT (which he was) and he was aware of the speed limit on site. Any help would be gratefully appreciated so I can take this forward and complete this damn risk assessment. Cheers.

Yes we do have a RA for using the fork lift trucks. He was wearing a lap belt that is installed in the FLT, but this did not prevent him hitting his head or receiving whiplash injuries. Yes he has had training in the FLT, July 2009. He uses it 5 days a week while he is at work. As a company we do not have a system in place with written permission from us stating he can operating a truck whilst on our premises...is this required?

Thanks for that. Something else I'll have to get my teeth into. So other than written authorisation, is there anything else, that is different from the 'normal' using a FLT risk assessment, that I need to be aware of? I've included possible adverse weather and the need for possible wet weather clothing, need dry warm place to dry clothes, means of heating food/warm drinks etc (which we have anyway), but is there anything regarding the FLT attachment. Its not lifting anything, its just pushing snow, so won't need to be tested under LOLER as such, just a visual inspection of it before every time it is used be sufficient?

And of course the snow would have potentially hidden any uneven surfaces...

Good afternoon, My humble opinion to your comments below: This particular task was totally missed out when we compiled our list of risk assessments back in August: "Risk assessments are for significant risks and foreseeable events. So I don't think anyone would expect you to have an assessment in place for this in August." The driver using it hit a raised bit of kerb and jolted him causing him whiplash injuries and him to hit his head on the dash. I have presumed that due to the injuries sustained, he was not adhering to the speed limit on site - "Accident would need an investigation and changing the presumptons into underlying (using unsuitable equipment, employee not trained in use of this 'attachment') and immediate reasons. Nevertheless, there was not a RA in place, and I need to do one - "You do need one by the strictest letter of the law, but let it beocme an obsession, especially if it is a one-off activity (i.e. likelihood is a key consideration). More important is preventing injury. And yes, post accident investigation should probably have that as a remedial step (i.e. such work to be assessed before commencement in future). Perhaps this activity is inappropriate in the first place? PUWER - suitability of work equipment. speed limits in general can range from 5-10 mph based on site requirements but using such an attachment may mean the existing speed limit should have been lowered further anyway." I know there are snow ploughs for attaching onto FLT's available to buy, but as we're a metalwork manufacturing business we made our own - "Attachments to forklift trucks would probably be considered interchangeable equipment under the Machinery Directive and UK Supply of Machinery Safety Regulations. i.e. must go through all the procedures for CE Marking even if it is for your own use, as own use is considered supply. I would suggest using suitable attachments that are already avaible or choosing the most appropriate equipment ranging from the good old snow shovels to vehicles. i.e. hire it in." As far as the RA goes, as the plough fits onto the forks and is pushed to clear the snow, I cannot see what precautions we need to ensure are in place, other than the driver is trained in the FLT (which he was) and he was aware of the speed limit on site - "As I mentioned before accident investigatoin should establish the underlying reasons which are usaully managment based not employee issues. The employee should certainly be trained through the accredited route when they are given the task to use attachments they have never used before on that attachment. But as I said this 'attachment' seems unsuitable from the machinery directve point of view anyway." Any help would be gratefully appreciated so I can take this forward and complete this damn risk assessment - "A lot more to consider than just the risk assesment in my humble opinion! Don't be lost in the paper work when underlying issues may be more essential." All the best Mubin

IC, There were a couple of threads on this subject last year: http://forum.iosh.co.uk/...aspx?g=posts&t=97717 http://forum.iosh.co.uk/...aspx?g=posts&t=98638 They may add to the advice you are receiving.