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

2 Pages12>
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
mph  
#1 Posted : 15 January 2016 11:35:29(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
mph

Good morning all As a company we are currently considering the pro's and con's of requiring employees and visitors to reverse park their cars at all of our sites. Your thoughts and comments would be welcomed. Thank you Mike
Invictus  
#2 Posted : 15 January 2016 11:41:30(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Invictus

Don't do it if you have women working they can't reverse and would always be late for work! On a serious note I don't think it makes any difference.
douglas.dick  
#3 Posted : 15 January 2016 11:52:16(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
douglas.dick

Laughing at Invictus's reply, awaiting responses. Reverse parking is considered safer as when you drive up to a space, you are more aware of everything going surrounding the space. Therefor it is deemed safer to reverse into it and drive out. When returning to a car that has been driven in, it takes a few moments to get in, fit the seatbelt and start the car. During this time, pedestrians may be walking behind the car without drawing the attention of the driver.
JayPownall  
#4 Posted : 15 January 2016 11:52:24(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
JayPownall

Depends entirely on the car park layout and also nature of the sites. Our car parks at times can be quite busy so reversing out in to a flow can become risky, even with a speed limit - hence we have reverse parking bays where they are located close to the main in/out road to the car park. HSE do encourage reverse parking but its all about the context! (This has been discussed before in 2013 - http://forum.iosh.co.uk/?g=posts&t=109088) Jamie
RayRapp  
#5 Posted : 15 January 2016 12:07:19(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
RayRapp

One of my pet hates - reminds me of not enough deck chairs on the Titanic. There is a fatuous argument it is safer to reverse park. Forgetting of course that many tradesmen need access to the rear of their vehicle for tools and equipment. I have worked in environments where it's mandatory to reverse park (unless you work for the client or you are a senior manager) but the safety on the project has been dire. What sort of message does this send out?
thanks 1 user thanked RayRapp for this useful post.
A Kurdziel on 03/08/2020(UTC)
chris.packham  
#6 Posted : 15 January 2016 12:41:10(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
chris.packham

To some extent it depends on the nature of the site. When working in an oil terminal reverse parking was mandatory, with keys left in the vehicle and vehicle unlocked. Then if there was an emergency vehicles could be removed quickly from any danger zone. Chris
mph  
#7 Posted : 15 January 2016 12:50:00(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
mph

Many thanks to all who have posted so far - much appreciated. Mike
alexmccreadie13  
#8 Posted : 15 January 2016 13:00:41(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
alexmccreadie13

Like Ray I hate it and in most cases find no reason for it. Given the scenario Chris has mentioned it makes sense. Ta Alex
chris42  
#9 Posted : 15 January 2016 13:29:27(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
chris42

Parking should be staggered so alternate cares face inwards/ outwards. This is to allow the passenger sides of the vehicle of both cars to be millimetres away from one another. That way there is room on the drivers side to actually allow them to get out /in. My car currently has a lovely dent & scratch down the side where someone thought they could get a shopping trolley past as they had reversed in, so not a big fan. Also quite a few parking spaces will have a wall or barrier or hedge at the end and so reversing in will prevent access to the boot properly. You have probably identified an issue where you work, but people will not appreciate being told which way around to park.
toe  
#10 Posted : 15 January 2016 14:28:41(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
toe

No view point on this myself, apart from a company I recently visited had this rule but there safety in the rear workshop was pretty poor, again a mixed message. On another note - I am led to believe that some states in America its illegal to reverse park. Not safety related, its because in some states they do not have front no plates and these have to be displayed when patrol cars are cruising the car lots looking for bad guys.
thanks 1 user thanked toe for this useful post.
A Kurdziel on 03/08/2020(UTC)
Invictus  
#11 Posted : 15 January 2016 14:48:21(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Invictus

Pro, you take your time reversing in, in the morning so it is safer. Con, your so made up to be out of work in the evening you jump in and because your facing forward you drive out quicker shouting yipeeee, I'm free. As I say I am not a great lover of this sort of safety requirements, it's just something else to police, for little benefit.
thanks 1 user thanked Invictus for this useful post.
A Kurdziel on 03/08/2020(UTC)
Ron Hunter  
#12 Posted : 15 January 2016 14:50:04(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Ron Hunter

You can 'force' the issue by painting parking bays at the appropriate angle. Angled bays tend to afford improved visibility. Where bays are at right-angles to the traffic flow then I don't think there's much of a practical difference. Highway Code says: "201.Do not reverse from a side road into a main road. When using a driveway, reverse in and drive out if you can."
Graham  
#13 Posted : 15 January 2016 15:02:54(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Graham

Oh Pleeeesss. This sounds absolutely bl***** ridiculous. Just the sort of ludicrous rule that gets Health and Safety ridiculed, and in cases like this deservedly so. Chris Packham’s and RayRap's comment accepted don’t waste your time and energy on something that can only result in ruining whatever credibility you’ve managed to garner. If there’s a good reason then consult consult consult and get the workforce on board. If you can’t then don’t it’ll only cause alienation. Sorry, it’s been a long week, getting wound up and it’s nice to have a place to let off steam.
thanks 1 user thanked Graham for this useful post.
A Kurdziel on 03/08/2020(UTC)
JayPownall  
#14 Posted : 15 January 2016 15:19:20(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
JayPownall

Graham wrote:
Oh Pleeeesss. This sounds absolutely bl***** ridiculous. Just the sort of ludicrous rule that gets Health and Safety ridiculed, and in cases like this deservedly so. Chris Packham’s and RayRap's comment accepted don’t waste your time and energy on something that can only result in ruining whatever credibility you’ve managed to garner. If there’s a good reason then consult consult consult and get the workforce on board. If you can’t then don’t it’ll only cause alienation. Sorry, it’s been a long week, getting wound up and it’s nice to have a place to let off steam.
As a 'rule' it may be slightly OTT for the vast majority of workplaces - but as 'general advice' to employees its not that silly an idea. Insurers (Aviva) and other large companies have come out in support of reverse parking. Its all about how you go about it like Graham states, most workplaces won't need this as a rule, with the odd exception, so best to consult the workforce and look at other examples around the country.
Invictus  
#15 Posted : 15 January 2016 15:25:17(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Invictus

Aviva, weren't to happy when my wife backed into a lamp-post.
Andrew W Walker  
#16 Posted : 15 January 2016 15:54:55(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Andrew W Walker

Invictus wrote:
Aviva, weren't to happy when my wife backed into a lamp-post.
Brilliant!!!!
Alan Haynes  
#17 Posted : 15 January 2016 16:32:44(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Alan Haynes

My local Council Offices have a notice banning reverse parking in an area where the parking bay is against a wall with office windows in it - obviously, someone had complained about car fumes in the office.
boblewis  
#18 Posted : 15 January 2016 17:53:21(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
boblewis

Can be discriminatory as well. I need around 6ft behind to get my wheelchair out of the boot of my car
thanks 1 user thanked boblewis for this useful post.
A Kurdziel on 03/08/2020(UTC)
Alan Haynes  
#19 Posted : 16 January 2016 09:56:40(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Alan Haynes

Invictus wrote:
Don't do it if you have women working they can't reverse and would always be late for work! On a serious note I don't think it makes any difference.
From a personal point of view, I find it so much easier to drive into the parking space and back out of it. This sequence seems to mean that I am parked more quickly [thus not blocking the road whilst I back in] and backing out of a narrow gap is so much easier than backing into one [so quicker all round]. Also, if I am going to get the car hit when exiting a parking space, I prefer that the back rather than the engine area 'gets it' Only time I would insist on a 'back in' policy would be if it was essential that a very quick exit from car park area was essential on safety grounds
westonphil  
#20 Posted : 17 January 2016 19:11:07(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
westonphil

MPH wrote:
Good morning all As a company we are currently considering the pro's and con's of requiring employees and visitors to reverse park their cars at all of our sites. Your thoughts and comments would be welcomed. Thank you Mike
Have you had any accidents / near misses which has made you start considering this? Or have you completed and risk assessment and found the current risk level to be too high? Regards
biker1  
#21 Posted : 18 January 2016 15:46:43(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
biker1

As a general rule, it is recommended by the Highway Code, the Institute of Advanced Motorists (try passing your advanced test without doing it) and others. But common sense must always prevail, and in some circumstances it is not the best thing to do, amongst other things if you need access to the rear of the car. It is not a silly thing, as some have suggested, as the potential to avoid collisions, with other cars or pedestrians, is considerable, especially when you consider how bad some drivers are at using mirrors and looking behind properly.
Invictus  
#22 Posted : 18 January 2016 15:50:10(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Invictus

biker1 wrote:
As a general rule, it is recommended by the Highway Code, the Institute of Advanced Motorists (try passing your advanced test without doing it) and others. But common sense must always prevail, and in some circumstances it is not the best thing to do, amongst other things if you need access to the rear of the car. It is not a silly thing, as some have suggested, as the potential to avoid collisions, with other cars or pedestrians, is considerable, especially when you consider how bad some drivers are at using mirrors and looking behind properly.
Why is it the drivers what about the stupid people who can see your reversing and continue to walk behind you.
RayRapp  
#23 Posted : 18 January 2016 15:59:50(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
RayRapp

I see this thread still going strong. If we take supermarket car parks for an example they do not have a reversing policy. That is because most people need to access the rear of their vehicle to put shopping away. There are tens of thousands of people who use these every day. I dare say they have their fare share of incidents, but I'm not aware of any particular issues through not reverse parking.
Victor Meldrew  
#24 Posted : 18 January 2016 19:12:34(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Victor Meldrew

RayRapp wrote:
I see this thread still going strong. If we take supermarket car parks for an example they do not have a reversing policy. That is because most people need to access the rear of their vehicle to put shopping away. There are tens of thousands of people who use these every day. I dare say they have their fare share of incidents, but I'm not aware of any particular issues through not reverse parking.
Nice one Ray - can't believe this has cropped up again five years on from original post. You know my thoughts from previous....... yes there may be the odd work place where this applies but far too often 'we' still get bogged down in trivia.
RayRapp  
#25 Posted : 18 January 2016 20:49:49(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
RayRapp

Victor Meldrew wrote:
RayRapp wrote:
I see this thread still going strong. If we take supermarket car parks for an example they do not have a reversing policy. That is because most people need to access the rear of their vehicle to put shopping away. There are tens of thousands of people who use these every day. I dare say they have their fare share of incidents, but I'm not aware of any particular issues through not reverse parking.
Nice one Ray - can't believe this has cropped up again five years on from original post. You know my thoughts from previous....... yes there may be the odd work place where this applies but far too often 'we' still get bogged down in trivia.
Hello Victor and welcome back. Yep, the usual nonsense is still dominating these forums. I know what you're thinking - I don't believe it! :)P
biker1  
#26 Posted : 19 January 2016 09:22:48(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
biker1

Interesting that putting in place a simple measure that costs nothing but will significantly reduce the chance of being knocked over by two tons of metal is considered as 'trivia'. Makes me wonder how many people have to be actually killed for precautionary measures to be considered sensible.
ptaylor14  
#27 Posted : 19 January 2016 11:21:17(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
ptaylor14

MPH wrote:
Good morning all As a company we are currently considering the pro's and con's of requiring employees and visitors to reverse park their cars at all of our sites. Your thoughts and comments would be welcomed. Thank you Mike
NOT AGAIN!!!!! Only just recovering from the last thread
Route66  
#28 Posted : 19 January 2016 11:35:46(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Route66

Alternatively, the argument for NOT reverse parking is that reverse parking requires careful driving into a restricted space, while going backwards, using all 3 mirrors (assuming you can see through the interior one), or for you to adopt the old fashioned seatbelt off, one arm over the back of the passenger seat, looking backwards approach. All this while possible only having a limited idea of where the back of the vehicle is (unless you have nice beeping sensors). Whilst reversing out, is into a much larger space and the biggest danger is the Clowns zooming around the car park, without being aware of exiting vehicles. I'll sometimes put the Hazards on when reversing out of a supermarket bay, just because of all the buffoons driving round without using their eyes. There may of course be other reasons for reverse parking (unless a old VW Beetle/Combi). If you have any terrorism concerns relating to car bombs. Reason being when a car bomb goes off, the engine block typically projectiles quite a distance, punching through walls if closely parked.
Alfasev  
#29 Posted : 19 January 2016 12:45:29(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Alfasev

If there is a tangible risk that can be controlled through reverse parking then it needs to be considered. If the risk is negligible then it does not. The issue I regularly come across is people thinking since a scenario is possible it is tangible. Only MPH can make that judgment knowing all the facts. However I do see it will be impossible to enforce without the car park design encouraging it (angled bays, one-way system). I have seen such a layout on construction sites which worked most of the time. There was also pedestrian’s segregation and a foreseeable risk from site traffic. I would not expect to see such controls for a typical office car park.
Victor Meldrew  
#30 Posted : 19 January 2016 20:21:26(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Victor Meldrew

biker1 wrote:
Interesting that putting in place a simple measure that costs nothing but will significantly reduce the chance of being knocked over by two tons of metal is considered as 'trivia'. Makes me wonder how many people have to be actually killed for precautionary measures to be considered sensible.
Like you said Ray - I don't believe it....... So biker1.... your evidence that reverse parking "will significantly reduce the chance of being knocked over by two tons of metal"? I have an Audi Q5 4x4 & that is under two tons so that statement is somewhat exaggerated. Secondly your statistical evidence on people that have actually been killed for reverse parking to be worthwhile? At this rate we'll soon be having procedures for getting out of bed & wiping our backside - that's not to say there are certain circumstances & industries that require such, e.g. Care/Nursing homes.
stillp  
#31 Posted : 20 January 2016 10:32:36(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
stillp

I used to work at a factory where reverse parking alongside the building was forbidden. Allegedly this followed Government advice during WW2, to give the engine some protection from enemy machine-gun bullets. The Site Services Manager did admit though, that the reason they sustained the rule was to avoid exhaust smoke marks on the nice clean paintwork of the factory wall. FWIW, I'm a committed reverse parker. I've seen several incidents caused by reversing out of a parking space, and I know of a couple of injuries caused by reversing out of a private drive. A couple of weeks ago outside my local supermarket someone reversed into my wife and I as we walked back to our car - he then had the cheek to complain that our trolley had scratched his car! (It hadn't - yet!)
Victor Meldrew  
#32 Posted : 20 January 2016 16:42:45(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Victor Meldrew

stillp wrote:
A couple of weeks ago outside my local supermarket someone reversed into my wife and I as we walked back to our car - he then had the cheek to complain that our trolley had scratched his car! (It hadn't - yet!)
Difficult to comment on your incident as obviously I wasn't present - but in my experience of similar incidents I have observed it is sometimes six of one & half a dozen of the other...... e.g. pedestrians not using pedestrian routes & hazard awareness of the likelihood of reversing vehicles, engines running, awareness of reversing lights etc...... not forgetting the drivers responsibilities of course in that of the possibility of moving pedestrians & moving vehicles. There will by pros & cons for both situations but a bit of common sense - which seems to be rare nowadays - is all that is required instead of rules, policies & procedures....... my motto; it is only when people understand that they are largely responsible for their own safety that attitudes & behaviours will change, not when rules & obstacles are put in 'their' way.
biker1  
#33 Posted : 20 January 2016 17:05:08(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
biker1

Victor Meldrew wrote:
biker1 wrote:
Interesting that putting in place a simple measure that costs nothing but will significantly reduce the chance of being knocked over by two tons of metal is considered as 'trivia'. Makes me wonder how many people have to be actually killed for precautionary measures to be considered sensible.
Like you said Ray - I don't believe it....... So biker1.... your evidence that reverse parking "will significantly reduce the chance of being knocked over by two tons of metal"? I have an Audi Q5 4x4 & that is under two tons so that statement is somewhat exaggerated. Secondly your statistical evidence on people that have actually been killed for reverse parking to be worthwhile? At this rate we'll soon be having procedures for getting out of bed & wiping our backside - that's not to say there are certain circumstances & industries that require such, e.g. Care/Nursing homes.
I am struggling to understand what the problem is here. If you cannot see that driving out of a parking space gives you better vision than reversing out of one, and that you are therefore more likely to avoid pedestrians and other vehicles, then I'm not sure what more there is to say. The evidence is before your eyes, literally, and that is why the IAM teach it as part of advanced driving, or are they just trivia as well? Whether a vehicle is two tons, one ton or half a ton, it is still capable of inflicting serious injury or death. As for statistical evidence, you seem to have missed my point. If a safer way of doing something can be found, which costs nothing, then waiting for x number of people to be killed before considering it is surely irresponsible? So no, I don't have statistics on the number of people killed or injured, although I'm sure they could be found, as I didn't think they were needed to recommend a simple safety measure. And I did state quite clearly that common sense should prevail, and it might not always be the best thing to do.
Victor Meldrew  
#34 Posted : 20 January 2016 17:58:25(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Victor Meldrew

.........conversely and as previously highlighted by others in previous posts, reversing into a parking space instead of driving directly into a parking space can be just as big a problem....... just watch those desperate to get into work to 'clock in' on time.
paul.skyrme  
#35 Posted : 20 January 2016 18:22:57(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
paul.skyrme

If there's a walkway behind the parking space & I reverse park my Transit Jumbo, then people seem to complain that it overhangs the walkway so people can't get past! Also the back of the van often ends up so close to the building that I can't open the doors. I also find that if I can open the doors then I block the walkway with them, so it's drive in & reverse out, with the reversing camera, & a banksman if needed. Mind then the van hangs right across the "roadway". Same as it does if I park it with the back not overhanging the pathway, or far enough to open the doors. Parking spaces are more often than not too small for vans! ;) The most damage I have ever done to a car in a parking manoeuvre, in fact the only serious damage I have aver done was reversing, because I had a bad neck/shoulder & could not turn my head, and the lighting design was so poor the mirrors were virtually useless. My fault yes, but, there is often more to parking design and use than just the way vehicles were parked. I always thought that in the highway code that if a reversing vehicle had started their move, then from that point other vehicles should give way, as long as, obviously the move had started before the others turned up as it were. As far as which is right, I don't think there is a right & wrong. I also don't think that insisting on reverse parking will definitely be safer, pedestrians can walk behind a vehicle reversing into a parking space also. Larger spaces on the other hand would make manoeuvre easier and safer, regardless of vehicle.
ARNARN  
#36 Posted : 01 August 2020 14:49:02(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
ARNARN

This reverse parking story always fascinated me. I find it quite dangerous to be reversing into a confined space between two vehicles. This has caused quite a few deaths. I have personally stoped a reversing vehicle from running over somebody that was lying under a vehicle doing some repairs. I was always told that reverse parking originated around oil/gas plants or similar , the story goes that the keys can be left in the vehicle and people can quickly jump into vehicles and speed off if they need to. Then they can try and figure out who may or may not need to be rescued. I always ask for a full review of why reverse parking has been implemented.It never happens because everybody seems to think that reverse parking is safer. I prefer the safer option of parking by driving forward. Its so much safer. You can see where you are driving as you are going forward and then you reverse out into an open space when you leave. The opposite happens if you reverse park.You reverse into a confined space and this is how the people are getting killed and injured. Let common sense prevail and let’s do this properly. Do a full review , admit that it was a mistake and then we can all start parking properly. For my own safety and the safety of others , I will only park by driving forward into a parking bay.
Roundtuit  
#37 Posted : 01 August 2020 19:52:32(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Your point in resurrecting a four year old post - Anger at some jobsworth who has introduced such a policy without assessement of actual site requirements e.g. rapid evacuation of a hazardous site?

Roundtuit  
#38 Posted : 01 August 2020 19:52:32(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Your point in resurrecting a four year old post - Anger at some jobsworth who has introduced such a policy without assessement of actual site requirements e.g. rapid evacuation of a hazardous site?

ARNARN  
#39 Posted : 02 August 2020 08:50:34(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
ARNARN

If a proper assessment is conducted , you will find that there is no good reason to ever reverse park. This will come out in the assessment.Just because reverse parking has become the norm , this doesn’t mean its the correct way of doing things. The problem with everybody jumping into vehicles and speeding off is that nobody can be accounted for. You have people spread all over the place and it is then unclear if some people need to be rescued. You then put the rescue teams in danger because you are looking for somebody the jumped in a vehicle and left site. Rather go to the designated muster point. All this is quite silly really. I would love to see a full and proper assessment that justifies reverse parking on a typical UK construction site. Reverse parking has and always will be just a little more dangerous than forward parking. Do a study and this becomes obvious. I think one of the problems is that it’s going to be a little embarrassing to now come out and say that we have been wrong for the past 20 years.
Brian Hagyard  
#40 Posted : 03 August 2020 07:51:23(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Brian Hagyard

Originally Posted by: ARNARN Go to Quoted Post
If a proper assessment is conducted , you will find that there is no good reason to ever reverse park.  

Sorry to disagree. I have insisted on Revers parking on one site in 30 years of H&S work. This was a distribution centre. The large curtain waggons arrived back at all times, and left at different times. They were forward parking up to the perimiter fence. It was a very small site, not practicable to put barriered walk ways in . Meaning on a morning some were reversing back blind between two otehr vehicles. This was before reversing cameras ets became common. Still think no good reason EVER?

thanks 1 user thanked Brian Hagyard for this useful post.
CptBeaky on 03/08/2020(UTC)
Wailes900134  
#41 Posted : 03 August 2020 09:19:50(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Wailes900134

Originally Posted by: ARNARN Go to Quoted Post
If a proper assessment is conducted , you will find that there is no good reason to ever reverse park.

I have seen lots of examples where the ability to leave in an orderly and swift manner without the complexity of reversing constitutes good enough reason. Even in none emergency scenarios i've observed factory workgroup arrivals spread over as much as 45 minutes prior to the start of shift depending on the routines of individuals whereas their departure has been within 5 minutes at the end of shift. 

I can see how a reverse parking policy would be low on many peoples to do list, but I suspect removing one that already exists would probably be even lower.

Users browsing this topic
2 Pages12>
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.