We had an incident recently where a recently refresher trained flt operator lifted a small skip to empty into a larger skip, the skip had been overfilled by one of machine operators and some of the contents spilt out and injured the flt operator. After treatment and before being sent home, he advised knew it was overfilled (contents were over the top of the sides of the skip and plain to see) but moved it anyway, we discussed disciplining him because he could have injured other staff, but because of his injuries decided not to. Two months later we receive a personal injury claim from him, after meeting with our insurers they advise that because we didn't show him what an overfilled skip looked like we would have to admit liability, despite his recent training and all the points made about moving unsafe loads. Yes the skip was overfilled and the machine operators have been advised about this but are we wrong to feel a bit aggrieved here, it seems that the flt operator takes no responsibility for his actions despite his training.

Forgot to mention that disciplining this individual would not prevent a re-occurrance. If an accident has happened then that is telling you that a control has failed or has not been identified. Take positive action to address it, and look at building a safer culture within the workplace by promoting near miss reporting, and having the don't walk by attitude firmly established within the business.

Judging from previous experience with insurers then they will state what was covered in the refresher training. My guess would be that the handling of skips would not have been covered and then they may say that under LOLER was this lifting operation planned correctly? It is difficult to judge the different reasons as to how this happened without having more information, but if the root cause is over filling the skip then that must be covered in your risk assessment, with measure put in place to reduce the risk and information given to the workforce. You can now get skips that do not require the FLT driver to get out of the cab and thus reducing the risk a little further.

I agree with your comments about apply HSG 48, but rather than just focusing on the behaviour it would be worth reading chapter 3 where it mentions about designing for people, and in a roundabout way that is what I was trying to say, namely design warnings that are effective and ensure the job fits the person so reducing the human behavioural factor.