Posted By Emma Forbes
Hi everyone

Working witin the refuse collection section in LA, we have a procedure that states that where appropriate, seatbelts must always be worn. The argument is that the men are in and out of the cab travelling between locations and it is pointless (Their words, not mine) to wear for such short journeys...is it realistic (and legal..) to insist that they wear seatbelts when travelling over 1-2+ mile journeys...? Any comments/views are much appreciated.

Posted By Heather Aston
There's an exemption for people on "delivery rounds".

The Government held a consultation exercise in 2003 aimed at considering the actual distance that ought to be allowed to be driven (they were looking at 10-20 m) before the seatbelt needed to be worn. Anyone know what the outcome was?

Details here http://www.dft.gov.uk/st...dft_rdsafety_023621.hcsp

Posted By Emma Forbes
Thanks Heather, that's the sort of thing I was looking for. I would be happier knowing what the result of the CD was.

We don't work to a task and finish regime - if the men finish early (a very rare occurence these days), they are sent out litter picking or depot tidying. Not much of an incentive for them to rush their rounds!

Thanks for the comments, enjoy hearing from you all and tapping into the knowledge out there, appreciated as always.

Posted By David Mains
If you decide that they should be wearing seat belts, how do you plan to enforce this policy?

Posted By David Mains
If they aren't breaking the law then they won't get a fine.
Even if they were then the chances of them being caught in the back of a bin lorry are very slim.

In-cab CCTV or a spy within each team of 4 or 5 workers probably isn't very practicable especially within a local authority organisation where the unions are likely to object.

Posted By Mike Miller
Taxi drivers are exempt due to the risk of personal attack and the difficulty they might pose on the driver trying to make a sharp exit.

Making the law is one thing but enforcing it is another. Its like mobile phones! I bet many of us safety Bod's out there go to some trouble writing and implementing a workplace/ transport policy only to have several employees chatting on a mobile phone whilst driving.

An articulated truck driver passed me today with a nokia 3310 in one hand whilst scrolling through the text, and a 30 tonner in the other. There's no way you can stop a truck in a hurry even if you are overtaking at only 20mph. It is still enough force to drive over the top of a motorist.

They are simply A**se Holes. and I just don't know what the answer is? As for the seat belts you could try disiplinary action but I bet some people won't get there bins emptied for a while.

Mike

Posted By Allan St.John Holt
Like you I had always believed there was an exemption for delivery workers, but this turns out to be untrue. As the country's biggest 'deliverer', Royal Mail has a constant battle to get seat belts worn, and there is no magic answer. The first step must be to dispel the 'exemption' culture. It helps of course if you have some data showing the number of injuries every year, which can be used to make the point.

And if you think belts are trouble, try making people wear cycle helmets!

Allan

Posted By Michael Griffith
Hello,

If you have a procedure stating that seatbelts must be worn at all times and employees are ignoring this procedure then you, as employers are failing to control the risk, and if an employee negligently injures another (i.e. as in the hard hitting advert where the son hits the back of his mothers seat and kills her) whilst in the course of his employment, would'nt you (as employers) be Vicariously Liable?

Also I was under the impression that Taxi drivers were only exempt from wearing seatbelts when they were carrying a fare, and at all other times had to wear one.

Posted By John Murphy
It is worth ringing your local police traffic division inspector for a definitive and informed opinion of the aplication of seatbelt laws.

Posted By Karen Todd
Whilst I've got me book out, I thought I'd put here what it says as it might be quite useful for future reference for others seeking info on the wearing of seatbelts.

Extract from The Transport Manager's & Operator's Handbook 2004 by David Lowe:

"Exemption from seat belt wearing applies:

- When holding a valid medical certificate giving exemption (see further details below).
- When driving a vehicle constructed or adapted for the delivery or collection of goods or mail to consumers or addresses, while engaged in making local rounds of deliveries or collections.
- When driving a vehicle at the time of carrying out a manoeuvre which includes reversing.
- When accompanying a learner driver as a qualified driver and supervising the provisional entitlement holder while that person is performing a manoeuvre which includes reversing.
- In the case of a driving test examiner (but NOT an instructor) who is conducting a dest of competence to drive and who finds that wearing a seat belt would endanger himself or any other person.
- In the case of a person who is driving or riding in a vehicle being used for fire brigade or police pusposes, or for carrying a person in lawful custody, including a person being so carried.
- In the case of a driver of a licensed taxi who is seeking hire, answering a call for hire, or carrying a passenger for hire; or of a driver of a private hire vehicle which is being used to carry a passenger for hire.
- When RIDING in a vehicle being used under a trade licence for the purposes of investigating or remedying a mechanical fault in the vehicle. N.B. This particular exemption refers specifically to 'riding' in a vehicle and does not include 'driving' a vehicle for the same or similar purposes - therefore, it must not be concluded that the driver of a vehicle using it for the puspose described would be exempt from wearing a seat belt whereas a passenger riding in the vehicle for the same purpose would be exempt.
- In the case of a disabled person, wearing a disabled person's seat belt.
- In the case of a person RIDING (see note above) in a vehicle while it is taken part in a procession orgainzed by or on behalf of the Crown. This exemption also applies to a person riding in a vehicle which is taking part in a procession to commemorate an event which is commonly or customarily held in the police area in which it is being held, or for which a notice has been given under the Public Order Act 1986.

The regulations also do not apply to a person who is:

- driving a vehicle if the driver's seat is not provided with an adult seat belt;
- riding in the front of a vehicle in which no adult belt is available to him;
- riding in the rear of a vehicle in which no adult belt is available to him.

It should be noted that these exemptions relate to the non-wearing of seat belts where they are not provided, but this circumstance may involve other infringements of the law relating to the non-fitment of seat belts".

Regards,

Karen