Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By Duncan Rees
I would appreciate some advice on a recent near miss involving a banksman and forklift driver. The driver made an error and failed to lower the front jacks on his forklift before extending the forks carrying two large stilages. The banksman (who had successfully completed an approved 2 day banksman course)was standing to the side of the forklift and at a point where he was able to view the area where the stilages were to be placed (at the front). This did not afford a clear view of the jacks. It has been contended that had the banksman been concentrating the incident could have been avoided and that he was at fault for failing to stop the driver extending the forks without the jacks being down. What is the best position for a banksman and on what should he be concentrating. No further action is to be taken and no one was hurt although the forklift did tip the two stilages spectacularly. Your opinions would be greatly appreciated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Danny Swygart
Any properly trained forklift driver worth his salt should have been aware that he needed to lower his jacks.
It would have been nice if the banksman had spotted the forklift drivers error (and it ought to be pointed out to him that he should have done) but I think you should focus your attention on retraining the forklift driver.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By John Beadle
At my previous employer there was over 100 FLTs operating on a 90 acre site, any incident/near miss would have resulted in a minimum temporary suspension of the driver and retraining. I would certainly recommend that you check your training procedures in addition to undertaking some random auditing of your FLT drivers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By kelvin
Morning,
Completely agree with John, retrain the driver and consult the banksmen on the reasons why the near miss occured. Blame is not the criteria of H&S. If blame is the approach taken prehaps management should take a look at Reason's theory. Fortunate further damage and injury was not sustained.
Regards
Kelvin
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By peter gotch
Duncan,
Perhaps you should also review the training and awareness of those responsible for supervising FLT drivers, who lapse by mistake or intent. Whilst the supervisor may not need to be trained to themselves operate an FLT, they should have an awareness of common dangerous practices.
Peter
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Merv Newman
I don't automatically require retraining of an FLT driver involved in an incident. Yes, I would propose suspending his licence until we get the incident inquiry report. If that says he needs retraining, or firing, so be it. If he is exonerated then I'll buy him a pint (out of hours) and thank him for his cooperation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By RP
To blame the Banksman would infer that all bank(persons) would need extensive training on all items of plant for which he/she controls. This is impractical. The operator is the 'competent' person and in control of the plant controls and safety sytems. Perhaps the attention should focus on the human error, he/she has I suppose lernt a valuable lesson and will make for a better operator in the future. Use the incident to remind all operators. Bear in mind that no 'licence' exists for forklift operators. There are however plenty of voluntary plant schemes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Alistair Reid
I suspect that we may be talking about a telescopic handler, if so, these are normally fitted with safe load indicators that would either prevent extending the forks to create an unstable condition or at minimum alarm to warn the driver of this situation prior to it occuring. If this item is fitted then the truck should not be in use if it is not functional.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.