Posted By Ross Hunter
Principal contractor, contracts out a crain lift to a competant contractor whose credentials have been verified, who has provided RA, method statement and a lift plan all of which have been read understood and agreed.

The crain contractor starts work on site lifting his loads with the aid of his own work force e.g. banksmen, slingers etc and incidently also has under his control the transport on which the materials are delivered.

During one of the lifts an accident occurs where a transport driver is injured as a consequence of this lift. The driver is in the area where the work is being carried out.

In the contractors method statement/liftplan etc, it is stated that only trained operatives are allowed in the area of operations.

Who do you think should carry 'the can' or be held responsible for the accident, the crain contractor or the principal contractor or the driver?

Posted By The toecap
I think the lifting supervisor is to blame because there were insufficient methods in place to control the lifting operation. Was there some form of physical barrier to demark the area? This sounds to me like the driver was on the back of the wagon unloading and fell off. Is okay agreeing method statements but, it following them. The PC needs to monitor to see that they are being folowed.

Posted By GT
If you are applying a "Blame Culture" then you are.

Please provide full details of the event.

Who is the owner of the work area.

Who invited the crane operator onto the site?

Did you assess any apsect of this operation.

On the initial reading of what you have
written, you may have to carry some
responsibilty and accountability for the outcome.

GT

Posted By Salus
Hello Ross,

the contractor is responsible for,
1. supplying the appointed person
2. planning the lift
3. the operation and safe system of work
4. organisation and control of the lifting operation.

The contractor has all the above resposibilities in a "fully contracted lift operation".