Posted By TBC
As the driver is responsible for the FLT he/she operates then it would be wise to do the checks each time - it only takes a few minutes. Someone could have damaged it beforehand and not reported it.

Posted By Sean Fraser
"A checklist? Think of the time wasted with a paperwork system."

We use a daily (or twice daily, as it is shift based) checklist. Only exemption is if the unit is not actually used at any time during the shift. It may seem to be a waste of paper, but it provides cover to the employee and employer:

Say the employee has been noting a failure which is not fixed, then there is an incident. First part of the investigation is the effectiveness of the equipment, closely followed by the competence of the individual to use it. If a persistent fault is being identified and reported, only criticism of the employee could be failure to refuse to use defective equipment. However, points off for the employer for not making the necessary repairs in good time.

And for the employer, it provides evidence that there is a formal inspection regime in place to quickly identify faults and prompt repair in a timely manner, which any decent insurance company would expect.

Excessive paperwork? Not really, considering the benefit it derives.

Posted By Peter Leese
Out of interest does anybody have any figures for accidents involving FLTs where a defective FLT was the cause?

I can think of one in 18 years where one of the forks broke - but it wasn't being statutorily inspected anyway.

Posted By Jim Walker
Ian D ,

We use this too.
Saftag sell it.
Seems to work OK

Posted By GavinR
Hi,

Could anyone please post a web link to the safetytag company on this thread for me? I would like to take a look at that checklist system.

Cheers, Gavin

Posted By Merv Newman
Same as Ian. A check list signed by the first person to take the truck each shift.

The trick is to get them to actually do the inspection rather than just signing the sheet.

Merv

Posted By Sean Fraser
I should have pointed out that the system we use, had 7 days worth of entries so it wasn't one piece of paper per FLT per shift, but I accept the point that the records take time to complete and that they are retained for a long time while only being a "was it done or not" check should someone have a gripe (or worse).

The Scafftag system is a good alternative, but are there historical records produced? Or is it only as good as the day it was done? From the description (I have seen something similar but seem to recall permanent records were also provided) it might be that the incident takes place on the day the card was wiped, losing the 30 days history of checks!

The trick, as Merv points out, is to actually get the drivers to do the check rather than just fill in a record. Temptation is always to just tick-tick-tick-tick and off you go. We have had this recently where someone complained the FLT had been faulty for weeks, but all the checks said it was OK right up to that day!

At the end of the day - if the checks are actually done, faults are rapidly addressed and people use the kit safely, then the records are of little importance. Unfortunately, they are necessary evils.

Posted By Merv Newman
They do it all together at shift start. Not one-by-one or as they feel like it.

They use log books where the pages are half the width of the covers. Checklist is printed on the inside of the front cover. Half pages on the right and left have columns for the "ticks"

Any "cross" and it goes to the supervisor for a maintenance check. Maintenance report is stapled in the back cover.

Log books are "filed" in a rack by the supervisor's office.

One log book per truck per year.

Easy, innit ?

Now, the really difficult bit is getting any answer other than "dunno" to the question "who did that ?"

Merv

Posted By Peter Leese
Phil, has somebody in your company said they want to do away with the checks after that?

Posted By Phil D
no Peter, but you ask how can it be enforced? The answer is, easilly. i have yet to work in a place where it isn't a requirement. And in all those places, it has been monitored, and enforced.

Posted By db
I suppose the answer to the initial question "is it a legal requirement" is yes.

It'll be somewhere under PUWER 98 to ensure work equipment is maintained in an efficient working order and in good repair.

The detail will be in the guidance which does sway a court room although does not have the same weight as an approved code of practice in theory.
In my experience the courts dont really differentiate when they are faced with an accident and what could have been done to prevent it.