Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

IOSH Forums are closing 

The IOSH Forums will close on 5 January 2026 as part of a move to a new, more secure online community platform.

All IOSH members will be invited to join the new platform following the launch of a new member database in the New Year. You can continue to access this website until the closure date. 

For more information, please visit the IOSH website.

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Admin  
#1 Posted : 29 February 2008 11:22:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By PL I have today been asked to approve a risk assessment for FLTs where the FLT can go up and down an aisle carrying 2 pallets which obscure forward vision. I have declined to authorise this as the drivers forward vision is totally obscured. It's my viewpoint that the driver should drive in reverse in this situation as this way he can see where he is going. The drivers argument is that from an ergonomic viewpoint, he doesn't want to spend all day twisting as this may lead to MSD issues in the future. Obviously the risk of him hitting someone is likely to lead to far greater injury. What do you guys think?
Admin  
#2 Posted : 29 February 2008 11:39:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Ian D Jones During the individuals FLT training he will have been informed that under no circumstances should he travel in any direction where vision is obscured. It is industry standard that if your vision is obscured you travel in reverse, If the operator feels that there is a risk of injury because he is using his vehicle in the way in which he was trained then maybe the task should be divided between multiple drivers if this option is available. Would removing one of the pallets reduce the problem if so again this may be an avenue for you to explore. The key thing here is if you put your signature on the assessment and an accident did occur you may well find yourself explaining to a judge, or at worse a coroner.
Admin  
#3 Posted : 29 February 2008 12:07:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Chris Costall Hello PL, I agree with Andy’s statement. I am assuming that you are using a counter balance FLT, If this is going to be an ongoing issue/ task I would suggest that you look at other types of FLT (i.e Side loader) this would solve the vision issue.
Admin  
#4 Posted : 01 March 2008 12:01:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By PL Thanks Guys, I know the rules and agree with the responses.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
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.