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 : 09 March 2008 08:47:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Alex Ashcroft Good morning everyone. Have an issue where we are building pallet racking on a site which we (As Experts regularly do). The stability of racks is determined by the height of the frame (Uprights) divided by the depth of the frame in broad terms. There was a situation last year where racking fell over whilst being built that had a H2D ration of 11.5:1, we are being asked to build racking at a ratio of 17.5:1, to enable the sprinkler contractor to install his pipes from a MEWP. We have stated clearly in our offer to the end user that we will only build racks in a back to back format due to the height to depth ratio of these racks not being stable. Now the Builder is insisting that we build it so (His) sub-contractor (Sprinklers can work from MEWP to work within the WAHR? Any advise? Al
Admin  
#2 Posted : 09 March 2008 08:57:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Dave Merchant Nobody can use one Regulation to justify breaking another, and in your case you would be failing in your duty if you built racking which you knew was unstable just to keep someone happy. Stick to your guns, and see if the sprinkler people can either get in first (hence no problem of access) or can work from something narrower. There's more than one MEWP out there, and I'm guessing that if your (correct) design still leaves space for a FLT, then there's space for a MEWP. Maybe not the one they already own, but that's not your problem!
Admin  
#3 Posted : 09 March 2008 10:41:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Dav Alex Agree with comments above. If you build it clearly knowing that it is not safe then you will be liable legally (as will they) should anything fail. Morals too, and although morals dont pay the bills and keep your company afloat, you would have to live with yourself if something went seriously wrong.
Admin  
#4 Posted : 10 March 2008 13:16:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Ron Hunter You would be in breach of Section 6(3) of the Health and Safety at Work Act. If they won't listen to reason, then you have to walk away.
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.