Posted By Crim
Morning all,

Is there a requirement for the operator working inside the cage of a elevated MEWP? I can see it is necessary when operating from a hydraulic platform boom type but have received conflicting advice?

Posted By Mitch
Crim,

Search forum for previous, lot's of discussion and more importantly some very sensible advice form the Jedi masters

Mitch

Posted By Mitch
I rest my case

Posted By Ron Hunter
The answer to this lies within a British Standard, referenced in earlier postings. The best practice answer is:
Yes, but only where there is a risk of collision at ground level (e.g. MEWP on a live carraigeway) EXCEPT when working on or near water, when a life jacket should be substituted for the harness.

Posted By John A Wright
A bit of decorum please :o)

I always insist on harness if there is risk of collision in air or a need to lean over railing. So, changing a strip light NO, putting fittings/tiles on wall YES

The decision here, though, is easy, all the fitters insist that they WANT a harness whatever they are doing.

John W

Posted By David Matthew
I know of at least one large contractor whose procedures insist that harnesses are worn in flying carpets but only have to be hooked on if leaning out further than elbow length.
Regards
David

Posted By Crim
Probably by measuring the distance between the hand and the elbow?

Sorry just couldn't resist ?

Posted By Mitch
I asked for that!

Posted By CFT


I ensure that when the SL is at its lowest level (flat) then if driving around an area such as a business park with many other vehicle movements I personally insist that the operator is connected via a short line restraint lanyard, much the same as a seat belt, this then would be what I would use the anchor points for.It is highly unlikely that at it's lowest it would actually tip due to the centre of balance; it 'may' be likely that it could get struck which, if the operative was not connected could throw him/her out.

A recent and friendly discussion between a highly respected contributor and myself, concluded that it was right to ensure that when operatives are working at height in this particular MEWP, the methodology ensured that the barriered control measure was just that, and should not be seen as gaining additional height or reach with the assistance of a harness and lanyard.

I have been scribbling away for weeks as and when time allows on an article for (hopefully) eventual inclusion in SHP or HSW, in it I identify from research undertaken of the likelihood of survival in a tipping over action with the wearing and not wearing of such a potentially protective piece of kit.

CFT

Posted By CFT
Actually Bob, traffic control not withstanding, to avoid any possibility of a shunt whilst moving from area to area would be fine, probably in most cases.

We have Europe's largest producer of a particular product on this particular business park and with 10,000 + HGV weekly movements along with employees vehicles, visitors and the other units is why I like em strapped in when moving around. With continental travel what it is now, a few HGV drivers have one rule (to do it as quickly as possible with as little regard to everyone else as possible) sadly one cannot tell which one it is likely to be this week; and to be clear, 'I am not chastising HGV drivers per se, on the whole they are a careful considerate band of professionals with safety clearly at the forefront of their concerns.'

With other large distribution depots here I need to be certain MEWP movement is carefully handled and although we have spotters, beacons, hi-vis, signs,lane closures, LED signs we can turn on, as and when, and circulate when why and for how long to all occupiers I just prefer to be certain and have them clipped in.

Just thought I mention why I consider this a suitable control measure here before you take me to task;-)

CFT