Cheapo fork lift

[ukracer]

It's no wonder that we no longer have people who can achieve things. There seems to be a movement to wrap everyone in cotton wool and prevent anything being done. I don,t think it will ever improve until UK PLc goes bust and has to start again.

The antics of the elf 'n safe tea brigade have done their utmost to make our aerial trade unviable. We manage but a perfectly safe job that would take an hour, takes three times that by the time all the nanny stuff is taken into account. Personally I am sick of it.

I was going to say exactly the same. I have recently been Looking into Level 3 vehicle service Technicial assesment and MOT certification for tester and all you can see is £££££ signs.

To be fair I would not be so concerned but often the person taking the course is less capable than the operator. Where the problem arises is the operator misusing the equipment.......they know full well HOW to use it but being able to make money depends on cutting corners. I see it everywhere.....

 

[brightspark]

years ago I was working at copydex factory when they went for dinner brake they left the forklift outside I borrowed it and learnt how to use it working there on a weekend when no one about I used to use it for fixing the lights the lights and running cables through the roof

 

[Questions]

Having a forklift seems an expensive enough venture, inspections insurance and all that.
Might need to have your employees sign a waver before taking them on, or is there
law against that too.

 

[WorkshopChris]

Might need to have your employees sign a waver before taking them on, or is there
law against that too.

In the event of a accident you would be fully liable as you would be seen of to of been fully aware of issues yet not acted on them.

 

[Questions]

In the event of a accident you would be fully liable as you would be seen of to of been fully aware of issues yet not acted on them.

Its all a scam to keep people in work, you need to commit a crime to be held responsible for one, is it a crime to
only allow people drive your forklift or make a claim regarding an accident with it if they have already agreed not to.

 

[ajlelectronics]

As I understand it, any waiver of liability is invalid. An employer is responsible for any stupidity carried out by an employee.

This is why I am so anti the nanny brigade...
I had an employee who was sent to a customer's house to install an aerial system. He was an ex builder so had general experience of ladders and site behaviour as well as the training we provided. This employee decided to wear shorts, a vest top and trainers to this job for reasons best known to himself. He couldn't be bothered to get his ladders off the van because he saw a wooden ladder propped against some scaffold, the ladder being secured to it with parcel tape!
He got his tools and the aerial system built and proceeded up the ladder with both hands occupied with the tools etc. Naturally he only got a few rungs up when the obvious happened, so he tried to turn as he jumped. Landing awkwardly, he sprained his ankle requiring hospital treament.

Elf 'n safe tea decided that I should have been aware of his stupidity and taken steps to prevent it, even though I was in the office and he was twenty miles away. Luckily they didn't get legal with me.
The insurance company then got a claim from an ambulance chaser and paid out five grand plus legal costs "because it was a cheaper option than defending it in court".

 

[ukracer]

As I understand it, any waiver of liability is invalid. An employer is responsible for any stupidity carried out by an employee.

This is why I am so anti the nanny brigade...
I had an employee who was sent to a customer's house to install an aerial system. He was an ex builder so had general experience of ladders and site behaviour as well as the training we provided. This employee decided to wear shorts, a vest top and trainers to this job for reasons best known to himself. He couldn't be bothered to get his ladders off the van because he saw a wooden ladder propped against some scaffold, the ladder being secured to it with parcel tape!
He got his tools and the aerial system built and proceeded up the ladder with both hands occupied with the tools etc. Naturally he only got a few rungs up when the obvious happened, so he tried to turn as he jumped. Landing awkwardly, he sprained his ankle requiring hospital treament.

Elf 'n safe tea decided that I should have been aware of his stupidity and taken steps to prevent it, even though I was in the office and he was twenty miles away. Luckily they didn't get legal with me.
The insurance company then got a claim from an ambulance chaser and paid out five grand plus legal costs "because it was a cheaper option than defending it in court".

Thats my view entirely. It might have been different if YOU had left the wooden ladder placed there.....I am amazed at what they thought you should have done to prevent him being stupid??

 

[colnerov]

As I understand it, any waiver of liability is invalid. An employer is responsible for any stupidity carried out by an employee.

This is why I am so anti the nanny brigade...
I had an employee who was sent to a customer's house to install an aerial system. He was an ex builder so had general experience of ladders and site behaviour as well as the training we provided. This employee decided to wear shorts, a vest top and trainers to this job for reasons best known to himself. He couldn't be bothered to get his ladders off the van because he saw a wooden ladder propped against some scaffold, the ladder being secured to it with parcel tape!
He got his tools and the aerial system built and proceeded up the ladder with both hands occupied with the tools etc. Naturally he only got a few rungs up when the obvious happened, so he tried to turn as he jumped. Landing awkwardly, he sprained his ankle requiring hospital treament.

Elf 'n safe tea decided that I should have been aware of his stupidity and taken steps to prevent it, even though I was in the office and he was twenty miles away. Luckily they didn't get legal with me.
The insurance company then got a claim from an ambulance chaser and paid out five grand plus legal costs "because it was a cheaper option than defending it in court".

Hi, What happened to being responsible for your own actions?

Colin

 

[Questions]

As above, the whole thing is manipulated, at the end of the day we are all solely responsible
ourselves, it the boy standing beside you shot someone, just because you employed him does
this mean you are guilty and responsible.
Why should you or I pay for some twit who could barely clean his **** if he has an accident
in a contained environment such as our workplace.
If some incompetent gets up on your forklift and hurts himself or someone else, they should
I be the one who ends up paying, the system should be geared towards continually taking from
those who are the problem and cause the trouble.
Then maybe the ordinary man who unwittingly employed dumbo would be lift in peace.

 

[wookie]

Thats my view entirely. It might have been different if YOU had left the wooden ladder placed there.....I am amazed at what they thought you should have done to prevent him being stupid??

By the sounds of it the only thing you could have possibly done to prevent that accident was by not employing him. I'm up and down ladders at work as well as using climbing gear going up masts etc but we take care, my boss is a good 'un he rather we work slower and be safer than take chances.

 

[Questions]

Thats my view entirely. It might have been different if YOU had left the wooden ladder placed there.....I am amazed at what they thought you should have done to prevent him being stupid??

Exactly, it is bad enough for an employer to be responsible for any work his employee carries out, which I disagree with too because one can only ever be responsible for his or her own actions,
might as well just adopt our employees.
so surely an employer can not be held responsible for anything no work related his worker does.
Take the broadband provider, read the small print, they deny responsibility for every possible aspect
of the service they supply. 99.9 % coverage, 99.9% uptime, and you can be guaranteed when it fails
you will be quoted we did not promise 100%, now did we.
Buy software, no liability of any kind, and its one of the biggest business on the planet, yet we all buy it.
Bottom line, there is one set of rules for the takers, and another for the man who through no fault of
his own is pressured into paying through the nose for other peoples mistakes.

 

[8ob]

, my boss is a good 'un he rather we work slower and be safer than take chances.

And that there is what its all about, we go to work to earn a living not get injured or killed. Basic training, safety awareness , a sense of self preservation and thoughts for the others about you go a long way.

Bob

 

[normspanners]

I always do but the guys just throw it in there any which way, I cant say for sure whether it makes any difference on this old clunker or not.

definitely there is a dip tube inside , if you draw gas instead of liquid it WILL freeze, even with the hot water most old gas trucks have issues with the thermostat also coz people dont think about them needing one when the gas is drawn off it will freeze because it works exactly like a freezer.

 

[baconbarm]

Well maybe it's worth us looking into some safety certs etc.
But it's just me and my business partner who are both definitely not going to sue one another if one of us gets injured using it.

 

[slim_boy_fat]

Well maybe it's worth us looking into some safety certs etc.
But it's just me and my business partner who are both definitely not going to sue one another if one of us gets injured using it.

No, but his family or relatives might if he becomes dead or severely incapacitated.

Sadly, it's the way of the world - or at least it's a First World phenomenon.

 

[Parm]

In my experience....

Gas forklifts are better for your needs IMO. No messing with sloshing diesel everywhere/no fumes, no risk of a big hole in your pocket if the batteries went pop.
Yes, your machine needs a yearly inspection - we do, lots don't.
Operators need certification. We do, lots don't.

Don't buy a ramshackle old machine even though the cost might look attractive - they will cost you time and money, even if you can do repairs yourself.

Nissan are a good make. Avoid new electronically controlled Hysters - we've had two that handle really badly and are forever locking themselves out because they have a hissy fit about driving over a pebble

Buy a machine that's big enough. We started with a 1.5T, then 2T, then 4T, now looking at a 6T.


A medical? really @Parm ?

Not my area of expertise, but we have an in house occ health department that are regularly out doing FLT medicals

 

[ajlelectronics]

By the sounds of it the only thing you could have possibly done to prevent that accident was by not employing him. I'm up and down ladders at work as well as using climbing gear going up masts etc but we take care, my boss is a good 'un he rather we work slower and be safer than take chances.

I think some of the nonsense is driven by desk jockeys, who are scared of everything that real workers do. In my case we had an 18 year old who came out to find out something about the industry, in the beginning of the elf 'n safe tea movement. It was clear that he had probably never seen a ladder let alone used one and considered that anyone using one must be suicidal. We were told that before the ladder could be ascended, we had to drill two dirty great holes in the customer's house for eyelet bolts, to which the ladder would be fixed. Then the same had to be done at the top.

When it came to the roof ladder, he had a blue fit about transfer from one to the other. Said laddie then demanded that the chimney be drilled for more eyebolts. On top of that, it was required that a hi-viz and hard hat be worn.

Utter and complete nannying nonsense, especially the hard had business for working up a ladder. I suppose the sky could fall in or something?

So in summary, not only was his demand unreasonable in terms of unecessary damage to the property, but drilling the chimney would be likely to result in serious damage as they are only single skinned. In fact when I was an employer, I sacked an engineer for doing just that.

I think you can tell that I am not a fan of nannies. ;-)

 

[evobilly666]

I have the plant on my site brake tested monthly, tyre pressure checks done monthly, as well as defect sheets completed daily by my operators. The reversing aids such as cameras and blue lights are tested monthly. This is not because I don't trust my operators. In the event of an accident, the HSE will ask what steps I took to minimise the risks. I need to have a certified paper trail. This covers me and the company that pay my salary to protect them. I have to be able to prove that I looked at every scenario. The thing that really bugs me beyond everything is that when you get an employee who doesn't give a care in the world, it is almost impossible to get rid of them without risk of a different type of tribunal yet you are still expected to keep them safe, basically from themselves.

 

[wookie]

When it came to the roof ladder, he had a blue fit about transfer from one to the other. Said laddie then demanded that the chimney be drilled for more eyebolts. On top of that, it was required that a hi-viz and hard hat be worn.

Utter and complete nannying nonsense, especially the hard had business for working up a ladder. I suppose the sky could fall in or something

My boss considered the H&S side of it with regards to working at height and decided that rather than wearing hard hats we would just take sensible precautions to avoid accidents, after all the hard hat worn by the guy at the top could fall off and injure the guy at the bottom , so we just avoid being under anyone when they were working up a mast whenever possible, if you have to below them then the person at the top doesn't use any tools so they can't accidentally drop anything on you, and wherever possible the tools are on lanyards.

Basic common sense, after all whether I go up the mast or my mate does we are both responsible for the others safety, so the guy at the top tries not to drop anything on the guy at the bottom and the guy at the bottom is responsible for winching the other guy up and lowering him back down again in one piece.

 

[evobilly666]

My boss considered the H&S side of it with regards to working at height and decided that rather than wearing hard hats we would just take sensible precautions to avoid accidents, after all the hard hat worn by the guy at the top could fall off and injure the guy at the bottom , so we just avoid being under anyone when they were working up a mast whenever possible, if you have to below them then the person at the top doesn't use any tools so they can't accidentally drop anything on you, and wherever possible the tools are on lanyards.

Basic common sense, after all whether I go up the mast or my mate does we are both responsible for the others safety, so the guy at the top tries not to drop anything on the guy at the bottom and the guy at the bottom is responsible for winching the other guy up and lowering him back down again in one piece.

That my friend is called a risk assessment and is a perfectly acceptable outcome. It is however worthless unless written down and signed by all parties involved. They have you in every way. What happens at home without incident cannot happen in the workplace