INMR FORKLIFT PARTS DRIVERS
INMR FORKLIFT PARTS DRIVER
INMR FORKLIFT PARTS CODE

The HSO further admitted that she did not observe any of the conditions described therein, such as overloading or traveling with the load elevated, that can result in lateral or forward tip-overs. Snyder that this provision only applies to high lift trucks, and that Con-Way does not use high lift trucks but only low lift trucks. However, under questioning, the HSO agreed with Mr. For example, when referred to ASME standard B56.1-2000, Safety Standard for Low Lift and High Lift Trucks, the HSO acknowledged that it was one of the standards considered in support of issuing the direction, specifically its paragraph 5.3.18. Everything she found points to the fact that in the event of a tip-over, staying within the cab is what prevents an employee from being crushed. The HSO testified that she did not find any evidence to the contrary in her search about wearing seat belts. Department of Labor Standard Interpretation dated July 28, 2004, May 22, 1998, October 9, 1996, and National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) alert 2001-109.

INMR FORKLIFT PARTS DRIVER

provides more detailed specifications for forklift design, CSA standard 6.9 provides further start up specifications which includes training the driver to use the restraint system, U.S. states that “With regard to an operator restraint system, (a) the user shall ensure that an operator restraint system is used.” And further that “(c) operator protection in the event of a tipover is intended to reduce the risk of entrapment of the body and any part thereof between the truck and the ground…” CSA standard 5.3. Department of Energy, Office of Environment, Safety and Health dated Septemconfirms that “Vehicle tip-over is the largest cause of forklift-related deaths, followed by being crushed by the vehicle.”, Canadian Standard Association (CSA) standard 4.9.2.3. Teamsters heard by Douglas Malanka, the report entitled Operating Experience Summary prepared by the U.S. 178 (a) (4), B56.1–1988, B56.1a–1989, B56.1–1993, American Society of Mechanical Engineering (ASME) B56.1–2000, Occupational Safety and Health Act (US) enforces this under Section 5(a)(1) of the OSH Act, ANSI 29CFR 1910.178 (q) (6) prevents employers from removing seatbelts, appeals officer decision 05-047 Consolidated Fastfrate vs.

INMR FORKLIFT PARTS CODE

In addition to the Code having provisions for wearing all PPE supplied, the following research confirms that staying in the forklift truck and wearing seatbelts is safer during rollover situations: American Nation (sic) Standards Institute (ANSI) Standard B56.1. She wrote:Īll of the research I have done leads one to the conclusion that, when a forklift rolls over, the safest place to be is in the cab to avoid being crushed by the unit.

The HSO explained that she conducted research to arrive at the decision that Con-Way was in contravention of the Code. The HSO noted that in the report, under section (i), Wearing of Forklift Seat Belts, the final bullet states: “Seatbelts would impede an emergency exit from a forklift cab in an unlikely event of a tip over, side impact by other forklifts or brake failure.” The committee did so in a report titled Health and Safety Committee Risk Assessment Report, which was submitted to the HSO on November 24, 2006. Snyder to have the health and safety committee prepare a report on its findings that the employer was not in violation of the Code on the issue of seat belts. He referred the HSO to a report from the Institute of Advanced Safety Studies dealing with forklift trucks’ overturn rates and probabilities. Snyder informed her that the health and safety committee had reviewed this issue and believed that there were procedures in place that negated hazards created by not using seat belts. The HSO discussed on a number of occasions the issue of seat belts with Ron M.

INMR FORKLIFT PARTS DRIVERS

During the inspection, she noticed that forklift drivers were not wearing seat belts. Having introduced herself to a manager of Con-Way, HSO Mordaunt scheduled an inspection of the employer’s premises for August 29, 2007. The HSO testified that her investigation was not the result of a refusal to work or of a complaint made by an employee of Con-Way nor was it the result of an accident. The NIM is intended to help federal employers with their health and safety program and to ensure they are in compliance with the Code. (hereafter referred to as Con-Way or the company). Health and safety officer (HSO) Kim Mordaunt was given a pro-active assignment by her manager through the National Intervention Model (NIM) which targeted Con-Way Freight Canada Inc. Investigation by the health and safety officer This case is an appeal under subsection 146(1) of the Canada Labour Code, Part II (the Code), of a direction issued under subsection 145(1) of the Code for a contravention to section 124 of the Code. This appeal was heard by Appeals Officer Serge Cadieux in Toronto, Ontario, on August 27 and 28, 2007.

Inmr forklift parts