Transport Accidents in Construction Are Still One of the Most Significant Causes of Fatal Injuries in the Sector

7/27/2019 Transport Accidents in Construction Are Still One of the Most Significant Causes of Fatal Injuries in the Sector

1/9

Transport accidents in construction are still one of the most significant causes of fatal injuries in the

sector. A number of operations give rise to particular concerns and these include; reversing, overturning

of vehicles (particularly common where sloping ground is involved), the proximity of motor vehicles (e.g.

work on roads/motorways) and the proximity of site plant.

This pattern is, unfortunately, well established, and comprehensive guidance is available in Health and

Safety Booklet HS(G)144, The Safe use of Vehicles on Construction Sites.

Fatal accidents Transport Total Chart 30

REVERSING 23%

OVER- TURNING 19%

ROAD TRAFFIC VEHICLES 32%

SITE PLANT 26%

Traffic Management was involved in 39 out of the 151 Transport fatal accidents making the Traffic

Management overall percentage 26%.

The Traffic Management fatal accidents consisted of 3 fatalities as a result of Site Plant, 7 fatalities as a

result of vehicles reversing and 29 Road Transport Vehicle fatal accidents. This represents 8% of Site

Plant fatal accidents, 20% of Reversing fatal accidents and 60% of Road Transport Vehicle fatal

accidents.

No Traffic Management issues were involved in the Overturning fatal accidents.

Summaries - Transport Fatal accidents involving Reversing

Surveyor was struck by a reversing tipping lorry which was approx 350m along from the access point.

The project involved motorway widening work.

Plasterer was struck by a reversing telescopic handler which mounted the pavement. The project

involved refurbishment of local authority domestic properties.

Summaries Transport Fatal accidents involving Overturning

Driver was crushed when a telescopic materials handler overturned as it was reversing down a slope.

The small project involved new build housing. Driver was crushed when a dumper overturned whilst he

was attempting to tip a load of clay to form a bund. The project involved remedial work at a landfill site.

Summaries Transport Fatal accidents involving Road Traffic Vehicles


2/9

Three traffic management workers were collecting cones from the central reservation. This involved

crossing three live lanes of traffic in the dark, no precautions taken. Worker was hit by car travelling at

high speed at a bend in the road.

Motorcyclist collided with a stationary crash cushion vehicle in lane 3 of a dual carriageway. Road

maintenance team were removing a warning sign.

Car driver was killed when he drove into a road closure area and hit a planning machine at speed.

Project involved overnight road closure for resurfacing.

Summaries Transport Fatal accidents involving Site Plant

Ground worker was struck by a dump truck which had lost control/veered towards him and trapped him

against a wall. Project involved construction school building.

Construction worker was crushed when an excavator rolled as he removed strop used to connect/tow

excavator with a dumper. Project involved road resurfacing.

Plant hire maintenance fitter was crushed by mobile crushing plant unit. The tracks moved unexpectedly

as he crawled beneath the unit with the engine running.

You must identify and adhere to any specific rules applying to reversing. In general this will include the

use of a trained banksman. Where these rules apply, no reversing is allowed except under the direction

of a banksman.

All drivers intending to reverse must check that the reversing path is clear and will remain so.

If for any reason, you lose sight of the banksman, stop immediately and check behind your vehicle.

Remember to keep away from plant and vehicles, because you will not always be visible to the drivers.

Persons working with the plant and vehicles must wear high visibility clothing BS (BSEN 471) and

should not stand close to vehicles or plant where they are not visible to the driver. Banksman reversing

vehicles should also wear a distinguishing helmet


3/9

Fabrication is the process used to manufacture steelwork components that will, when assembled and

joined, form a complete frame. The frame generally uses readily available standard sections that are

purchased from the steelmaker or steel stockholder, together with such items as protective coatings and

bolts from other specialist suppliers.

Although a wide range of section shapes and sizes are produced, the designer may find that the required

section size is not available. In this case, built-up girders may be fabricated from plate. Sections and

plate girders may also be strengthened by stiffening the web or flanges depending upon the load to be

carried.

Most modern steelwork fabrication factories have computer aided design and detailing (CAD) which is

linked directly to factory floor computer numerically controlled (CNC) machinery creating a genuine

CAD/CAM environment. The accuracy of the computer generated details being transmitted directly to

the computer aided manufacturing (CAM) machinery increases the quality standards of production

The fact that machinery has taken over from the tape measure means that the frame is produced to

high quality standards which are reflected in the speed and accuracy of steel erection on site. This

results in significant benefits both to the client and main contractor.

The erection of structural steelwork consists of the assembly of steel components into a frame on site.

The processes involve lifting and placing components into position, then connecting them together.

Generally this is achieved through bolting but sometimes site welding is used. The assembled frameneeds to be aligned before bolting up is completed, and the structure handed over to the principal

contractor.


4/9

Under the requirements of the CDM Regulations [4] the principal contractor has overall responsibility

for health and safety during construction, and this responsibility is effected through the Construction

Health and Safety Plan as he develops the plan for the new building or bridge construction.

The principal safety objectives when erecting steelwork are:

Safe access and working positions

Safe lifting and placing of steel components

Stability and structural adequacy of the part-erected structure

The most serious hazards during steel erection are related to falls from height, either from working

positions or while gaining access to them. Other serious hazards are related to structural instability or

failure during erection and while handling, transporting, and lifting heavy components. The steelwork

contractor's health and safety management system addresses the particular hazards and risks in steel

construction as well as the normal range of issues in working on construction sites. His planning for

health and safety is systemic to all the preparation for erection through risk assessment, devising safe

systems of work and working up the erection method statement.


5/9

Musculoskeletal disorders are the most common occupational health problem in Great Britain, affecting

over 1 million people a year. It is unlikely that manual handling in construction can be eliminated in its

entirety, but measures can be taken to minimise the exposure of workers to this risk. It is important,

therefore, to address issues in the early stages of a projects design.

Steel/concrete composite construction is a popular, cost effective and safe means of forming a concreteslab. There is currently no mechanical handling device to assist with the moving and positioning of

decking sheets once loaded out onto steelwork. Typically, the mass of sheets ranges between 9.3 kg/m2

to 12.98 kg/m2 (0.9 mm gauge) and 12.3 kg/m2 to 17.30 kg/m2 (1.2 mm gauge). This can theoretically

result in sheets in excess of 150 kg (e.g. a 9 m span with a 1 m cover width) well in excess of the

recommendations of the Guidance published with the Manual Handling Operations Regulations 19921

The findings from the survey suggest that metal deckers are a group of workers to which potential

manual handling interventions could be targeted. The most common reports of trouble were in the

lower back (42.0%) in the last three months and (24.1%) in knees for the last seven days. The lower back

was also the site associated most frequently with disability (15.2%), the site most associated with

trouble caused by the job (18.8%) and made worse by the job (13.4%). In a comparison of MSDs

between metal deckers and three other groups (care workers, podiatrists and industrial workers), the

metal deckers reported similar prevalences to the industrial workers, except the metal deckers

reported higher prevalences than the industrial workers in the hips/thighs/buttocks and in the knees.

The survey generally suggests that workers have a positive attitude towards their management. The

majority of workers (69.6%) believe management are committed to reducing the risks posed by manual

handling on site. The majority (71.4%) also believed that management are keen to hear from front line

staff on ways to reduce manual handling and the majority (63.4%) believe that management take

appropriate action to reduce the risk associated with manual handling. When asked specifically about

the responsiveness of site managers to complaints, 34.1% said that site managers would not respond

and 22.4% said site managers would only respond sometimes. The Metal Decking Industry working party

believe that this may be due to the limited options available to the decking managers once the materials

are loaded out, as loading out is usually undertaken by the steel fabricator. This highlights the need to

ensure the works are adequately planned for the loading out of one decking bundle in each steelwork

bay and this is supported by 71.5% of the work force who suggested this would improve manual

handling. The majority of the work force (91.6%) also believed that mechanical lifting of ancillary items

such as edge trims would make their job easier.

The majority of the work force (62.5%) stated that they would prefer to fix shorter sheets which are

600mm wide even though this would increase the overall number of sheets that they were required to

fix each day. In a separate question the majority (67.9%) also reported that they would prefer to fix

lighter decking sheets. Whilst it is not always possible for decking contractors to reduce the length of the

sheets without impacting on the engineers design, it is often possible for decking to be detailed and

manufactured to double span rather than triple span. Hence 9m long sheets can often be reduced to a

greater number of 6m length sheets which from an ergonomic and manual handling perspective is

thought to be generally preferable. The widths of decking sheets in the UK currently range from 1.00m


6/9

to 600mm wide, the later of which is always lighter for a comparable product. The work force generally

preferred to fix shorter sheets of a 600mm profiles (62.5%). There are design and considerable retooling

costs associated with reducing the widths of the wider decking profiles on the market, but this could be

an area for decking contractors to consider when redesigning their decking profiles for the future.

Manual handling training provided for the work force was thought to be practical (73.9%), but whilst themajority reported they had received some manual handling training, 38.4% reported that they had

received no manual handling training. This is therefore an area where immediate improvements should

be made by the decking contractors.

The industry working party has spent considerable time investigating the potential for the introduction

of manual handling devices to reduce the requirement for the deckers to lay everything by hand. The

working party has however concluded that such devices would not be a practical solution on site. 82.2%

of the work force thought that manual handling devices would not be practical on site.


7/9

It is clear from a recent industry survey2 of metal decking installers that a combination of laying shorter

lengths (up to 6m in length) and narrower cover widths (up to 600 mm in width) would make them

easier to handle and reduce the risk on site.

The same survey also identified that the job would be less physically demanding, and the manual

handling risks reduced, by:

Better planning around the location and distribution of ancillary items; Loading out with one decking bundle in each bay; and Mechanical loading out of edge trim bundles.

What designers are required to undertake: the legal situation

The Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 (CDM 07)3 require that designers avoid

foreseeable risks to the health and safety of those involved or affected by the construction, use,

maintenance and demolition of the structure. In doing so, they must eliminate hazards that may give

rise to risk and reduce the remaining risks from any hazards. Both these elements must be done so far

as is reasonably practicable, taking due account of other relevant design considerations.

The Industry Guidance4 states that, Having identified the foreseeable risks, designers should, so far as

is reasonably practicable, eliminate or reduce those risks. The current regulatory view is that this means

that a hazard must be eliminated (or the remaining risk reduced) unless, compared to the risk, it is

grossly disproportionate in terms of time, cost and effort to do so.

In addition, a designer is required to take all reasonable steps to provide information about the design

to assist other duty holders in complying with their duties under CDM 2007 (that is, to identify and

manage the remaining risks). Industry guidance illustrates several different ways in which information

may be transferred.

REASONABLY PRACTICABLE CONTROL MEASURES

The Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004 explain what must be taken into account when deciding if

something is reasonably practicable. In general terms the factors are:

The likelihood of the hazard or risk eventuating

The degree of harm that would result if the hazard or risk eventuated

What you know, or ought to reasonably know, about the hazard or risk and any ways of eliminating or

reducing that hazard or risk

The availability and suitability of ways to eliminate or reduce the hazard or risk, and


8/9

the cost of eliminating or reducing the hazard or risk.

It is expected that employers, HSRs, employees and WorkSafe inspectors will use this guide to form an

opinion about suitable health and safety risk controls, under the test of reasonable practicability.

12..0 Manual Handling

All loading and unloading involves lifting and handling to some extent. Although mechanical equipment

should be used whenever practicable, much of the work will inevitably continue to be carried out

manually. The risk of injury can be greatly reduced by a knowledge and application of correct kineticlifting and handling techniques.

The Manual Handling Regulations which came into force to implement European Directive 90/269/ EEC

on the manual handling of loads.

This company will comply with these regulations by carrying out the following:

-planning.

cannot be avoided.

- with particular

consideration being given to mechanical assistance.

Regulations.


9/9

Documents

Transport Accidents in Construction Are Still One of the Most Significant Causes of Fatal Injuries in the Sector