A logistics company has been fined after a worker died when he was trapped between a trailer and his vehicle.
Dudley Magistrates’ Court heard how, on 22 January 2016, a Tuffnells Parcels Express Limited employee was fatally injured whilst attempting to attach a trailer to his vehicle. The trailer was parked upon a slight slope, which was enough to allow it to roll forward trapping the employee.
An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) into the incident found safety management arrangements for coupling trailers to vehicles failed to take account of the slope.
Tuffnells Parcels Express Limited of Wallows Industrial Estate, Dudley pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2 (1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and has been fined £1.5 million and ordered to pay costs of £32,823.35
Speaking after the hearing, HSE inspector Karl Raw said:
“Had Tuffnells taken the slope into account, simple measures could have been taken that would have prevented this incident. Workplace transport remains a high risk environment, and this case serves as a reminder to industry that assessments of sites should be specific and identify the hazards unique to each yard. It is also a reminder that the slope a vehicle is parked on does not need to be steep for incidents to occur.
“This was a tragic and wholly avoidable incident, caused by the failure of the company to adopt robust management action in both planning and monitoring of the workplace and workplace actions at this site.”
Once again a Co get hammered because of an employees incompetence. If he/she had done their job correctly in the first place then this would be a non issue.
Are we really at the stage where everyone doing whatever their job is needs to be spoon fed instructions on exactly how to do their job?
Said it before and I’ll say it again
Suzie rails / MAVIS rails whatever you want to call them mean there is no need to be split coupling trailers , no need to be up on a catwalk between a trailer and the cab .
Split coupling is dangerous and has to many chances / oppertunities for it to go wrong. But it costs money say the companies . I say £1.5 million would fit a lot of MAVIS rails and everyone gets to go home .
As Maoster says,whichever way you couple/uncouple there is no reason why a driver/employee can not spare the few seconds it takes to apply a handbrake.It’s only a push/pull button nowadays for heavens sake.Even the old ratchet type is more exercise than some care to take.Shunters,of course,don’t have the time either.
beefy4605:
Said it before and I’ll say it again
Suzie rails / MAVIS rails whatever you want to call them mean there is no need to be split coupling trailers , no need to be up on a catwalk between a trailer and the cab .
Split coupling is dangerous and has to many chances / oppertunities for it to go wrong. But it costs money say the companies . I say £1.5 million would fit a lot of MAVIS rails and everyone gets to go home .
Where was split coupling mentioned Mavis? failure to use the trailer brake seems to be the reason for the accident
beefy4605:
Said it before and I’ll say it again
Suzie rails / MAVIS rails whatever you want to call them mean there is no need to be split coupling trailers , no need to be up on a catwalk between a trailer and the cab .
Split coupling is dangerous and has to many chances / oppertunities for it to go wrong. But it costs money say the companies . I say £1.5 million would fit a lot of MAVIS rails and everyone gets to go home .
Where was split coupling mentioned Mavis? failure to use the trailer brake seems to be the reason for the accident
if it wasn’t a split coupling then the pin should have been home and a handbrake on - how could the trailer roll forward ? Only a split coupling has the potential for this .
Years ago, we had taps on the suzies. They were very useful in all sorts of situations. Sadly, the practice of judging everybody by the most stupid, has lead to a full-circle scenario, where the systems to protect the semi-morons have caused the reasonably intelligent to be lulled into a false sense of security, resulting in the numbing of their expectations, leading to their judgement of what is safe being wrong.
beefy4605:
Said it before and I’ll say it again
Suzie rails / MAVIS rails whatever you want to call them mean there is no need to be split coupling trailers , no need to be up on a catwalk between a trailer and the cab .
Split coupling is dangerous and has to many chances / oppertunities for it to go wrong. But it costs money say the companies . I say £1.5 million would fit a lot of MAVIS rails and everyone gets to go home .
Where was split coupling mentioned Mavis? failure to use the trailer brake seems to be the reason for the accident
if it wasn’t a split coupling then the pin should have been home and a handbrake on - how could the trailer roll forward ? Only a split coupling has the potential for this .
beefy4605:
Said it before and I’ll say it again
Suzie rails / MAVIS rails whatever you want to call them mean there is no need to be split coupling trailers , no need to be up on a catwalk between a trailer and the cab .
Split coupling is dangerous and has to many chances / oppertunities for it to go wrong. But it costs money say the companies . I say £1.5 million would fit a lot of MAVIS rails and everyone gets to go home .
Aren’t tufnells mainly wag n drag? Do Mavis rails work with them? Sounds to me like a trailer brake wasnt applied.
beefy4605:
Said it before and I’ll say it again
Suzie rails / MAVIS rails whatever you want to call them mean there is no need to be split coupling trailers , no need to be up on a catwalk between a trailer and the cab .
Split coupling is dangerous and has to many chances / oppertunities for it to go wrong. But it costs money say the companies . I say £1.5 million would fit a lot of MAVIS rails and everyone gets to go home .
Where was split coupling mentioned Mavis? failure to use the trailer brake seems to be the reason for the accident
if it wasn’t a split coupling then the pin should have been home and a handbrake on - how could the trailer roll forward ? Only a split coupling has the potential for this .
It was a drawbar, A frame drawbar with 2 axles
why did it roll forward then ? It wasn’t coupled up correctly - a simple check would have revealed the pin wasn’t in before moving in to connect the suzies. OK so it wasn’t a artic and trailer but what I said still stands - split coupling is dangerous and has to many chances to go wrong . In this day and age where health and saftey is such a big issue there is no excuse for having to be on a catwalk between a unit and trailer when there are easy and safe ways to couple up .
the maoster:
Once again a Co get hammered because of an employees incompetence. If he/she had done their job correctly in the first place then this would be a non issue.
Are we really at the stage where everyone doing whatever their job is needs to be spoon fed instructions on exactly how to do their job?
2 employees not 1. The person dropping it hadn’t applied it and the next driver didn’t check.
Reading the op it sounds like there was a lack of training and checking this was being followed. I know we should apply it as standard but I have been places and told not to put it on, For the record I did but given they mention the slope I wonder if they applied it in the slope area of the yard but not elsewhere
The trailer was on a slope I’m guessing he stooped a foot or two away from the trailer hooked up the air lines and took the trailer brake off and tried to guide the bar into the vgb coupling but it missed and crushed the driver between the primemover and the trailer.
Vgb coupling is a pain in the ■■■ unlike artic coupling as you have to be pretty much dead on so some people get out and manually guide it if the trailer is on a slope as gravity is working for them.
People still do this at tuffnells because it’s all rush rush and they don’t want to invest in a reversing camera so you can hook up easily.
Anyway, anyone who can reverse a tuffnells trailer deserves respect they are a proper pig to reverse.
Wheel Nut:
Where was split coupling mentioned Mavis? failure to use the trailer brake seems to be the reason for the accident
if it wasn’t a split coupling then the pin should have been home and a handbrake on - how could the trailer roll forward ? Only a split coupling has the potential for this .
It was a drawbar, A frame drawbar with 2 axles
why did it roll forward then ? It wasn’t coupled up correctly - a simple check would have revealed the pin wasn’t in before moving in to connect the suzies. OK so it wasn’t a artic and trailer but what I said still stands - split coupling is dangerous and has to many chances to go wrong . In this day and age where health and saftey is such a big issue there is no excuse for having to be on a catwalk between a unit and trailer when there are easy and safe ways to couple up .
SImilar can happen with an artic trailer if it’s dropped high and the driver doesn’t realise the pin has rode over the top of the fifth wheel. If it’s on a slope when it airs up if the driver’s still on the catwalk it will roll into the back of the cab.
In reality the main safety issue is excluding loading bays not ever dropping trailers on any kind of slope rather than always applying the parking brake per se.
The trailer was on a slope I’m guessing he stooped a foot or two away from the trailer hooked up the air lines and took the trailer brake off and tried to guide the bar into the vgb coupling but it missed and crushed the driver between the primemover and the trailer.
Vgb coupling is a pain in the ■■■ unlike artic coupling as you have to be pretty much dead on so some people get out and manually guide it if the trailer is on a slope as gravity is working for them.
People still do this at tuffnells because it’s all rush rush and they don’t want to invest in a reversing camera so you can hook up easily.
Anyway, anyone who can reverse a tuffnells trailer deserves respect they are a proper pig to reverse.
Good post.
Guess we can’t say that was definitely what happened?
But a good explanation of how/why it could happen. I’ve never worked with these outfits so that explanation is news to me, but seems quite plausible.
Own Account Driver:
SImilar can happen with an artic trailer if it’s dropped high and the driver doesn’t realise the pin has rode over the top of the fifth wheel. If it’s on a slope when it airs up if the driver’s still on the catwalk it will roll into the back of the cab.
In reality the main safety issue is excluding loading bays not ever dropping trailers on any kind of slope rather than always applying the parking brake per se.
Then surely the safest way regardless of slope is just to put the brake on every time? Then the gradient becomes irrelevant.
Personally I can’t believe I this day there’s not a system on the trailer that doesn’t snap a brake shut once the airline is off…
Own Account Driver:
SImilar can happen with an artic trailer if it’s dropped high and the driver doesn’t realise the pin has rode over the top of the fifth wheel. If it’s on a slope when it airs up if the driver’s still on the catwalk it will roll into the back of the cab.
In reality the main safety issue is excluding loading bays not ever dropping trailers on any kind of slope rather than always applying the parking brake per se.
Personally I can’t believe I this day there’s not a system on the trailer that doesn’t snap a brake shut once the airline is off…
Own Account Driver:
SImilar can happen with an artic trailer if it’s dropped high and the driver doesn’t realise the pin has rode over the top of the fifth wheel. If it’s on a slope when it airs up if the driver’s still on the catwalk it will roll into the back of the cab.
In reality the main safety issue is excluding loading bays not ever dropping trailers on any kind of slope rather than always applying the parking brake per se.
Personally I can’t believe I this day there’s not a system on the trailer that doesn’t snap a brake shut once the airline is off…
There is,
We’ve got a mixed bag. Some as soon as the red line is off the brakes snap on, others as long as air is retained the brakes will stay off until the switch is pulled.
Perhaps the former shoukd be mandatory? Or perhaps it is but only on newer trailers etc?
The brakes come on as soon as the air line is taken off with tuffnells trailers.
I’ve seen plenty of drivers manually guide the a-frame into the vgb coupling via connecting the red airline and taking the trailer brake off and letting gravity do the rest.
I cant be certain but I highly suspect it was driver at fault.
