And that’s the way it should be, that companies are liable for industrial accidents, or don’t you agree?
Potentially, but not in all circumstances.
I can see in this case that the firm played a part and that’s where H&S get them, tipping out in a layby doesn’t sound like good practice. That doesn’t mean to say,however that the driver can be absolved from guilt. My dad was a tipper driver at some point when my age was in single digits, that’s my sole involvement in tippers, however even I would know not to lift up a body if it’s going to hit something in the air.
However, whilst this I’ll agree with you, I don’t think all industrial accidents should be. It wasn’t long ago this was discussed on here
Driver crushed because he failed to put his parking brake on and company fined because they didn’t have a policy. It’s his job, he has the license and frankly that old common sense appears again, you put your parking brake on.
There is no way that any company can set up a policy that covers everything, there’s always something going to blindside you.
And ultimately we do all pay for it in increased insurance premiums.
This is all over Facebook and there are similar comments on there. The drivers family are not happy with the comments but then they will obviously be on his side. In the ‘good old days’ we would have cleaned out with a brush or shovel, but of course back then we were allowed to actually access the vehicle body which is believe is frowned upon nowadays? I have been in the position of having a little bit of loose tarmac (just dust really that had dropped from the sheet) remaining in the body when I called at a Midlands quarry to load gravel, I started to brush it out onto the quarry tip and was soon ordered to move off the site as “It wasn’t their product” but I could chuck it into a hedge bottom down a nearby lane. That was back in the 90’s.
We had a couple of trucks that were hit by power from overheads, both eight leggers and one an OD. Neither touched the cables but you don’t need to as it can jump several feet. One was actually tipping in a bay which had power cables overhead, he had tipped there many times but that day the cables had sagged a little and he got the ram within range! It blew all the tyres and brake diapraghms off but the driver was unhurt as he leapt out without touching anything metallic. I always looked up before tipping, second nature really, but we can all have an off day.
bobbya:
If you wonder why the jobs gone down the pan just read some of these posts slagging off a fellow driver, no camaraderie there ,no chance of us all sticking together is there,the firm is at fault for not having a Safe system of work in place for this task,why not slag them off instead.
I feel sorry for the poor bloke but the two golden rules of tipper driving are tip level and watch for overhead obstructions.
All the risk assessments tool box talks etc will never stop human nature ■■■■ ups
Conor:
Can’t wait to see what bill he ends up paying for the defence’s legal costs when he loses.
Given that some firms make you sign to say you know how to get in and out of the cab, the fact they don’t appear to have a written policy on how to empty/clean the tipper I think he will win.
bobbya:
If you wonder why the jobs gone down the pan just read some of these posts slagging off a fellow driver, no camaraderie there ,no chance of us all sticking together is there,the firm is at fault for not having a Safe system of work in place for this task,why not slag them off instead.
There is no “safe system of work” for raising a trailer under live power lines. None. You know why? Because it’s not safe.
In fairness there are systems about what you do when you have hit power lines
Wheel Nut:
There is not a grain of truth in this story
Was going to say he hasn’t got a leg to stand on,but i reckon thats taking it too far.
Not even verging on humorous.
I disagree. It was humorous. Black humour, or gallows humour may not be your preferred type of humour but it has been a thing ever since the days when cavemen laughed when a dinosaur bit somebody’s head off (*)
Good for him, from what i read of the report, its not the first time it has happened…and the company failed for the second time…plus they had not made arrangements for disposing of waste material prior to collecting another load…so its not the drivers fault, its the companies fault…BUT in my opinion, a driver should always be aware of his surroundings, especially when raising a body like a tipper, or a tanker, or a crane, to make sure there are no overhead lines, electrical or otherwise, so he is partly to blame which will reduce any compensation due in my opinion, but there are mitigating circumstances: It is the duty of the company to find a suitable place to dispose of any unwanted material, and a layby is not one of those places… ( so i hope they both get prosecuted for fly tipping ) And if there wsas a suitable place, then this accident wouldnt have happened…i am glad the driver survived, as it could quite easily have killed him…signed…Chief CSI officer Truckyboy.
Wheel Nut:
There is not a grain of truth in this story
Was going to say he hasn’t got a leg to stand on,but i reckon thats taking it too far.
Not even verging on humorous.
I disagree. It was humorous. Black humour, or gallows humour may not be your preferred type of humour but it has been a thing ever since the days when cavemen laughed when a dinosaur bit somebody’s head off (*)
+1
its funny and nothing personal against the driver.
however…
by the reckoning that the co is at fault,
does that mean that the next stobart kebab meat in a seat that demolishes his truck into a low bridge can sue stobarts for his gross stupidity if he bumps his nose in the process?
rule 1 with a tipper…dont rais the ram underneath anything .
rule 1 with stobarts ( though i imagine theres plenty of rule 1 with them) .dont drive under low bridges that are too low.
has to be the same logic.
drive about,do your job,be careless and wreck yourself along wth the truck,and then claim the co was to blame…seems pathetic to me.
Hmm, I’m in a quandary with this one; on one hand I believe that stupidity should be punished at best or killed at worst, otherwise the stupid gene will just be bred into successive generations. On the other hand though the company haven’t exactly covered themselves in glory have they? In this litigious day and age it is no longer good enough to say “well we’ve always done it this way” as that doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. Just turning a blind eye to bad practices will not cut it nowadays, and companies can not cherry pick which H&S rules to implement when it suits them.
In balance though I have never received training from my company telling me not to crash into a bus stop full of nuns and toddlers and TBF I’d not expect them to, some things should be plain and evident to a sane person.
Mr Cabbage decides to empty whatever crap that is remaining in his trailer onto a public road for a motorcyclist to encounter and possibly end up dead or paralysed.
If that is not enough, the brainless moron then decides to park underneath power lines and raises his tipper.
What an out and out raging bellend. He deserves everything that has come his way and I hope he doesn’t get a bean.
Mr Cabbage decides to empty whatever crap that is remaining in his trailer onto a public road for a motorcyclist to encounter and possibly end up dead or paralysed.
If that is not enough, the brainless moron then decides to park underneath power lines and raises his tipper.
What an out and out raging bellend. He deserves everything that has come his way and I hope he doesn’t get a bean.
^^^
This…
The company cant be blamed if the driver has no savvy. Its like sticking your balls in the mangle and complaining that no one said not to
And that’s the way it should be, that companies are liable for industrial accidents, or don’t you agree?
So are you saying an employee has no responsibility to check they are working in a safe manner and should obey their bosses instructions without question?
I’m not saying either of those things. Nobody doubts the employee caused the accident, but that doesn’t make it any less of an accident. He’s a middle-aged man who was injured while he was doing his job due to an oversight. It’s usually the case with small oversights which have sudden and grave consequences, that at first blush one can hardly imagine how it was overlooked, and yet even the most conscientious workers do make mistakes. And in this firm, the same mistake has now happened twice.
I wouldn’t like to totally enumerate the reasons why workers make mistakes in cases where the stakes can barely be any higher for them personally, but one factor is that the management of the hazard is not usually their sole or main responsibility (he isn’t paid just to drive around looking for power lines to avoid), second is that the hazard merely sits amongst a mixture of many others which also have to be managed (including, in this case, perhaps looking out for any signs of public authority who might take exception to the dumping of waste along the highway), and a third is that habits of behaviour which embed safe practices (such as only raising the tipper in familiar places that have been verified safe and free of special hazards) are disrupted due to too many other demands or a disorganised working style.
Generally speaking, the only way to solve the problem of hazards is to work in such a way that doesn’t depend on constant and perfect vigilance over one’s activity to avoid injury or death. Instead of sleeping next to the tiger but assuming you’ll be able to sense when he’s about to maul you and will have time to get a gun shot off into his face, you just don’t sleep next to the tiger, or associate with one at all.
I’d also just like to reiterate again the real rationale behind the public policy is not that employers have somehow failed to do something when an accident occurs - it is enough that the accident did occur, that the employee injured accidentally has a legitimate claim on the resources of the organisation to make the situation good, and that such claims should be priced into the cost of doing that kind of business in that kind of way.
The fact that almost all industrial accidents are preventable and arise from corner-cutting and a wilful culture of bad practices is a completely separate discussion, although irresponsible employers always want to believe that it had nothing to do with them (usually on the premise that it is reasonable to expect an employee to demonstrate constant and perfect vigilance, a premise which has been rejected as impossible and unworkable by both lawmakers and experts on the issue of accident avoidance).
And that’s the way it should be, that companies are liable for industrial accidents, or don’t you agree?
So are you saying an employee has no responsibility to check they are working in a safe manner and should obey their bosses instructions without question?
I’m not saying either of those things. Nobody doubts the employee caused the accident, but that doesn’t make it any less of an accident. He’s a middle-aged man who was injured while he was doing his job due to an oversight. It’s usually the case with small oversights which have sudden and grave consequences, that at first blush one can hardly imagine how it was overlooked, and yet even the most conscientious workers do make mistakes. And in this firm, the same mistake has now happened twice.
I wouldn’t like to totally enumerate the reasons why workers make mistakes in cases where the stakes can barely be any higher for them personally, but one factor is that the management of the hazard is not usually their sole or main responsibility (he isn’t paid just to drive around looking for power lines to avoid), second is that the hazard merely sits amongst a mixture of many others which also have to be managed (including, in this case, perhaps looking out for any signs of public authority who might take exception to the dumping of waste along the highway), and a third is that habits of behaviour which embed safe practices (such as only raising the tipper in familiar places that have been verified safe and free of special hazards) are disrupted due to too many other demands or a disorganised working style.
Generally speaking, the only way to solve the problem of hazards is to work in such a way that doesn’t depend on constant and perfect vigilance over one’s activity to avoid injury or death. Instead of sleeping next to the tiger but assuming you’ll be able to sense when he’s about to maul you and will have time to get a gun shot off into his face, you just don’t sleep next to the tiger, or associate with one at all.
I’d also just like to reiterate again the real rationale behind the public policy is not that employers have somehow failed to do something when an accident occurs - it is enough that the accident did occur, that the employee injured accidentally has a legitimate claim on the resources of the organisation to make the situation good, and that such claims should be priced into the cost of doing that kind of business in that kind of way.
The fact that almost all industrial accidents are preventable and arise from corner-cutting and a wilful culture of bad practices is a completely separate discussion, although irresponsible employers always want to believe that it had nothing to do with them (usually on the premise that it is reasonable to expect an employee to demonstrate constant and perfect vigilance, a premise which has been rejected as impossible and unworkable by both lawmakers and experts on the issue of accident avoidance).
Please make your replies more concise, this isn’t school you won’t get extra marks for paragraphs of waffle.
Darkside:
I know no one goes to work to get injured, and if the company is negligent they should be compensated.
Who said anything about the company having to be negligent? The organisation is not paying because it’s managers have been negligent - it is paying because it is an accident in the course of its business which has to be made good again. Same as if I swing into my driveway and the brakes fail, leading the car to go ploughing into the doorway, I’m not paying to repair my own house and car because I’ve been negligent, I’m paying (regardless of any negligence on my part) because things need to be put back into proper order.
Please make your replies more concise, this isn’t school you won’t get extra marks for paragraphs of waffle.
I’d love to, but at some point one has to explain one’s self.
I’m sure you can make you point in far fewer words. I’d do it for you, but I really can’t be bothered to read through it to find the salient points and offer a counter argument to prove how wrong you are.
I have been in the position of having a little bit of loose tarmac (just dust really that had dropped from the sheet) remaining in the body when I called at a Midlands quarry to load gravel, I started to brush it out onto the quarry tip and was soon ordered to move off the site as “It wasn’t their product” but I could chuck it into a hedge bottom down a nearby lane. 
That was back in the 90’s.