240
HSE Health & Safety Executive Review of workplace control measures to reduce risks arising from the movement of vehicles Phase 1 & Phase 2 Prepared by Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) Limited for the Health and Safety Executive 2002 RESEARCH REPORT 038

Review of workplace control measures to reduce risks arising - HSE

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    3

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

HSE Health & Safety

Executive

Review of workplace control measures to reduce risks arising

from the movement of vehicles

Phase 1 & Phase 2

Prepared by Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) Limited

for the Health and Safety Executive 2002

RESEARCH REPORT 038

HSE Health & Safety

Executive

Review of workplace control measures to reduce risks arising

from the movement of vehicles

Phase 1

Camilla Fowler Transport Research Laboratory

Old Wokingham Road Crowthorne

Berkshire RG45 6AU

United Kingdom

The research aims to obtain information about workplace transport safety from organisations of varying size and industry sector. The research was divided into two sections, phase one and phase two. This report marks the completion of phaseone.

One hundred companies were randomly selected from each of the identified industry sectors. The companies were of varying size (number of employees) and were operating from premises of different ages. Through a brainstorming session key technical members of the project team compiled a list of potential measures that could be used to control workplace transport. The measures could be grouped under the following categories: pedestrian safety, traffic routes, vehicle safety, site safety engineering measures and signs, safe systems of work, training and selection and personal protective equipment.

This report and the work it describes were funded by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE). Its contents, including any opinions and/or conclusions expressed, are those of the author alone and do not necessarily reflect HSE policy.

HSE BOOKS

ii

© Crown copyright 2002

First published 2002

ISBN 0 7176 2581 8

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may bereproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted inany form or by any means (electronic, mechanical,photocopying, recording or otherwise) without the priorwritten permission of the copyright owner.

Applications for reproduction should be made in writing to: Licensing Division, Her Majesty's Stationery Office, St Clements House, 2-16 Colegate, Norwich NR3 1BQ or by e-mail to [email protected]

CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY v

1. INTRODUCTION 1

2. AIMS OF THE RESEARCH PROJECT 4

2.1 Overall aims 4

2.2 Detailed aims of Phase 1 5

3. METHODOLOGY 6 3.1 Sample Selection 6

3.2 Questionnaire design 7

3.3 Mailing of the questionnaire 8 3.4 Analysis 8

4. RESULTS 11

5. DISCUSSION 43

6. CONCLUSIONS FOR PHASE ONE 47

7. AIMS FOR PHASE TWO 47

8. REFERENCES 49

APPENDIX ONE 50

APPENDIX TWO 59

APPENDIX THREE 85

iii

Printed and published by the Health and Safety ExecutiveC30 1/98

iv

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The research aims to obtain information about workplace transport safety from organisations of varying size and industry sector. The research was divided into two sections, phase one and phase two. This report marks the completion of phase one.

100 companies were randomly selected from each of the identified industry sectors. The companies were of varying size (number of employees) and were operating from premises of different ages. Through a brainstorming session key technical members of the project team compiled a list of potential measures that could be used to control workplace transport. The measures could be grouped under the following categories: pedestrian safety, traffic routes, vehicle safety, site safety engineering measures and signs, safe systems of work, training and selection and personal protective equipment.

After an extensive literature search and familiarisation with relevant legislation and guidance, a questionnaire was designed. The information being sought included general information about the company, such as the number of employees, the types of vehicles in use within the work site, accident reporting, general workplace transport safety, awareness of legislation, the implementation of control measures and their perceived effectiveness.

The questionnaire was piloted on 10 local companies through face to face interviewing. Comments were noted and suggestions fed into the redesign of the questionnaire. The questionnaire was then re-piloted on 25 companies through telephone interviewing. The final version of the questionnaire was mailed to 2000 companies and a covering letter and pre-paid envelope were included.

Sufficient responses were received to allow statistical analysis and the responses were weighted in line with the total number of organisations in each industry sector, so conclusions could be drawn about the population as a whole.

There is a reasonably high reported level of awareness of health and safety legislation, but a sizeable minority of companies have little awareness, and do not record accident data. About 40% of the companies who reported being aware of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations said they had not conducted a risk assessment of workplace transport. These finding suggest that there is considerable scope for improving the promulgation of regulations, guidance on good practice, and enforcement.

As the number of vehicles on site increases, the rated effectiveness of vehicle safety measures, safe systems of work, and personal protective equipment decreases. However, the use of training, selection and site safety engineering measures and signs tends to increase. It may be that, with many vehicles on site, the complexity of the safety problem is seen to require these additional types of measure. Also, some sites with many vehicles will be ones in which company­based vehicle safety measures are inappropriate as the cars are owned and maintained outside the control of the organisation.

Control of vehicle movements in the workplace seen as a high priority for 41% of the sampled companies, and 52% of the sample said they had conducted risk assessments to identify and evaluate the risks posed. All participating companies have implemented some measures to control workplace transport safety. The

v

measures implemented by the most companies are suitable and effective brakes on vehicles, horns on vehicles and suitable lighting in the workplace.

There was a tendency for implementation and perceived effectiveness scores for workplace transport safety control measures to increase as number of employees increased. Such a tendency is probably to be expected since larger companies will tend to have more complex workplace transport safety problems requiring a wider spectrum of control measures. However, another part of the explanation may be that larger companies have better organised and better resourced health and safety functions, suggesting that the smaller companies may be a particularly important target for future efforts to improve workplace transport safety.

Phase 2 of this project will explore further the above issues, and other issues raised by the work to date.

vi

1. INTRODUCTION

The Health and Safety at Work Act, 1974, states:

‘It shall be the duty of every employer to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of his employees.’ (Section 2(1)).

Section 3 of the Act extends the employer’s duty of care to include the health and safety of persons not in his employment who may be affected by the risks posed by his undertaking.

Underpinning this Act are the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations, 1999. These state that every employer shall conduct a suitable and sufficient assessment of the risk to the health and safety of persons in his employment and persons who may be affected by his undertaking. The employer must record the findings of this assessment and implement any preventative or protective measures to reduce the risks posed, as low as reasonably practicable.

Therefore, legislation requires a risk assessment to be conducted for all workplace activities including workplace transport. Workplace transport refers to any vehicle or piece of mobile equipment, used by employers, employees, self-employed people or visitors in any work setting, with the exception of travelling on public roads. Examples of workplace transport vehicles and equipment are listed below:

· Cars · Vans · Fork Lift Trucks · Heavy Goods Vehicles · Light Goods Vehicles · Industrial Trucks · Mobile Equipment · Dumper Trucks · Straddle Carriers · Rubber Tyred Gantries · Self Propelled Machinery · Motorcycles · Bicycles

The risks posed by workplace transport must be identified, minimised and controlled. Measures that can be taken to reduce the inherent risk posed by workplace transport are outlined in The Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992. Further Regulations include The Construction (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1996 (only applicable to constructions sites) and The Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations, 1998. Further guidance on workplace transport risks and control measures includes:

· Workplace Transport Safety, HS(G)136

· Managing Vehicle safety at the Workplace, INDG. 199

· Safety Policy Directorate – Workplace Transport

· Danger, Vehicles at Work – HSE video.

1

The HSE hierarchy of risk control measures (HS(G)65) is as follows:

1. Eliminate risks or substitute activity, substance or process by a less hazardous activity/ substance/ process.

2. Combat risk at source by engineering control measures.

3. Minimise risk by suitable safe systems of work, for example reduce exposure to hazards.

4. Mitigate the consequences.

Workplace layout is often the primary control measure, but it is important not to overlook other essential control measures. Workplace transport safety control measures can be grouped into seven main categories:

1. Pedestrian Safety, for example, pedestrian crossings and separate vehicle and pedestrian traffic routes.

2. Traffic Routes, for example, crash barriers and one way systems.

3. Vehicle Safety, for example, seat belts and reversing lights.

4. Safety Measures and Signs, for example, speed ramps and warning signs. (Hereafter referred to as ‘site safety engineering measures and signs’)

5. Safe Systems of Work, for example, designated areas for reversing and overtaking restrictions.

6. Training and Selection, for example, driving assessments and vehicle maintenance training.

7. Personal Protective Equipment, for example, hard hats and high visibility clothing.

On average, 70 people are killed and 2000 seriously injured in workplace transport accidents every year (HSC Newsletter, October 1999). Vehicles are the second highest cause of death in the workplace. Whilst the type of equipment and the working environment may differ significantly across workplaces, transport is recognised as a significant risk for all industries.

The greatest number of deaths from workplace transport arises from the movement of vehicles, including people being struck by objects falling from vehicles (usually part of the load) or vehicles overturning. Reversing vehicles also presents a particular hazard. (HSC Newsletter, October, 1999)

These facts alone demonstrate that the risks posed by workplace transport are not being suitably identified and sufficiently controlled. Therefore, employer’s compliance with UK health and safety legislation is questionable.

It is important to establish the extent that recommended control measures have been implemented and gain an insight into the types of organisation and industry that contribute to the high death rate from workplace transport accidents. Such

2

industries can then be targeted for guidance and assistance from regulatory bodies in the future.

Many organisations have implemented measures and systems to control the risks posed by vehicles in their workplace. It is important to examine these measures, assess their effectiveness in reducing the inherent risk and calculate their cost of implementation and maintenance. Lessons can be learnt from these companies experience and considered when establishing best practice.

The HSE are aware of the large number of industrial accidents that are attributable to workplace transport. The HSE believe that industries hold a negative attitude towards the control of vehicle movements and are concerned that the level of compliance with relevant health and safety legislation is low. The HSE recognises the need to develop a workable, comprehensive and transparent strategy on workplace transport and need information from research to develop supporting material.

This research aims to gain an insight into the types of measures used within industry to control workplace transport and the effectiveness, implementation costs and maintenance costs of such measures. Compliance with legislation will be examined and the reasons why safety problems arising from vehicle movements in workplaces is neglected, explored. From the research, best practice will be established and fed into the HSE transport strategy and future workplace transport guidance.

3

2. AIMS OF THE RESEARCH PROJECT

2.1 OVERALL AIMS

The aims of the project, as specified by the HSE are as follows:

· Determine the types of workplace control measures in use to reduce the risk from vehicle movements.

· Establish the degree to which control measures are implemented across industry and evaluate compliance with Workplace Regulations and the Construction (Health, Safety and Welfare Regulations 1996.

· Review the effectiveness of different types of control measures, their cost of implementation and cost of maintenance.

· Establish changes to the workplace and best practice demonstrated. · Gain an understanding of why the control of vehicle movements in workplaces

is neglected or not seen as a problem. · Examine interface with the public and extended workforce. · Provide six suitable case studies for HSE publications. · Identify further suitable case study material.

4

2.2 DETAILED AIMS OF PHASE ONE

The project is being conducted in two phases. Phase one involves obtaining and analysing data on workplace transport control measures through a postal questionnaire to a number of specified industrial sectors. Phase two involves undertaking more in depth studies of workplace controls through the inspection of 20 industrial sites.

This report deals with phase one, the aims of which are as follows:

§ To determine the types of workplace control measures in use to reduce the risk from vehicle movements.

§ To determine the perceived effectiveness of different types of measures that could be used to control workplace transport.

§ To establish, within the limits imposed by the size of the study, whether the size of company affects the type of control measures implemented and the effectiveness of the measure.

§ To determine whether the control of vehicle movements in the workplace are seen as a high priority and establish whether steps have been taken to identify, evaluate and reduce the risks posed.

§ To discover whether companies claim to be aware of the current health and safety legislation applicable to workplace transport.

5

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 SAMPLE SELECTION

The Health and Safety Executive stipulated in the project specification that data for phase one should be collected from a number of specified industrial sectors. The named sectors were as follows:

· Food · Scrap yards · Woodworking · Road Haulage · Rubber/Plastics · Docks · Engineering · Builders Merchants · Hospitals · Textiles · Warehouses · Printing · Wholesalers · Brick/ Cement · Drink · Construction Sites · Paper · Freight Transport · Glass/ Ceramics · Retail Premises

The HSE also indicated that the sample should include companies with varying numbers of people employed.

Response rates for postal questionnaires vary dramatically depending on the nature of the information being researched, the target population and the incentive being offered to participate. Previous research, of a similar nature, which was conducted for the HSE is the ‘Evaluation of the Six Pack Regulations, 1992’ (Institute of Occupational Medicine). This research achieved a 24% response rate. A similar response rate was expected for this research as a similar group of companies was to be contacted for relatively sensitive information. As recognised in the TRL proposal study, a high response rate was not expected because of the nature of the questionnaire and the companies’ perceived implications with completing it.

Providing adequate statistical power for comparisons between the above industry sectors would require a very large sample for the survey. This was discussed with the HSE customer during the bidding stage, who confirmed that between-sector comparisons were not required. Accordingly, it was decided that a returned sample of 400 questionnaires would be adequate, since this would allow the proportion of companies reporting, for example the use of a particular safety intervention, to be estimated within five percentage points.

Initial contact was made with the Chamber of Commerce with regards to the obtaining the required information for the 2000 companies. They suggested that Dun and Bradstreet would be a more appropriate company to contact as they hold the complete database and could supply the required information on CD-ROM.

A sample of 100 companies from each of the 20 identified industry sectors was selected at random from the Dun and Bradstreet database. Information on the number of companies within each sector was also provided to enable the sample data to be re-weighted.

6

3.2 QUESTIONNAIRE DESIGN

The responses from the questionnaires form the foundations of the research. Obtaining useful information from a relatively high number of respondents was deemed an essential part of ensuring that the research was accurate and successful. Therefore, the questionnaire was meticulously designed and piloted to ensure that the following objectives were met:

i) To obtain useful information from companies in a range of industry sectors with varying number of employees regarding workplace transport, transport control measures and their perceived effectiveness, general workplace safety and compliance with/ knowledge about health and safety legislation.

ii) To achieve a high enough response rate so representative and accurate conclusions could be drawn from the analysis of responses.

iii) To ensure that the questions asked were not misleading, unnecessary or confusing and to minimise the amount of effort required by the respondent to complete them.

The questionnaire design process consisted of four main stages:

3.2.1 Literature Search

A literature search was undertaken to ensure a complete understanding of the hazards associate with workplace transport and the control measures that could be implemented in the workplace to mitigate these risks. All relevant legislation and guidance was also obtained to refer to during the process of designing the questionnaire.

3.2.2 Brainstorming

Key technical members of the project team undertook a brainstorming session to create a list of all control measures that could potentially reduce the inherent risk posed by workplace transport. 130 control measures were listed and were categorised into 7 groups: i) Vehicle safety ii) Pedestrian safety iii) Site safety engineering measures and signs iv) Workplace safety v) Safe systems of work vi) Training vii) Personal protective equipment

The list of control measures is intended to be used both in the phase one questionnaire survey and in the site visits, to be conducted in phase two.

3.2.3 Initial Questionnaire Design.

A high response rate was not expected from the questionnaire because of the nature of the information being sought and the company’s perceived implications of providing it. It was therefore important to maximise the response rate through ensuring minimal burden on the respondent, encouraging response through the careful design of a covering letter and informing the participant that there would be no repercussions by assuring complete confidentiality and anonymity.

7

A time limit of 20 minutes was aimed for, to maximise the response rate. It was decided that an eight page questionnaire could be completed within this time frame.

3.2.4 Piloting

Due to the complexity of the research it was deemed essential to thoroughly pilot the questionnaire. Two piloting procedures were conducted. Pilot one involved contacting ten local companies to ask for their permission to involve them in the study, mailing a questionnaire to the volunteering companies and following this up with a face to face interview, where any problems encountered when answering the questionnaire were discussed. Pilot two involved mailing a questionnaire to 25 companies and following this up with a telephone interview to discuss any issues with the content or completion of the questionnaire.

All companies were selected from the internet and local business guides. It was important to ensure that the piloted industries reflected the industries to be included in the final sample. Therefore the companies selected were of varying size and age of premises, and from different industry sectors.

The HSE customer also reviewed the questionnaire and comments were made.

All comments made by the pilot companies and the HSE were deemed valid and a subsequent version of the questionnaire was designed incorporating the suggestions made. Further information on the questionnaire design and pilot studies can be found in Appendix One. The final questionnaire is shown in Appendix Two. It included questions on the age of premises, size of the company, methods of transport used within the company, safety information recorded, details of transport accidents encountered, general workplace transport safety, awareness of legislation and the measures in place to control workplace transport, the extent to which they had been implemented and their perceived effectiveness.

3.3 MAILING OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE

Questionnaires were mailed to 2000 companies i.e 100 companies randomly selected from the Dun and Bradstreet database for each of the 20 specified industry sectors. Covering letters were enclosed with the questionnaire explaining the purpose of the research and assuring anonymity and confidentiality. A TRL contact name and number was included on the letter, so respondents could seek assurance if required. The letters were addressed to the safety manager, as the pilot studies revealed this as the best option. Pre-paid envelopes were also included to reduce the participating companies’ expenditure and to increase the likelihood of response.

Reminder letters, questionnaires and pre-paid envelopes were mailed to non­responding companies after three weeks. These companies were then given a further two weeks to respond.

3.4 ANALYSIS

All responses from the returned questionnaires were input into a spreadsheet created on Microsoft Access software. The primary aim of the analysis was to fulfil the objectives set for phase one as listed in section one.

8

3.4.1 Weighting of responses

Randomly sampling 100 organisations from each of the 20 industry sectors gives at least a limited possibility of being able to make comparisons between sectors. However it does not produce a representative sample of the total population of companies across all the sectors: companies from small industrial sectors will be over-represented in the sample. For some analyses the sample data were re­weighted to provide population estimates using a standard procedure, that is the weights being calculated as:

Weight for sector i = (population for sector i x total sample)/(sample for sector i x total population)

3.4.2 Analysis

For the majority of the questions, frequency counts, percentages or mean scores for each response category were calculated.

The questionnaire included 90 questions relating to workplace transport safety control measures.

Respondents were asked to tick boxes to indicate whether the work site had implemented the identified control measure and to what extent, as well as assigning a score of effectiveness for each implemented control measure between 1 and 5. The 90 control measures were grouped into the seven categories, as listed below:

· Pedestrian safety · Traffic routes · Vehicle safety · Site safety engineering measures and signs · Safe systems of work · Training/selection · Personal protective equipment

Three scores were calculated for each of the seven categories as follows:

Implementation Score: respondents ticked a box to indicate the percentage of “appropriate places” in which the control measure was implemented.

Response Mid point percentage Yes, 100% 100%

Yes, 75-100% 87.5% Yes, 50-75% 62.5%

Yes, less than 50% 25% No, but needed 0% No, not needed n/a

Don’t know n/a

Since a response box covered a range of percentages, the mid point of that range was used in the calculation of the score. The implementation score for a category of control measures was calculated as the mean of these mid points values for all measures in the category, treating n/a as not contributing to the score.

9

Effectiveness score: this was the average of the effectiveness ratings for all control measures in the category of safety measures. ‘Not applicable’ responses were treated as not contributing to the score, and missing ratings were assigned a value of 3.

Combined implementation and effectiveness score: this was calculated as: Combined score = å(percenti x effectivei)/ åeffectivei

3.4.3 Tests of statistical significance

Some of the analyses presented in this report seek to determine whether variables such as implementation or effectiveness scores differ between industry sectors, between sizes of company, or according to the number of vehicles on site. One­way analysis of variance was used here to establish whether there was any statistical significant association between the variables. Having detected a significant association, a technique attributable to Duncan (1975) was used to explore which industry sectors, company sizes etc were responsible for the effect. This technique ensures that the ‘type – 1 error rate’ is maintained at the desired level (in this case 5 per cent) regardless of how many comparisons are made.

10

4. RESULTS

Questionnaires were mailed to 2000 randomly selected companies of varying industry sector and company size. 63 questionnaires were returned to TRL as undelivered.

In total 275 companies responded to the questionnaire. 226 companies answered all questions and 49 companies only answered section A. Table 1 shows the population of industries, the achieved sample and the weighting factors referred to in section 3.4.1.

Table 1 Population of industries, achieved sample and weighting factors

Sector Population Achieved sample Weight

brick/cement 3212 16 0.29 builders merchants 5099 8 0.92 construction 1432 18 0.11 docks 1111 13 0.12 drink 2321 20 0.17 engineering 3432 18 0.28 food 5349 18 0.43 freight transport 4712 9 0.76 glass/ceramics 4543 13 0.50 hospitals 5643 26 0.31 paper 23433 17 1.99 printing 2343 7 0.48 road haulage 23432 2 16.90 retail premises 63200 11 8.29 rubber/plastics 399 20 0.03 scrap yards 5003 16 0.45 textiles 2399 4 0.87 warehouses 4321 18 0.35 wholesalers 21343 11 2.80 woodworking 7887 10 1.14

190614 275

4.1 RESPONDENT’S ROLE

Question A1 – What is your role within this organisation?

Table 2 identifies the roles of the questionnaire respondents. The responses to the response option ‘other’ included several similar roles. Thus a new category was formed 'Director/Owner' which included director, managing director, owner, company owner, proprietor, working partner, works director. The remaining responses were kept as 'other'.

11

Table 2 The roles of the questionnaire respondents

Response Category Middle Manager Safety Advisor

Safety/ Risk Manager Senior Manager

Shop Floor Worker Supervisor

Transport Manager Director/ Owner

Other

Number of responses 16 29 54 74 1 2

11 43 17

Percentage 6.5% 11.7% 21.9% 30% 0.4% 0.8% 4.5%

17.4% 6.9%

It can be seen from the above table that the majority of respondents were senior managers within the participating organisation. A large number of safety or risk managers also responded.

4.2 AGE OF COMPANY AND PREMISES

Question A2 – How many years has the company been established? Question A3 – How many years has the company been operating from this site? Question A4 – How old are the buildings on this site, within which your company operates?

Responses to these questions are summarised in Table 3.

Table 3 Responses to questions A2, A3 and A4.

Number of responses for each response category (%) 0-2 3-5 6-10 11-15 16-25 26-40 Over

QA2. Number of years the company has been established?

QA3. Number of years the company has been operating from this site?

QA4. The age of the buildings on the site?

6 2.4%

25 9.8%

29 8.4%

35 13.9%

51 20%

38 11%

90 35.7%

81 31.9%

43 12.5%

21% 8.3%

20 7.9%

49 11.3%

33 13%

30 11.8%

50 14.5%

23 9.1%

16 6.3%

53 15.4%

44 17.5%

31 12.2%

83 24.1%

The majority of responding companies have been established between six and ten years, with only 2% being less than 2 years old.

32% of the buildings on the responding companies premises have been built in the last ten years. This is a positive factor as they ought to have been built to incorporate the requirements of the six pack regulations. However, 68% of the buildings are over ten years old, with 24% of all buildings being over 40 years old.

12

40

4.3 SIZE OF ORGANISATION

4.3.1 Employees

Question A5 - How many employees are there within the company?

It can be seen from Table 4 that the majority of responding companies have less than 10 employees. However there is a range of company size across the sample, with the largest company having 6000 employees.

Table 4 Number of employees in the responding companies in each industry sector

0-10 11-20 21-40 Number of permanent staff

41-60 61-100 101-200 201-1k 1001-6k TOTAL Brick/cement Builders

10 5

1 2

1 1 1

2 1 16 8

merchant Construction 12 3 1 18 Docks 4 4 1 1 2 13 Drinks 7 1 1 1 2 4 2 1 20 Engineering Food

8 2 1

1 5 2

1 5

2 2

1 2

18 18

Freight 7 1 9 transport Glass/ceramic Hospitals Paper Printing Road haulage Retail premises Rubber Plastics

5 2 5 3

4 2

1

3

1

4

3 1 1 1

1 5

1 2 3

1 1

2 4 2

2 1

1 2 1

5

1 3 1

2

13 13 26 17 7 2 11 20

Scrap yards Textiles

5 2

4 1 1 3 16 4

Warehouses 7 1 6 2 1 18 Wholesalers 6 2 3 11 Woodworking TOTAL

7 101

1 28

2 36 13 26 22 15 14

10 275

13

4.3.2 Non-permanent members of staff

Question A6 - How many non-permanent members of staff work at this site, in a typical month?

Table 5 Number of non-permanent members of staff working in the responding companies in

each industry sector

Number of non-permanent staff 0-10 11-20 21-40 41-60 61-100 101-200 201-1000 TOTAL 14 1 16 6 8

13 18 10 1 13 9 3 2 1 1 20 10 2 1 18 11 2 2 18 8 9

11 1 13 9 5 1 1 4 1 2 26 15 1 17 5 1 7 2 2 8 11 15 2 1 1 20 9 1 2 16

4 13 2 18 10 11 7 10

185 19 7 5 7 2 2 275

Brick/cement Builders merchant Construction Docks Drinks Engineering Food Freight transport Glass/ceramic Hospitals Paper Printing Road haulage Retail premises Rubber Plastics Scrap yards Textiles Warehouses Wholesalers Woodworking TOTAL

The majority of responding companies employ less than 10 non-permanent members of staff per month. Companies from a few industry sectors such as hospitals and glass and ceramics employ more than 100 non-permanent members of staff per month.

4.4 VEHICLES ON SITE

Question A8 – Which of the following vehicles are used at, or driven onto this work site and in what quantity?

Ten different vehicle types were identified under question A8. The respondent was required to indicate the number of vehicles and identify whether this was a daily, weekly or monthly figure. A monthly figure has been calculated for each response, so that the number of vehicles could be standardised. This assumes that there are 22 working days per month and 4 working weeks. Therefore a daily figure of 10 cars becomes 220 per month. If no frequency field was completed, it has been assumed that this is a daily figure. There had to be at least one vehicle of that category per month in order to contribute to any statistics. Table 6 shows the average monthly vehicles, by vehicle type and sector. There is also a count of the number of contributing respondents.

14

Table 6 Average monthly vehicles by sector

Count Bicycles

Mean Cars Mean

Dumper Trucks Mean

ForkliftMean

12 195.5 1,153.8 22.0 132.0 7 121.0 484.0 22.0 26.4 15 22.0 194.3 . 22.0 10 58.7 576.9 22.0 84.3 18 194.9 1,673.3 . 83.9 11 506.0 853.1 . 44.0 17 132.0 710.9 18.0 76.2 3 . 799.3 220.0 66.0 13 118.8 658.2 . 88.0 23 719.5 16,878.6 22.0 29.3 16 69.1 591.1 . 94.0 5 117.3 335.5 . 88.0 2 44.0 880.0 . 44.0 6 88.0 699.2 . 22.0 19 117.6 862.7 22.0 63.8 13 77.0 234.4 44.0 44.4 17 121.0 1,126.4 . 127.6 10 66.0 249.3 . 26.4 9 22.0 102.3 . 22.6

226 266.1 2,324.7 40.9 74.1

Brick/cement Builders merchants Construction Docks Drinks Engineering Food Freight transport Glass/ceramic Hospitals Paper Printing Road haulage Retail premises Rubber/plastics Scrap yards Warehouses Wholesalers Woodworking Sample Overall

Heavy Goods Motorcycles Mobile Vehicles Equipment

Count Mean Mean Mean 12 134.5 139.3 . 7 234.0 33.0 . 15 42.3 26.4 . 10 662.4 39.6 66.0 18 550.3 64.8 264.0 11 75.0 198.0 . 17 192.6 104.5 44.0 3 528.0 66.0 22.0 13 116.7 61.6 44.0 23 247.1 371.8 229.4 16 102.4 94.3 . 5 154.0 66.0 . 2 610.0 88.0 . 6 66.0 . 44.0 19 144.0 75.8 22.0 13 268.9 51.3 . 17 660.0 39.6 22.0 10 100.0 22.0 . 9 29.1 22.0 .

226 272.2 142.5 136.1

Brick/cement Builders merchants Construction Docks Drinks Engineering Food Freight transport Glass/ceramic Hospitals Paper Printing Road haulage Retail premises Rubber/plastics Scrap yards Warehouses Wholesalers Woodworking Sample Overall

15

Self Propelled Machinery Trucks Vans Count Mean Mean Mean Brick/cement Builders merchants

12 7

88.0 .

36.7 137.5

116.0 289.3

Construction 15 . 58.0 86.3 Docks 10 22.0 29.5 187.4 Drinks 18 44.0 154.0 238.0 Engineering Food

11 17

22.0 29.3

44.0 53.4

220.7 146.8

Freight transport Glass/ceramic Hospitals Paper Printing Road haulage Retail premises Rubber/plastics Scrap yards Warehouses

3 13 23 16 5 2 6 19 13 17

22.0 22.0 207.4 44.0

. 44.0

. 77.0

. 36.7

44.0 61.6 315.9 66.0 33.0 88.0 94.0 74.2 40.4 138.3

418.0 113.6

1,076.8 89.1 396.0 130.0 148.5 122.8 174.4 283.1

Wholesalers 10 . 60.0 83.6 Woodworking Sample Overall

9 226

22.0 78.0

25.2 110.5

37.3 269.4

By a large margin, the most commonly used vehicles within the workplace are cars. Heavy goods vehicles are the next most frequently used vehicles within the workplace and dumper trucks are the least prominent vehicle within the workplace.

4.5 ACCIDENT AND INCIDENT RECORDING

Question 11 – is the following information recorded in your company: a) Accidents (damage to property) b) Injuries to people c) Near misses d) Safety objectives e) Safety performance indicators f) Spillage

Table 7 Information recorded by sample of companies

Number of responses for each response category Yes No Don’t Know Accidents 197 (90%) 19 (9%) 2 (1%) Injuries to people Near Misses

208 (94%) 124 (58%)

12 (5%) 81 (38%)

1 (1%) 8 (4%)

Safety Objectives Safety Performance Indicators Spillage

169 (80%) 101 (50%) 118 (58%)

37 (18%) 91 (45%) 76 (37%)

4 (2%) 11 (5%) 9 (5%)

Nine per cent of responding companies do not record accidents within the workplace. A large number of companies do not record near misses, indicating a poor safety management system and reporting culture.

16

4.6 INJURY ACCIDENTS AND FATALITIES

Question 12 – over the past three years have there been any of the following vehicle accidents on your company site? a) Vehicle accidents causing death b) Vehicle accidents causing major injury (requiring the injured person to have more than three days off work) c) Vehicle accidents causing minor injury (requiring the injured person to have less than three days off work)

Table 8 Accidents reported by the survey sample and industry sector

Sector Number of vehicle Number of vehicle Number of vehicle accidents causing

death accidents causing

major injury accidents causing

minor injury Brick/cementDocks

1 4

1 3

Drinks 1 3 4 Engineering Food

1 1 2

Glass/ceramic Hospitals Paper Printing Rubber/plastics Scrap yards Warehouses

2

2 3

2 3

1 6 2 2 3 1 2

Wholesalers 1 Group Total 3 21 27

In the sample, companies from 13 industry sectors had encountered fatal, major or minor accidents. The companies from the seven remaining sectors either had not encountered any of these accidents, not recorded the accidents that had occurred or failed to complete the question. Two out of the three fatal accidents had occurred within scrap yards and the majority of major accidents had occurred at docks. Out of 275 responding companies 51 accidents had been recorded. This figure is higher than the average number of accidents recorded to the HSE. This may indicate that the companies who responded to the questionnaire have a higher reporting culture than those who did not respond.

4.7 INCIDENTS

Question 13 - Over the past three years, have there been any of the following incidents at this site involving workplace transport?

a) Objects falling from vehicles b) People falling from vehicles c) Vehicles overturning d) People struck by a vehicle e) People run over by a vehicle f) People hit by objects dislodged by vehicles g) People injured getting on or off vehicles. h) Vehicle malfunctioning causing accident or injury. i) Collision between vehicles j) Collision between vehicles and property. k) Accident or injury occurring during maintenance of vehicle l) Loading/ unloading of vehicles causing accident or injury.

17

Table 9 Total number of each incident type for sample

Incident Type Total Number Objects falling from vehicles 24 People falling from vehicles 11 Vehicles overturning 12 People struck by a vehicle 16 People run over by a vehicle 1 People hit by objects dislodged by vehicles 1 People injured getting on or off vehicles. 32 Vehicle malfunctioning causing accident or injury. 6 Collision between vehicles 36 Collision between vehicles and property. 70 Accident or injury occurring during maintenance of vehicle 4 Loading/ Unloading of vehicles causing accident or injury. 29

The majority of the incidents experienced within the responding companies involved vehicles colliding with property. Relatively few incidents have occurred where a pedestrian was injured by a moving vehicle.

18

4.8 OPINIONS ON WORKPLACE TRANSPORT SAFETY

Question B1 – Please indicate how much you agree or disagree with the following statements:

a) This company has taken appropriate steps to ensure workplace transport safety b) The workplace is rarely tidy c) The workplace is organised so vehicles and pedestrians can operate in a safe manner d) Employees understand the dangers of workplace transport e) We have a problem with reversing vehicles. f) This company has found it difficult to reduce dangers arising from workplace transport.

The respondents were asked to indicate whether they strongly agreed, agreed, neither agreed or disagreed, disagreed or strongly disagreed with each statement. The responses were scored as follows:

Strongly Agree = 1 Agree = 2 Neither Agree or Disagree = 3 Disagree = 4 Strongly Disagree = 5

The mean score for each statement was calculated for each industry sector:

19

Table 10 The mean score for each statement by industry sector

This company has The workplace is The workplace is taken appropriate steps rarely tidy organised so vehicles

to ensure workplace and pedestrians can transport safety operate in a safe

manner A low number is good A high number is good A low number is good

Brick/cement Builders

2.08 2.00

3.50 3.86

2.67 2.00

merchant Construction 1.86 3.86 1.71 Docks 1.75 3.50 2.13 Drinks 1.94 4.22 1.94 Engineering Food

1.70 2.19

4.30 4.06

1.70 2.25

Freight transport Glass/ceramic Hospitals Paper Printing Road haulage Retail premises Rubber Plastics

1.67 1.85 2.00 1.47 1.80 2.00 1.33 2.21

5.00 4.08 4.17 4.50 3.80 4.50 4.17 4.16

1.33 1.85 2.30 1.79 2.20 2.00 1.83 2.11

Scrap yards Warehouses

1.54 1.47

4.00 4.35

1.62 1.63

Wholesalers 1.70 4.00 1.80 Woodworking Sample total

1.89 1.84

4.22 4.10

2.11 1.98

20

Table 10 contd.

Employees We have a problem This company has understand the with reversing found it difficult to

dangers of workplace vehicles reduce dangers arising transport from workplace

A low number is good

Brick/cement Builders merchant Construction Docks Drinks Engineering Food Freight transport Glass/ceramic Hospitals Paper Printing Road haulage Retail premises Rubber Plastics Scrap yards Warehouses Wholesalers Woodworking

2.33 2.00

1.93 1.63 2.06 1.80 2.06 1.33 1.75 2.26 1.73 1.80 1.50 1.50 2.05 1.54 1.59 1.90 2.11 1.91

A high number is good 4.00 4.14

3.77 4.13 3.56 4.20 4.00 4.33 4.25 3.30 4.31 4.20 3.50 4.00 3.89 3.92 4.13 4.00 3.89 3.93

transport A high number is good

3.83 3.43

4.23 3.50 3.67 4.10 3.81 4.33 4.33 3.70 4.25 3.60 4.00 4.50 3.95 4.31 4.18 4.00 3.78 3.96Sample total

As discussed in section 2, the sample size means that the survey cannot be relied upon to detect as statistically significant any between-sector differences that exist, unless they are very big. That is, the survey has low statistical power for such comparisons. Nevertheless, it was thought worthwhile to test for such differences. Table 11 gives the results of a one-way analysis of variance showing that only for statements 3 and 4 were there between-sector differences significant at the p=0.05 level, though between-sector differences for statements 1 and 5 approached significance.

21

Table 11 A one-way analysis of variance to determine significant differences between industry

sectors

Sum of Squares

df Mean Square

F p.

1 This company has taken appropriate steps to ensure workplace transport safety

Between Groups

Within Groups Total

13.748

94.949 108.697

18

199 217

.764

.477

1.601 .063

2 The workplace is rarely tidy Between Groups Within Groups Total

16.557

170.039 186.595

18

201 219

.920

.846

1.087 .367

3 The workplace is organised so vehicles and pedestrians can operate in a safe

Between Groups

18.118 18 1.007 1.842 .023*

manner Within Groups Total

108.768 126.885

199 217

.547

4 Employees understand the dangers of workplace

Between Groups

14.052 18 .781 1.949 .014*

transport Within Groups Total

80.122 94.174

200 218

.401

5 We have a problem with reversing vehicles

Between Groups Within Groups Total

18.866

131.959 150.826

18

199 217

1.048

.663

1.581 .068

6 This company has found it difficult to reduce dangers arising from workplace

Between Groups

17.036 18 .946 1.109 .345

transport Within Groups 170.672 200 .853 Total 187.708 218

*difference between sectors significance at the P = 0.05 level

Tables 12.1 and 12.2 that follow use Duncan’s technique (see Section 3) to explore which industry groups give rise to these differences.

22

Table 12.1 Means for groups in homogenous subsets (computed by Duncan’s technique) “The workplace is organised so vehicles and pedestrians can operate in a safe

manner”

Subsets N 1 2 3

Freight transport Scrap yards Warehouses

3 13 16

1.33 1.62 1.63

1.62 1.63

Engineering Construction

10 14

1.70 1.71

1.70 1.71

Paper Wholesalers

14 10

1.79 1.80

1.79 1.80

1.79 1.80

Retail premises Glass/ceramic Drinks

6 13 18

1.83 1.85 1.94

1.83 1.85 1.94

1.83 1.85 1.94

Builders merchant 7 2.00 2.00 2.00 Road haulage Rubber Plastics

2 19

2.00 2.11

2.00 2.11

2.00 2.11

Woodworking Docks

9 8

2.11 2.13

2.11 2.13

2.11 2.13

Printing Food

5 16

2.20 2.20 2.25

2.20 2.25

Hospitals Brick/cement

23 12

2.30 2.30 2.67

Table 12.1 shows that for this statement, the responses given by the freight transport, scrap yards, warehouses, engineering and construction industry sectors are significantly different from the responses given by the food, hospitals and brick cement industry sectors. Respondents in the industry sectors listed first on the above table agreed strongly that their workplace was organised so that pedestrians and vehicles could operate in a safe manner.

23

Table 12.2 Means for groups in homogenous subsets (computed by Duncan’s technique)

“Employees understand the dangers of workplace transport”

Subsets N 1 2 3

Freight transport 3 Road haulage 2 Retail premises 6 Scrap yards 13 Warehouses 17 Docks 8 Paper 15 Glass/ceramic 12 Engineering 10 Printing 5 Wholesalers 10 Construction 14 Builders merchant 7 Rubber Plastics 19 Drinks 18 Food 16 Woodworking 9 Hospitals 23 Brick/cement 12

1.33 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.54 1.54 1.59 1.59 1.59 1.63 1.63 1.63 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.90 1.90 1.90 1.93 1.93 1.93 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.05 2.05 2.05 2.06 2.06 2.06 2.06 2.06 2.06

2.11 2.11 2.26 2.26

2.33

The table above reveals that the responses for the industry sectors freight transport, road haulage, retail premises and scrap yards were statistically significantly more positive than those of the industry sector brick/cement.

24

4.9 WORKPLACE TRANSPORT SAFETY MEASURES

Question B2 – Respondents were asked to indicate whether their company had conducted certain measures to control workplace transport, for example regularly inspecting vehicles.

Table 13 Responses to question B2 about whether certain control measures have been

implemented

Number of responses and percentage of total responses for that question

Control measure Yes No Don’t Not Applicable Know

A risk assessment has been 113 69 7 28 conducted for our workplace (52%) (32%) (3%) (13%) transport Traffic and warning signs in the 70 79 4 66 workplace are the same as those (32%) (36%) (2%) (30%) found on public highways. Regular inspections and services are 193 7 4 16 carried out on all vehicles, in (88%) (3%) (2%) (7%) accordance with manufacturer’s recommendations. Control of vehicle movements is a 113 59 11 33 priority within this organisation. (52%) (27%) (5%) (16%) Documented daily/ weekly safety 115 60 13 31 checks are conducted on vehicles. (53%) (27%) (6%) (14%) Persons required to drive company 116 65 12 26 vehicles have their driving licence (53%) (30%) (5%) (12%) checked annually.

Over one quarter of the responding companies have not conducted a risk assessment for their workplace transport and over 50% of companies do not have traffic signs that are the same as those found on public highways. However, almost all participating companies reported conducting regular inspections of their vehicles. 53% of companies responded affirmatively to the other three items, that is: the control of vehicle movements is a priority within their organisation; documented daily/ weekly safety checks are conducted on vehicles; persons required to drive company vehicles have their driving licence checked annually.

25

4.10 AWARENESS OF LEGISLATION

Question C1 – Respondents were asked to tick the legislation they felt was appropriate to their company.

Table 14 Overall awareness of health and safety legislation

Legislation Health and Safety at Work Act 1974

Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998

Construction (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1996 Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 1994 Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences, 1995

Number of responses in each category and percentage of total responses for that question.

Yes No Don’t Know 207 (74%) 4 (1%) 68 (25%)

190 (89%) 6 (3%) 17 (8%)

190 (89%) 6 (3%) 18 (8%)

160 (76%) 28 (13%) 22 (11%)

73 (36%) 99 (49%) 29 (15%)

62 (30%) 106 (52%) 36 (18%)

184 (85%) 14 (6%) 18 (9%)

An encouraging number of companies claimed to be familiar with The Health and Safety at Work Act and the six pack regulations. However, although 190 companies said they were familiar with The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999, only 113 had conducted a risk assessment. This suggests that either respondents felt they ought to be familiar with the regulations and were not, or they were familiar with the regulations but were not compliant.

4.11 IMPLEMENTATION AND EFFECTIVENESS OF WORKPLACE TRANSPORT SAFETY CONTROL MEASURES

Question D1 – Control measures for pedestrian safety Question D2 – Control measures for traffic routes Question D3 – Control measures for vehicle safety Question D4 – Site safety engineering measures and signs for workplace transport safety Question D5 – Safe systems of work for workplace transport safety Question D6 – Training and selection for workplace transport safety Question D7 – Personal protective equipment for workplace transport safety

4.11.1 All sectors combined

A number of control measures were identified for each question and respondents were asked to indicate whether their companies had implemented the control measure, to what extent, and the perceived effectiveness of that measure. Table 15 shows the control measure which has been implemented by the greatest number of companies and the average extent to which it has been implemented at those companies, and the control measure which has been implemented by the fewest companies and the average extent to which it has been implemented. The

26

table also shows the control measure that was perceived as the most effective and the least effective by the companies that had implemented the control measure.

Table 15 The most and least common control measure and the most and least effective control

measure for each category of control measure.

Question Most Least Most effective Least Common Common Effective

Pedestrian safety Separate vehicle,

pedestrian and public doors

(130 companies

implemented the measure in

72.3% of all

Pedestrian deterrent

paving (25 companies

implemented the measure in

32% of all necessary

places)

Separate vehicle,

pedestrian and public doors

(mean score = 3.6)

Subways/ footbridges for

pedestrians (mean score =

3.0)

necessary places)

Traffic routes Easy access for emergency vehicles (186 companies

implemented the measure in

92% of all

Safety banks to prevent

vehicles from overturning (29

companies implemented

the measure in

Forklift truck routes

avoiding public roads (mean score = 4.0)

Mirrors on vehicles to aid visibility (mean

score = 3.2)

necessary places)

30.2% of all necessary

places) Vehicle safety Suitable and

effective CCTV on

vehicles to aid Suitable and

effective Radar sensors to warn drivers

brakes on vehicles (198 companies on 98.7% of the necessary vehicles)

reversing (22 companies on

25% of the necessary vehicles)

brakes on vehicles (mean

score = 4.1)

if reversing too close to

vehicles (mean score = 3.2)

Site safety engineering measures and signs

Clearly displayed

speed limits (112

companies implemented

the measure in

Speed activated

warning signs (22 companies implemented

the measure in 34.7% of all

Guide humps installed in

HGV parking bays (mean score = 3.6)

Speed activated

warning signs (mean score =

3.1)

73.1% of all necessary

places)

necessary places)

Safe systems of work Hours driven by each driver monitored and regular breaks provided (107

companies implemented

the measure in 58.1% of all

Operational procedures to protect driver

during un/loading of HGV’s (98 companies

implemented the measure in

Restriction of vehicle

movement when known

influx of personnel

(mean score = 3.8)

Hours driven by each driver monitored and regular breaks

provided (mean score =

3.2)

necessary situations)

86.7% of all necessary situations)

27

Training and selection Suitable selection

process for drivers (153 companies

implemented the measure in

Impairment testing of

drivers (80 companies test drivers 33.8% of the time)

Suitable selection

process for drivers (mean score = 3.7)

Impairment testing of

drivers (mean score = 3.1)

85.3% of all necessary

cases) Personal protective equipment

Provision of necessary

PPE for staff

High visibility clothing for

workers in all

Steel toe capped boots

for all

High visibility clothing for

workers in all and visitors

(140 companies

implement the 91% of all

transport areas (124

companies implement the

measure in

employees (mean score =

3.8)

transport areas (mean score =

3.5)

necessary situations)

73.9% of all necessary situations)

It can be seen from Table 15 that the control measure implemented by the largest number of companies, is not necessarily the control measure that has been implemented to the greatest extent by the companies who have implemented it. For example 107 companies have implemented regular breaks and monitoring of hours but have only implemented these in 58% of the places that are necessary. More detailed data can be found in Appendix 3.

Further analysis was then conducted to determine whether variables such as industry sector, number and type of accident, number of vehicles or size of company had any significant effect on the control measures implemented.

As explained in the methodology section, control measures were grouped into the seven categories of pedestrian safety, traffic routes, vehicle safety, site safety engineering measures and signs, safe systems of work, training and selection and personal protective equipment. For each control measure category there are three figures, each calculated as described in section 2.

a) percentage implementation b) effectiveness score c) combined implementation/ effectiveness score

4.11.2 Control measures and sector

Table 16 The average mid point of responses for each control measure category

Pedestrian safety

implementation

Traffic routes implementation

Vehicle safety implementation

Site safety engineering

measures and signs

implementation Brick/cement 57.1 72.2 80.1 60.5 Builders 72.6 83.3 91.9 50.1 merchants Construction 73.7 65.6 92.6 27.8 Docks 69.4 87.3 94.6 74.1 Drinks 39.7 65.0 89.9 47.0

28

Engineering 64.4 88.2 96.1 57.9 Food 61.5 81.8 86.2 57.8 Freight 84.4 89.6 78.3 63.7 transport Glass/ceramic 76.9 86.6 95.3 53.0 Hospitals 54.9 69.1 82.3 69.9 Paper 67.5 83.9 87.0 75.6 Printing 56.8 81.7 75.5 81.9 Road haulage 34.7 83.3 91.3 75.0 Retail premises 81.4 79.0 80.7 56.6 Rubber/plastics 64.4 78.2 83.0 58.9 Scrap yards 54.6 76.0 89.4 54.3 Warehouses 67.9 81.2 84.7 62.2 Wholesalers 76.0 82.3 86.7 39.1 Woodworking 70.3 78.4 92.7 45.8 Sample overall 63.0 77.8 87.3 58.9 Weighted total 66.3 80.6 85.6 60.6 (population estimate)

Table 16 (contd.)

Training and Safe systems of Personal protective selection work equipment implementation

implementation implementation Brick/cement 73.0 37.7 96.2 Builders 42.1 59.7 87.9 merchants Construction 54.2 47.2 83.2 Docks 96.7 75.9 92.9 Drinks 54.1 41.4 83.2 Engineering 74.3 39.7 100.0 Food 69.4 58.4 85.1 Freight 72.9 88.9 100.0 transport Glass/ceramic 64.0 63.5 90.6 Hospitals 47.5 59.6 69.9 Paper 62.4 82.7 89.5 Printing 78.2 83.8 46.7 Road haulage 78.5 77.2 56.3 Retail premises 38.8 66.3 91.3 Rubber/plastics 54.0 49.6 73.4 Scrap yards 77.9 72.7 87.2 Warehouses 67.5 72.5 96.1 Wholesalers 82.0 82.0 74.4 Woodworking 61.6 57.3 89.6 Sample overall 63.1 60.9 83.8 Weighted total 60.6 69.8 82.0 (population estimate)

Table 16 shows the percentage implementation score for each category of control measure in each sector, together with the weighted score that estimates the overall population score for the industry sectors covered by the sample. The implementation score is the average extent to which the group of control measures have been implemented by those companies who have indicated that the control measures are applicable to their company.

29

Tables 17 and 18 present the effectiveness scores and the combined implementation/ effectiveness scores, in the same way. Table 17 shows that the most effective control measure category is vehicle safety as this scored an average effectiveness of 3.87. Table 18 shows that when effectiveness and the extent to which a control measure has been implemented are combined, vehicle safety scores the highest.

Table 17 Average effectiveness scores for the control measure categories.

Pedestrian Traffic routes Vehicle safety Site safety safety effectiveness effectiveness engineering

effectiveness measures and signs effectiveness

Brick/cement 3.3 3.8 3.8 3.2 Builders merchants 3.5 4.2 4.1 3.0 Construction 3.4 3.4 3.8 3.2 Docks 3.3 3.4 4.4 3.2 Drinks 2.9 3.3 3.5 2.9 Engineering 3.9 3.9 4.1 3.4 Food 3.2 3.7 4.1 3.1 Freight transport 3.3 3.6 4.6 3.3 Glass/ceramic 4.3 4.0 4.0 3.4 Hospitals 3.4 3.6 3.9 3.5 Paper 3.4 3.7 3.7 3.4 Printing 3.6 3.5 3.4 3.7 Road haulage 3.6 4.1 4.3 3.8 Retail premises 3.3 3.1 3.6 2.9 Rubber/plastics 3.6 3.9 4.1 3.4 Scrap yards 3.3 3.7 3.8 3.4 Warehouses 3.7 3.9 3.8 3.6 Wholesalers 2.9 3.3 3.5 3.3 Woodworking 3.1 3.7 3.9 2.7 Sample overall 3.4 3.7 3.9 3.3 Weighted total 3.4 3.5 3.8 3.2 (population estimate)

Safe systems of work Training effectiveness effectiveness

Brick/cement Builders merchants Construction Docks Drinks Engineering Food Freight transport Glass/ceramic Hospitals Paper Printing Road haulage Retail premises

3.0 3.3 3.5 3.6 3.0 3.6 3.4 4.1 3.8 3.3 3.7 3.7 3.6 3.2

3.7 3.4 3.2 3.6 3.2 4.0 3.5 3.7 3.6 3.1 3.3 3.2 4.2 2.9

Personal protective equipment effectiveness

4.0 3.6 3.4 3.9 3.4 4.3 3.7 5.0 4.1 3.4 3.6 3.3 3.8 2.6

30

Rubber/plastics 3.5 3.5 3.9 Scrap yards 3.5 3.4 3.9 Warehouses 3.8 3.5 3.9 Wholesalers 3.6 3.4 3.4 Woodworking 3.4 3.3 3.1 Sample overall 3.5 3.4 3.7 Weighted total (population estimate)

3.4 3.4 3.4

Table 18 Combined implementation and effectiveness scores for all control measure

categories.

Pedestrian Traffic routes Vehicle safety Site safety safety engineering

measures and signs 57.3 73.1 82.9 64.1 75.5 86.5 93.9 50.7 74.5 67.4 93.3 27.8 71.7 86.8 94.7 74.8 40.0 66.9 89.2 48.0 64.5 90.4 97.1 58.5 64.3 84.5 87.9 59.0 84.4 90.4 83.3 63.9 79.1 89.4 97.1 55.8 58.4 71.7 84.4 70.5 68.3 85.0 89.4 76.0 57.2 81.9 75.6 81.9 35.7 85.5 93.6 74.6 81.3 78.4 81.0 55.1 66.6 81.7 85.7 60.6 55.0 77.2 90.8 52.7 71.5 83.1 86.5 65.9 76.3 85.0 88.4 39.1 68.6 78.4 93.3 51.8 64.5 79.7 88.8 60.0 67.0 81.6 86.9 60.3

Brick/cement Builders merchants Construction Docks Drinks Engineering Food Freight transport Glass/ceramic Hospitals Paper Printing Road haulage Retail premises Rubber/plastics Scrap yards Warehouses Wholesalers Woodworking Sample overall Weighted total (population estimate)

Safe systems of work

Training and Personal protective selection equipment

Brick/cement 42.0 75.0 97.0 Builders merchants 66.3 45.6 88.2 Construction 49.1 55.8 84.3 Docks 76.1 97.0 92.9 Drinks 42.4 55.3 84.3 Engineering 40.4 74.7 100.0 Food 62.4 70.4 86.5 Freight transport 89.1 77.3 100.0 Glass/ceramic 68.0 66.8 93.4 Hospitals 60.0 47.6 71.0 Paper 83.4 66.1 91.6 Printing 83.8 78.3 46.7 Road haulage 77.9 80.4 57.1 Retail premises 65.9 38.2 92.5

31

Rubber/plastics 51.7 56.6 74.1 Scrap yards 74.3 77.8 87.7 Warehouses 76.2 69.5 97.0 Wholesalers 84.9 82.3 75.5 Woodworking 57.7 63.0 90.0 Sample overall 63.0 64.6 84.8 Weighted total (population estimate)

70.8 61.7 83.2

Again, although the sample size means that the survey cannot be relied upon to detect between sector differences it was thought worthwhile to conduct a one-way analysis of variance to attempt to detect such differences. The result is shown in Table 19.

Table 19 Statistically significant findings from a one-way analysis of variance to identify

differences between the industry sectors

Sum of Squares

df Mean Square

F p.

Pedestrian safety effectiveness

Between Groups 19.805 18 1.100 1.781 .032

Within Groups 96.397 156 .618 Total 116.202 174

Safe systems of work implementation

Between Groups

Within Groups

35391.385

175674.840

18

166

1966.188

1058.282

1.858 .023

Total 211066.225 184 Safe systems of work combined

Between Groups 35162.716 18 1953.484 1.847 .024

implementation/ effectiveness

Within Groups 175552.530 166 1057.545 Total 210715.247 184

Personal protective equipment implementation

Between Groups

Within Groups

19220.092

89067.185

18

160

1067.783

556.670

1.918 .018

Total 108287.277 178 Personal protective equipment weighted

Between Groups 19488.446 18 1082.691 2.034 .011

average Within Groups 85176.530 160 532.353 Total 104664.975 178

It can be seen from Table 19 that there are significant differences between industry sectors for the perceived effectiveness of control measures for pedestrian safety, the extent control measures have been implemented for safe systems of work and personal protective equipment, and the combination implementation/ effectiveness score for safe systems of work and personal protective equipment.

Duncan’s technique was used to identify which industry sectors were responsible for these differences. Tables 20.1 to 20.5 show the results.

32

Table 20.1 Means for groups in homogenous subsets (computed by Duncan’s technique)

Pedestrian safety effectiveness

Industry Sector Drinks Wholesalers Woodworking Food Retail premises Brick/cement Scrap yards Freight transport Docks Hospitals Paper Construction Builders merchants Rubber/plastics Road haulage Printing Warehouses Engineering Glass/ceramic

Subset N 1 2 15 7 7 15 4 8 12 2 6 20 12 8 6

2.888 2.943 3.143 3.191 3.250 3.281 3.318 3.333 3.344 3.356 3.383 3.391 3.533

3.250 3.281 3.318 3.333 3.344 3.356 3.383 3.391 3.533

16 2 2 13 9 11

3.559 3.575 3.583 3.653 3.889

3.559 3.575 3.583 3.653 3.889 4.321

Industry sectors drink, wholesale, woodwork and food have a lower perception of the effectiveness of pedestrian safety control measures than the glass/ceramic industry sector.

33

Table 20.2 Means for groups in homogenous subsets (computed by Duncan’s technique)

Safe systems of work implementation

Industry sector Brick/cement Engineering Drinks Construction Rubber/plastics Woodworking Food Hospitals Builders merchants Glass/ceramic Retail premises Warehouses Scrap yards Docks Road haulage Wholesalers Paper Printing Freight transport

Subset N 1 2 3 4 7 37.670 7 39.732 39.732 15 41.412 41.412 41.412 10 47.188 47.188 47.188 47.188 19 49.634 49.634 49.634 49.634 6 57.292 57.292 57.292 57.292 16 58.427 58.427 58.427 58.427 21 59.589 59.589 59.589 59.589 6 59.668 59.668 59.668 59.668 12 63.495 63.495 63.495 63.495 6 66.285 66.285 66.285 66.285 16 72.521 72.521 72.521 72.521 12 72.696 72.696 72.696 72.696 6 75.868 75.868 75.868 75.868 2 77.232 77.232 77.232 77.232 6 82.008 82.008 82.008 12 82.711 82.711 82.711 3 83.796 83.796 3 88.889

Industry sectors brick/cement, engineering and drinks have fewer safe systems of work implemented to control workplace transport than industry sectors wholesale, paper printing and freight transport.

Table 20.3 Means for groups in homogenous subsets (computed by Duncan’s technique)

Safe systems of work combined implementation/ effectiveness score

Subset Industry sector 1 2 3 Engineering Brick/cement Drinks

7 7 15

40.402 41.974 42.375

41.974 42.375

Construction 10 49.107 49.107 49.107 Rubber/plastics Woodworking Hospitals Food

19 6 21 16

51.723 57.670 60.026 62.444

51.723 57.670 60.026 62.444

51.723 57.670 60.026 62.444

Retail premises Builders

6 6

65.931 66.303

65.931 66.303

65.931 66.303

merchants Glass/ceramic Scrap yards Docks

12 12 6

67.991 74.280 76.131

67.991 74.280 76.131

67.991 74.280 76.131

Warehouses 16 76.160 76.160 76.160 Road haulage Paper Printing Wholesalers

2 12 3 6

77.888 83.398 83.796

77.888 83.398 83.796 84.886

77.888 83.398 83.796 84.886

Freight transport 3 89.137

34

Freight transport and wholesale industry sectors had lower combined implementation/ effectiveness scores than the engineering, brick/ cement and drink sectors.

Table 20.4 Means for groups in homogenous subsets (computed by Duncan’s technique)

Personal protective equipment implementation

Industry Sector Printing Road haulage Hospitals Rubber/plastics Wholesalers Construction Drinks Food Scrap yards Builders merchants Paper Woodworking Glass/ceramic Retail premises Docks Warehouses Brick/cement Engineering Freight transport

Subset N 1 2 3 3 46.667 2 56.250 56.250 21 69.901 69.901 69.901 17 73.358 73.358 73.358 8 74.375 74.375 74.375 11 83.182 83.182 15 83.208 83.208 16 85.091 85.091 11 87.159 87.159 7 87.857 87.857

13 89.471 7 89.643 9 90.556 4 91.250 7 92.857 16 96.107 7 96.161 3 100.000 2 100.000

Printing and road haulage industry sectors implement significantly fewer personal protective equipment rules for their exposed employees than any other sampled industry sector.

35

Table 20.5 Means for groups in homogenous subsets (computed by Duncan’s technique)

Personal protective equipment weighted average

Industry Sector Printing Road haulage Hospitals Rubber/plastics Wholesalers Construction Drinks Food Scrap yards Builders merchants Woodworking Paper Retail premises Docks Glass/ceramic Brick/cement Warehouses Engineering Freight transport

Subset N 1 2 3 3 46.667 2 57.143 57.143 21 70.975 70.975 70.975 17 74.127 74.127 74.127 8 75.498 75.498 75.498 11 84.272 84.272 15 84.335 84.335 16 86.505 86.505 11 87.650 87.650 7 88.207 88.207

7 90.000 13 91.603 4 92.535 7 92.857 9 93.370 7 96.982 16 97.024 3 100.000 2 100.000

Printing and road haulage industry sectors had a lower combined implementation/ effectiveness scores than the other sampled industries.

4.12 CONTROL MEASURES AND ACCIDENTS.

Information was requested in the questionnaire about the number of fatal accidents, major accidents and minor accidents in the past three years due to workplace transport. Respondents were asked to tick boxes, yes, no or don’t know and if they had ticked yes to state the number of that accident type encountered. In the following analysis, the accident types have been combined. For example, if a company had encountered any accidents of any type, their overall response was recorded as ‘yes’. The table below shows how the yes, no or don’t know responses were combined.

Table 21 Combinations of answers and the response used for analysis.

Fatal Accident Major Accident Minor Accident Overall response Yes No/ Don’t Know No/ Don’t Know No

No/ Don’t Know Yes No/ Don’t Know No

No/ Don’t Know No/ Don’t Know Yes No

Yes Yes Yes No

Don’t know No/ Don’t Know No/ Don’t Know Don’t Know

36

Table 22 Implementation/ effectiveness scores and accidents

Accident? N Mean Pedestrian safety implementation Yes

No 37

136 59.3 64.0

Don't know 2 57.8 Total 175 63.0

Pedestrian safety effectiveness YesNo

37 136

3.3 3.4

Don't know 2 3.1 Total 175 3.4

Pedestrian safety combined implementation/ effectiveness Yes 37 61.9 score No 136 65.2

Don't know 2 63.2 Total 175 64.5

Traffic routes implementation YesNo

38 166

77.2 78.0

Don't know 3 73.0 Total 207 77.8

Traffic routes effectiveness YesNo

38 166

3.8 3.6

Don't know 3 3.1 Total 207 3.7

Traffic routes combined implementation/ effectiveness score YesNo

38 166

80.0 79.7

Don't know 3 76.4 Total 207 79.7

Vehicle safety implementation YesNo

35 167

87.5 87.1

Don't know 2 94.3 Total 204 87.3

Vehicle safety effectiveness YesNo

35 167

4.0 3.8

Don't know 2 4.6 Total 204 3.9

Vehicle safety combined implementation/ effectiveness score YesNo

35 167

89.4 88.6

Don't know 2 96.2 Total 204 88.8

Site safety engineering measures and signs implementation YesNo

37 130

71.3 55.1

Don't know 2 77.7 Total 169 58.9

Site safety engineering measures and signs effectiveness YesNo

37 130

3.4 3.2

Don't know 2 3.4 Total 169 3.3

Site safety engineering measures and signs combined Yes 37 72.8 implementation/ effectiveness score No 130 56.0

Don't know 2 81.4 Total 169 60.0

Safe systems of work implementation YesNo

38 145

65.7 59.5

Don't know 2 75.0 Total 185 60.9

37

Accident? N Mean Safe systems of work effectiveness Yes

No 38

145 3.5 3.5

Don't know 2 3.6 Total 185 3.5

Safe systems of work combined implementation/ Yes 38 67.2 effectiveness score

No 145 61.6 Don't know 2 80.1 Total 185 63.0

Personal protective equipment implementation YesNo

36 140

80.7 84.3

Don't know 3 95.8 Total 179 83.8

Personal protective equipment effectiveness YesNo

36 140

3.8 3.6

Don't know 3 3.2 Total 179 3.7

Personal protective equipment combined implementation/ Yes 36 82.0 effectiveness score

No 140 85.3 Don't know 3 97.4 Total 179 84.8

Training implementation YesNo

38 142

71.5 60.7

Don't know 3 73.0 Total 183 63.1

Training effectiveness YesNo

38 142

3.5 3.4

Don't know 3 3.2 Total 183 3.4

Training combined implementation/ effectiveness score YesNo

38 142

73.0 62.2

Don't know 3 73.0 Total 183 64.6

A one way analysis variance was then used to determine whether the number of accidents encountered by companies was significantly affected by the control measures implemented and their perceived effectiveness. Results are shown in Table 23.

38

Table 23 Significant findings from a one way variance to establish significant association

between control measures implemented and accidents encountered

Sum of df Mean Square F Sig. Squares

Site safety engineering Between Groups 8246.218 2 4123.109 3.403 .036 measures and signs implementation

Within Groups 201124.200 166 1211.592 Total 209370.418 168

Site safety engineering Between Groups 9011.330 2 4505.665 3.673 .027 measures and signs combined implementation/ effectiveness score.

Within Groups 203653.672 166 1226.829 Total 212665.001 168

The above shows that the implementation of site safety engineering measures and signs is associated with the number of accidents encountered by companies. Table 22 reveals that, on average site safety engineering measures and signs are implemented in 71.3% of all places necessary in organisations who have encountered accidents and only in 55.1% of all necessary places in companies that have not encountered accidents. Since it is unlikely that signs make the workplace less safe, this finding suggests that ‘high-risk’ companies tend to install more signs, perhaps as a response to risk assessments or to accidents themselves. Some control measure categories do not reveal this pattern. For example, in the pedestrian safety category, the extent to which control measures are implemented is higher in companies that have not encountered accidents, than in those who have. This therefore suggests that the control measures that have been implemented in these companies are effective. However, this statistically is not a significant effect.

39

4.13 CONTROL MEASURES AND VEHICLES

Information was requested in question 8 about the types and numbers of vehicles used on the work site. The correlation between the number of vehicles and control measure categories was computed and the following statistically significant relationships found:

Table 24 Statistically significant relationships between vehicles and control measures

Control measure Vehicle type Sample Correlation Sig. level

Vehicle safety Motorcycle 79 -0.25 <0.05 effectiveness Vehicle safety Cars 177 -0.25 <0.001 implementation Vehicle safety combined Cars 177 -0.24 <0.001 implementation/ effectiveness score Site safety engineering Forklift 112 0.20 <0.05 measures and signs implementation HGV 132 0.19 <0.05 Site safety engineering Forklift 112 0.23 <0.05 measures and signs combined implementation/ effectiveness score HGV 132 0.20 <0.05 Safe systems of work Trucks 85 -0.24 <0.05 effectiveness Safe systems of work Mobile equipment 16 -0.54 <0.05 implementation Safe systems of work Mobile equipment 16 -0.62 <0.01 combined implementation/ effectiveness score Training effectiveness Forklift 127 0.20 <0.05 HGV 146 0.24 <0.01 Training implementation Forklift 127 0.19 <0.05 HGV 146 0.20 <0.05 Training combined Forklift 127 0.18 <0.05 implementation/ effectiveness score HGV 146 0.19 <0.05 Personal protective HGV 142 0.18 <0.05 equipment effectiveness Motorcycle 74 -0.31 <0.01 Trucks 87 -0.23 <0.05

A negative correlation means that as the number of vehicles increases, the effectiveness or combined score for the control measure reduces. Table 24 reveals that this is the case for vehicle safety, safe systems of work and personal protective equipment, but not for training, or site safety engineering measures and signs. The explanation may be that with higher numbers of vehicles, it is more difficult to control vehicle safety and implement safe systems of work and there is a greater input to training and site safety engineering measures and signs to redress this situation. It also seems likely that where there are very large numbers of cars on site, these will generally be customers’, patients’ or employees’ vehicles, not a suitable target for company-based vehicle safety measures.

40

4.14 CONTROL MEASURES AND THE SIZE OF THE COMPANY.

It was decided to establish whether there was a significant correlation between the number of employees within the sampled companies and the implementation and effectiveness of control measure categories. A one way variance was used here.

Table 25 Statistically significant results from a one way analysis of variance used to establish

any relationship between the number of employees in a company and the implementation and effectiveness of control measures.

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F p Site safety Between 19825.348 7 2832.193 2.406 .023 engineering Groups measures and signs implementation Site safety Between 19879.587 7 2839.941 2.372 .025 engineering Groups measures and signs combined implementation/ effectiveness score

Table 25 shows that a statistically significant relationship was found between the number of employees and the implementation of site safety engineering measures and signs to control workplace transport safety. The same was true of the combined implementation and effectiveness score for site safety engineering measures and signs. There were no statistically significant effects for other types of control measure.

As before, Duncan’s technique was used to explore where these effects occurred. Tables 26 and 27 show the results.

41

Table 26 Means for groups of homogenous subsets (computed by Duncan’s technique).

Number of employees and implementation of site safety engineering measures and signs

Subset Number of employees N 1 2 0-10 40 43.463 21-40 27 51.627 51.627 61-100 25 59.730 59.730 101-200 19 66.084 66.084 11-20 19 67.108 67.108 41-60 12 69.549 201-1000 14 72.178 1001-6000 13 73.466

Table 27 Means for groups of homogenous subsets (computed by Duncan’s technique).

Number of employees and the combined implementation/effectiveness score for site safety engineering measures and signs

Subset Number of employees N 1 2 0-10 40 44.044 21-40 27 53.752 53.752 61-100 25 61.743 61.743 101-200 19 66.256 66.256 11-20 19 66.290 66.290 41-60 12 70.271 201-1000 14 74.442 1001-6000 13 74.897

Tables 26 and 27 reveal that the extent to which site safety engineering measures and signs have been implemented and their implementation and effectiveness score differs between companies with under 10 employees and companies with 41­60 or over 200 employees.

42

5. DISCUSSION The overall response rate was 13.8 per cent – well below the hoped-for rate of 20 to 25 per cent – and the response rate in some industry sectors was particularly low. For example only two companies responded from the textiles sector. This reduced the precision of the population estimates available from the survey, and its power to detect differences between sub-groups such as industry sectors. Nevertheless, useful information was obtained on the implementation and rated effectiveness of safety measures, and some between-sector differences were detected.

The reasons for the low response rate can only be guessed at present. Given the degree of care put into piloting the questionnaire it seems likely that factors other than questionnaire design were mainly responsible. It seems likely that the time­burden, coupled with the fact that most respondents were being asked to report less than fully satisfactory compliance with Health and Safety legislation to a survey sponsored by HSE, will have played its part in reducing the survey response. Also, some of the questions would have required respondents either to think fairly deeply about implementation and effectiveness of control measures, or to collect further information from within the company. This, too, will have tended to reduce response rate.

Even with the intended response rate of over 20 per cent, the scope for non­response bias in the survey was important. In general, response rates will probably have been lowest for companies with poor implementation of safety measures, and poor safety culture. If so, the survey will have tended to over-estimate the degree of implementation of workplace transport safety control measures.

This section deals, in turn with each of the identified objectives for phase 1 of the study.

5.1 WHAT TYPES OF WORKPLACE CONTROL MEASURES ARE IN PLACE TO REDUCE THE RISK FROM VEHICLE MOVEMENTS?

Before establishing the types of control measures used to reduce the risk from vehicle movements, it is important to have an insight into the types of vehicles that are in use within British industries. Table 6 shows that the vehicle most commonly present within the workplace is the car. This will primarily be because of the number of employees who drive to work. At certain times of the day, for example at the end of a shift, the movement of these vehicles and the potential for interaction with pedestrians and cyclists will need to be controlled. Visiting heavy goods vehicles are also prominent within many companies’ workplaces. Such vehicles will need different or additional control measures to minimise the hazards posed from reversing, reduced visibility and loading and unloading. Hospitals have a large number of all types of vehicles on site and present a particular hazard associated with interaction between vehicles. There are also a large number of pedestrians present within such premises, who may disrupt the measures implemented to control vehicle movements and who may be the most likely victims in any accidents.

Table 13 reveals that a majority of participating companies document daily or weekly safety checks on vehicles, and check drivers’ UK driving licenses annually. Almost all companies reported that vehicles are also regularly inspected and serviced in accordance with manufacturer recommendations. Such control

43

measures will reduce the risk of a vehicle malfunctioning and will ensure that drivers would legally be permitted to be in charge of a vehicle on the public highways. Only about half the participating companies reported that traffic and warning signs in the workplace are the same as those found on the public highway.

The most and least commonly implemented control measures for each control measure category can be seen in Table 15. Overall the control measure that has been implemented by the largest number of companies and to the greatest extent is easy access for emergency vehicles. The provision of personal protective equipment for visitors and staff has also been implemented by a large proportion of companies to a great extent. CCTV on vehicles to aid reversing and speed activated warning signs has only been implemented by 22 companies in fewer than 35% of the necessary locations. However these control measures are not a requirement under UK legislation and it is encouraging that companies have taken steps to introduce control measures beyond legislative requirements.

5.2 WHAT IS THE PERCEIVED EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF MEASURES THAT ARE USED TO CONTROL WORKPLACE TRANSPORT?

Table 17 shows that overall effectiveness scores (i.e. across all the industry sectors represented in the survey) were highest for the ‘vehicle safety’ category of control measure, and lowest for personal protective equipment. The individual control measures with the highest scores were suitable and effective brakes on vehicles and horns on vehicle (refer to table in Appendix 3). Those with the lowest scores were CCTV on vehicles to aid reversing and speed activated warning signs.

Degree of implementation of a control measure does not appear to be a good indicator of rated effectiveness. For example 80 companies claim to have implemented a suitable selection process for drivers but this was rated as the least effective measure. Superficially it might be expected that companies would tend to implement those control measures that they perceive to be effective, but no doubt other factors intervene, including the cost of control measures and the perceived degree of enforcement.

A further indicator of effectiveness is number of accidents. This survey covered far too small a sample to enable firm conclusions to be drawn about any relationship between accidents and control measures, but it was found that ‘site safety engineering measures and signs’ had a statistically significantly higher level of implementation in companies experiencing accidents than in other companies. Since it is unlikely that site safety engineering measures and signs have a negative effect on safety, a speculative explanation is that ‘high risk’ companies tend to implement more of these safety measures perhaps in response to risk assessments or to accidents or incidents themselves.

Table 24 shows the statistically significant relationships between number of vehicles and the implementation and effectiveness of control measures. It is interesting to note that as the number of vehicles increase the rated effectiveness of vehicle safety, safe systems of work and personal protective equipment decreases. However, as the effectiveness of these measures decrease the implementation of training, selection and site safety engineering measures and signs increases, thereby redressing the situation.

44

5.3 DOES THE SIZE OF THE COMPANY EFFECT THE TYPE OF CONTROL MEASURES IMPLEMENTED AND THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE MEASURE?

The majority of the participating companies employ over 10 personnel. The Health and Safety Commission define small companies as having less than 50 employees and a large company having over 50 employees. Using this definition, the achieved sample contained small and large companies in the ratio 60:40. There is a tendency for the implementation and effectiveness scores to increase as the number of employees increases. Within the sample, this is true for all control measure categories but, generalising beyond the sample, the difference is statistically significant only for site safety engineering measures and signs (Table 25).

A general tendency for larger companies to implement control measures more widely is probably to be expected. It seems reasonable to assume that larger companies will tend to have more complex workplace transport safety problems, requiring a wider spectrum of control measures. They are also more likely to have a specialist health and safety functions in their management teams, better awareness of health and safety regulations and guidance, more sophisticated safety management and risk appraisal systems, and perhaps more resources to devote to control measures.

5.4 IS THE CONTROL OF VEHICLE MOVEMENTS IN THE WORKPLACE SEEN AS A HIGH PRIORITY AND HAVE STEPS BEEN TAKEN TO IDENTIFY, EVALUATE AND REDUCE THE RISKS POSED?

Table 13 shows that 41% of the responding companies feel that the control of vehicle movements in the workplace is a high priority within their organisation. 12% felt that the control of vehicles within their company was not a high priority and 4% did not know. Overall 52% of the sample said they had conducted a risk assessment for workplace transport. This indicates that companies who do recognise the importance of workplace transport safety are also taking steps to identify and evaluate the risks posed, though the survey cannot tell us which is the cause and which the effect here. Table 7 shows that over 70% of responding companies said they record accidents and injuries to people. This is a low figure considering that the reporting of injuries is a legal requirement. Table 16 shows that all sectors claim to have implemented some control measures to reduce the inherent risk of workplace transport. Table 10 reveals that on average companies report that appropriate steps have been taken to ensure workplace transport safety.

It is apparent that the companies who do not see workplace transport as a priority and have not conducted a formal risk assessment, still claim to be implementing some control measures to reduce the risk. However, it is important to realise that the implementation of control measures prior to assessing the risks may not combat the risk posed at source and may potentially give rise to additional hazards.

5.5 ARE COMPANIES AWARE OF THE CURRENT HEALTH AND SAFETY LEGISLATION APPLICABLE TO WORKPLACE TRANSPORT?

Table 14 shows that 75% of companies say they are aware of The Health and Safety at Work Act, 1974 and feel that it is appropriate to their company. Over 65% of the sampled companies also feel that the “six pack” regulations, such as The

45

Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations, are appropriate to their company. 71% of companies record accident data but only 66% feel that the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations are appropriate to their company. This may be because at the time of completing the questionnaire no reportable accidents under RIDDOR had been encountered.

Although 190 companies said they were aware of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations, only 113 reported having conducted a risk assessment on their workplace transport. Presumably, the remainders of the 190 were either claiming to be aware of the legislation, when they were not or had not yet conducted a risk assessment they knew to be necessary. It seems possible that some companies may be generally aware of the legislation but not fully aware of how they apply to workplace transport safety.

The reported level of awareness of health and safety legislation by the responding companies is encouraging. Compliance with such legislation will be examined in phase two of this research.

46

6 CONCLUSIONS FOR PHASE ONE There is a reasonably high reported level of awareness of health and safety legislation, but a sizeable minority of companies have little awareness, and do not record accident data. About 40% of the companies who reported being aware of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations said they had not conducted a risk assessment of workplace transport. These finding suggest that there is considerable scope for improving the promulgation of regulations, guidance on good practice, and enforcement.

As the number of vehicles on site increases, the rated effectiveness of vehicle safety measures, safe systems of work, and personal protective equipment decreases. However, the use of training, selection and site safety engineering measures and signs tends to increase. It may be that, with many vehicles on site, the complexity of the safety problem is seen to require these additional types of measure. Also, some sites with many vehicles will be ones in which company­based vehicle safety measures are inappropriate as the cars are owned and maintained outside the control of the organisation.

Control of vehicle movements in the workplace seen as a high priority for 41% of the sampled companies, and 52% of the sample said they had conducted risk assessments to identify and evaluate the risks posed. All participating companies have implemented some measures to control workplace transport safety. The measures implemented by the most companies are suitable and effective brakes on vehicles, horns on vehicles and suitable lighting in the workplace.

There was a tendency for implementation and effectiveness scores for workplace transport safety control measures to increase as number of employees increased. Such a tendency is probably to be expected since larger companies will tend to have more complex workplace transport safety problems requiring a wider spectrum of control measures. However, another part of the explanation may be that larger companies have better organised and better resourced health and safety functions, suggesting that the smaller companies may be a particularly important target for future efforts to improve workplace transport safety.

Phase 2 of this project will explore further the above issues, and other issues raised by the work to date.

7. AIMS FOR PHASE TWO § To evaluate compliance with health and safety legislation that is applicable to

workplace transport safety.

§ To review the effectiveness of different types of control measures, their effectiveness and cost of implementation.

§ To gain an understanding of whether the control of vehicle movements in workplaces are neglected and if so, why?

§ To determine the steps taken by companies to identify, evaluate and reduce the risks posed by workplace transport.

§ To examine, where appropriate the interface of workplace transport with the public and extended workforce.

47

§ Establish best practice for controlling workplace transport.

§ To provide six case studies for future HSE publications.

20 organisations will be selected from the 65 companies who have volunteered to participate in phase two. Each company will be visited and the above objectives fulfilled through inspection, investigation, assessment, observation and interviewing.

48

8. REFERENCES

Duncan D B (1975) t-tests and intervals for comparisons suggested by the data,Biometrics, 31, pp 339-359

Health and Safety Commission (1999), Newsletter, Issue 127, October

Health and Safety at Work Act (1974). London: HMSO

Statutory Instrument (1999) Management of health and safety at work regulations No 3242 London: HMSO

Statutory Instrument (1995) The reporting of injuries, diseases and dangerous occurrences regulations No. 3163 London: HMSO

Statutory Instrument (1996) The construction (health, safety and welfare)regulations No. 1592 London: HMSO

Statutory Instrument (1998) The provision and use of work equipment regulations No. 3163 London: HMSO

HSE (1992) Workplace (health, safety and welfare): Approved code of practice. L24 HSE Books

HSE (1995) Workplace transport safety: Guidance for employers. HS(G)136 London: HMSO

Institute of Occupational Medicine (1998) The evaluation of the Six-Pack Regulations 1992. HSE Contract Research Report 177/1998.

49

APPENDIX ONE – DETAILED QUESTIONNAIRE DESIGN.

A. LITERATURE SEARCH.

Before commencing on the questionnaire design, it was vital to have a complete understanding of the hazards associated with workplace transport and the control measures that could be implemented in the workplace to mitigate these risks. It was also essential to be aware of all relevant legislation and guidance relating to workplace transport safety. It was thought that control measures recommended in such documents could have shaped the transport safety systems of some of the organisations being researched.

B. BRAINSTORMING.

The objective of the brainstorming session was to create a list of all control measures that could potentially reduce the inherent risk posed by workplace transport. The key technical members of the project team undertook the session and were encouraged to use previous experience from site investigations and research as well as knowledge gained from literature reviews and professional training to create the required list of control measures. It was decided that the control measures should be categorised into five main groups:

· Vehicle Safety · Workplace Safety · Safe Systems of Work · Training · Personal Protective Equipment.

A total of 130 control measures were listed, each fitting into one of the identified categories. The measures ranged from those thought to be relatively inexpensive, simple to implement and generally in wide use, such as mirrors on walls to aid visibility at intersections, to measures such as crash data recorders which may be less common amongst the participating companies.

The list of control measures is intended to be used both in the phase one questionnaire survey and in the site visits to be conducted in phase two of the research.

C. INITIAL QUESTIONNAIRE DESIGN

A high response rate was not expected from the questionnaire because of the nature of the information being sought and the company’s perceived implications with providing it. It was therefore important to maximise the response rate through ensuring minimal burden on the respondent, encouraging response through the careful design of a covering letter and informing the participant that there would be no repercussions by assuring complete confidentiality and anonymity.

A time limit of 20 minutes was aimed for, to maximise the response rate. It was decided that an eight page questionnaire could be completed within this time frame.

The questionnaire was divided into four main sections:

50

a) General. This section covered demographics and general information about the age and size of premises, number of employees, types of vehicles used on the premises, basic information about the company’s safety management system and accident data.

b) Workplace Transport. The questions in this section focused on the company’s overall attitude towards workplace transport safety, including whether risk assessments had been conducted, general control measures such as vehicle checks and company attitudes towards and their understanding of the safety issues surrounding workplace transport.

c) Legislation. One of the aims of the research is to determine the extent to which companies are complying with relevant workplace transport legislation. This section listed seven pieces of appropriate legislation and asks the participant to indicate whether they are appropriate to the company.

d) Control Measures. The control measures listed in the brainstorming session had been categorised into 7 categories.

- Pedestrian Safety- Traffic Routes - Vehicle Safety- Safety Measures and Signs - Safe Systems of Work- Training/ Selection - Personal Protective Equipment

It was felt that these categories were suitable for the questionnaire, for ease of answering the questions and ease of analysis. For each control measure listed the respondent was required to indicate whether or not their company had implemented the control measure and the perceived effectiveness of it.

It was important that this section did not place an unnecessary burden on the respondent, so some of the control measures from the original brainstorming list were excluded. The control measures not included in this phase will be investigated during the site visits in Phase Two of the research.

The questionnaire included a final section, where respondents could complete company information, if they were prepared to participate in the subsequent phase of the project.

D. PILOTING

Due to the complexity of the research, it was deemed essential to thoroughly pilot the questionnaire. Two piloting procedures were conducted:

(a) Pilot One:

The aims of the primary pilot were as follows:

§ To identify any misleading or irrelevant questions and instructions.

§ To identify any questions that needed further response categories

§ To estimate the time taken to complete the questionnaire.

51

§ To establish who to address the questionnaire and letter to in the main survey.

§ To discuss the company’s need for anonymity and confidentiality and establish how this should be dealt with in the main survey.

§ To discuss how to persuade companies to respond and how to assure them that there will be no repercussions.

§ To discuss how the main survey should describe its sponsorship, that is, should the HSE sponsorship be stressed, or would it be preferable to emphasise TRL’s independent status?

§ To identify any further relevant questions or additional control measures.

§ To discuss how to ensure that the questions were answered honestly and openly.

§ To determine how easy it was for respondents to score the effectiveness of each of the control measures.

Ten local companies were selected from the internet and local business guides. It was deemed important for the pilot companies to reflect the industries to be included in the final sample. Therefore, the companies selected were of varying size and age of premises and from different industry sectors. Each of the ten selected companies were telephoned and asked if they would be prepared to participate in this pilot study. After agreement was given, an appointment was made to visit the company in the subsequent two weeks. A questionnaire and letter, reminding them of the appointment booked, was mailed to each of the companies. All of the companies contacted agreed to participate. (The mailed questionnaire can be seen in the appendix 2 – questionnaire 1)

The main comments and suggestions made by the pilot companies are listed below:

§ Several of the pilot companies were concerned about the confidentiality of the information they were giving. Although confidentiality and anonymity were stressed in the opening paragraph of the questionnaire, it was felt that this was not sufficient. It was, therefore decided that the words ‘strictest confidence’ and ‘complete anonymity’ should be enhanced on the questionnaire in bold typeface and a footer should be added on every page reminding the respondent that the questionnaire is anonymous and confidential.

§ Question A1 asks about the role of the respondent within the participating organisation. It was decided that as the questionnaire focused on transport safety as opposed to general safety, the inclusion of ‘transport manager’ as a response option would be appropriate. However, all participating pilot companies agreed that the survey should be addressed to the generic title ‘safety manager’.

§ It was decided that question A4 needed to clarify that the buildings being referred to were the ones situated on that site.

52

§ Question A5 requested the respondent to state the number of employees within the company. Several of the pilot companies thought that a larger category than ‘over 200’ should be included in the options.

§ Question A6 asked about contractors working at the company. It was felt that this should be changed to ‘non-permanent members of staff’ as the term ‘contractor’ was taken to mean only persons such as plumbers and electricians and not agency staff, for example.

§ It was thought that Question A7 needed some clarification about the vehicles to be included as well as those to be excluded from the count. It was also deemed necessary to clarify the meanings of the terms ‘mobile equipment’ and ‘self­propelled machinery’. Another issue raised for this question was the fact that some of the vehicles using the site may only visit one a month, whilst others may be in use every day, therefore leading to confusion when completing the ‘number of vehicles’ column. A ‘delete as appropriate’ column was added, so the respondent could specify whether there were 10 vehicles in total, for example, or per day or per week etc.

§ Within the pilot companies, there was one company that did not own any vehicles and did not have any deliveries. The respondent stated that if he had received this questionnaire speculatively he would not have completed or returned it. It was decided that a statement should be added at the bottom of question A7, asking respondents who had ‘ticked no to all of the above vehicles’, to return the questionnaire to TRL. It was felt that receiving partially completed questionnaires from companies with no vehicles was more useful to the research than obtaining an inexplicably high number of non-respondents.

§ Question A9 required the respondent to estimate the percentage of the site as a whole that is accessible to vehicles. Several respondents felt that this was an ambiguous question to answer, as some vehicles could access all areas, whilst others may only be able to access 10%. To reduce this ambiguity, an additional column was added to question A7, asking the respondent to specify the amount of site accessible for each of the identified vehicles.

§ Question A11 enquires about the safety related information that may be recorded within the organisation. One pilot company suggested that organisations might also record spillages as these may contribute to subsequent transport related incidents.

§ Questions A12 and A13 required the participant to supply accident information for the last 10 years. It was suggested by several of the pilot companies that this should be reduced to 3 years. Reasons given for this were

a) there may have bee significant changes to the workplace and safety systems in the last ten years, thereby rendering the accident records meaningless,

b) downloading accident/ incident information for the last 10 years is time consuming and may reduce response rate and

c) companies may not have details of accidents dating back that far.

§ One of the pilot participants revealed that their most common incident type involves vehicles colliding with property. This option was therefore added to question A13.

53

§ Three issues were raised regarding question B2. Firstly the participants were unsure of the term ‘penalised’. It was deemed more appropriate to use the word ‘disciplined’. Secondly, several of the pilot participants thought that all companies within the final sample would agree that daily safety checks are conducted on their vehicles. However by adding the word ‘documented’ before the statement, it ensures that this is an implemented company procedure as opposed to a presumed action. Thirdly, one pilot company revealed that their transport policy required all company drivers to have their driving license checked annually. It was felt that this revealed good practice and should be added to the question.

§ One pilot company noticed that some of the dates on legislation in question C1 were incorrect. This was updated immediately.

§ All participating pilot companies had problems completing section D regarding workplace transport control measures. The main issue raised was with the options ‘yes’, ‘no’, ‘don’t know’ and ‘not needed’. Many of the identified control measures may be partially implemented but not all over the site. For example, barriers may have been positioned where previous incidents had occurred but not on all areas of the site where vehicles are present. After serious consideration, it was decided that the best option for solving this problem was to increase the response options. Respondents would be required to indicate the extent to which the control measure in question had been implemented. The response, ‘Yes, 100%’ would indicate that the control measure had been implemented in all necessary places. The response ‘no’ was also divided into two categories, these being ‘no, but needed’ and ‘no, not needed’.

The pilot companies were also concerned about the column regarding the effectiveness of the identified control measure. It was decided that the respondent would be more likely to complete this column if the scale was reduced from 10 to 5 points and they were presented with the numbers to circle.

§ Several of the pilot companies also suggested that an additional ‘further comments’ section would be useful. It was felt that this would allow respondents to clarify any answers given throughout the questionnaire.

§ The pilot companies were asked whether they felt it was appropriate to identify that the questionnaire is for the HSE. All companies, without exception felt that a higher response rate would be achieved if the respondents were unaware of the HSE involvement.

A meeting was held on March 1st 2001 with Nick Ratty from the HSE and further suggestions were made about the questionnaire. Two main issues arose from the meeting. Firstly, in question A1, job titles should not include the terms “not safety” as safety is the responsibility if all employers and employees. Secondly, question A7 excluded vehicles used to travel to and from work. It was felt that as this was likely to be a major part of the company’s traffic flow, such vehicles should be included in the research.

All comments made by the pilot companies and the HSE were deemed valid and a second version of the questionnaire was designed, incorporating the suggestions made. (Questionnaire 2 in appendix2 ).

54

(b) Pilot Two:

The aims of pilot two were similar to those of pilot one, with the emphasis being on ensuring the highest response rates possible. Issues such as who to address the questionnaire to, anonymity and confidentiality, and whether to stress the involvement with the HSE were focused on, as opposed to the technical content of the questionnaire. The aims were as follows:

§ To identify whether the questionnaire reaches the appropriate person by addressing it to the ‘safety manager’.

§ To identify whether amendments made to the questionnaire after the first pilot had given rise to any misleading or inappropriate questions and to ensure that all questions could be easily interpreted and answered.

§ To discuss the company’s need for anonymity and confidentiality.

§ To discuss how to persuade companies to respond and how to assure them that there would be no repercussions.

§ To confirm that was appropriate not to stress that the questionnaire is for the HSE.

§ To identify any further relevant questions or additional control measures.

§ To discuss how to ensure that the questions were answered honestly and openly.

§ To determine whether it was easier to score effectiveness for each of the control measures when the respondent is given the categories to circle.

Twenty-five companies were selected from the internet and local business guides. The companies were chosen from a variety of industry sectors with ranging numbers of employees, to ensure that pilot was representative of the final sample selection. Each selected company was sent a copy of the questionnaire and a covering letter explaining the purpose of the research and the aims of the pilot study. The companies were informed that TRL would be contacting them by telephone to discuss the questionnaire and were requested to inform us if this was inconvenient. All companies were made aware that participation in the survey was entirely voluntary.

Twenty-five companies were contacted by telephone and 17 agreed to discuss the questionnaire. The 8 companies who were not willing to participate were asked for their reasoning behind this decision. The following reasons were given:

§ The questionnaire had not reached the company and therefore had not been completed.

§ The questionnaire was not relevant to their company.

§ The company did not have time to complete the questionnaire in the given time frame.

§ The company was concerned that if they participated in this survey, they would be included in all subsequent TRL surveys.

55

§ The company was concerned that TRL was trying to sell them products to reduce the risks posed by their workplace transport.

It was important to ensure that the highest possible response rate was achieved. Therefore changes were made to the questionnaire and covering letter, in light of the above comments, to minimise the number of non-participating companies in the main study. The changes made were as follows:

§ A sentence was added to the covering letter in bold typeface stating ‘ We urge your company to respond even if workplace transport does not seem to be applicable to your line of business’.

§ It was stressed that TRL is an independent centre for the study of transport and the unabbreviated name of ‘Transport Research Laboratory’ was used in place of TRL Limited. It was felt that these changes would assure companies that the research is legitimate and minimise participants’ concerns about TRL selling products to reduce their workplace transport risk.

§ Amendments were made to the covering letter to assure respondents that the information they provided would only be used for the purposes of this research and not subsequent TRL studies.

The main comments and suggestions made by the pilot companies are listed below:

§ Participants of pilot one believed that a higher response rate would be achieved if the respondents were unaware of the HSE involvement. However, all participants in pilot two disagreed strongly with this belief. Participants felt that naming the HSE on the covering letters and questionnaires would legitimise the research and encourage companies to respond. Participants also felt that they would be more inclined to complete the questionnaire, knowing that the research was being conducted for a regulatory body.

§ Several pilot companies were concerned about the reference number on the questionnaire, as they felt that it put the anonymity of their responses into question. The questionnaire was therefore amended so respondents were aware that the reference number related to the industry sector as opposed to individual companies.

§ The participating pilot companies were able to answer three out of four of the sections without any problems. However, the amended section D regarding workplace transport control measures was still being completed incorrectly. All participants had overlooked the column regarding the effectiveness of the control measures. It was felt that the instructions were too long and the respondents were not reading to the end of the paragraph where the scoring of effectiveness was explained. After consideration, it was decided that the most appropriate way of simplifying the instructions was to split the paragraph into two bullet points, one for each task required. The sentence instructing the participant to score the effectiveness of the control measure from 1 to 5 was underlined to ensure that the respondent noticed it.

§ It was suggested by some of the pilot companies, that participants of the main sample may not be prepared to volunteer their company for phase two of the research without more detailed information. Care had to be taken not to

56

dramatically increase the length of the questionnaire or covering letter as this may reduce the number of responses returned. Therefore, a contact name was added to the questionnaire so concerned companies could telephone TRL and find out the necessary information.

All comments were deemed valid and the relevant changes were made to the questionnaire. The amended questionnaire was mailed to the HSE and the TRL internal technical authority for comment. No comments were made. (The amended questionnaire can be seen in appendix 2, with the covering letter – questionnaire 3).

57

58

APPENDIX TWO – QUESTIONNAIRES:

§ VERSION ONE § VERSION TWO § FINAL VERSION § COVERING LETTER

59

60

Ref No.

CONTROL MEASURES FOR WORKPLACE TRANSPORT SAFETY.

Please complete this questionnaire by ticking the appropriate boxes and writing in the spaces provided. It should only take about 20 minutes to complete. All of the information you provide will be treated in the strictest confidence and complete anonymity can be assured. Thank you for your help.

A. GENERAL

If your organisation has more than one site, please only answer for the site to which this questionnaire was addressed.

(Please tick the boxes as appropriate.)

1. What is your role within this organisation?

Safety Manager o Middle Manager (not safety) o

Safety Representative o Supervisor (not safety) o

Senior Manager (not safety) o Shop Floor Worker o

Other (Please State)

Years 0-2 3-5 6-10 11-15 16-25 26-40 Over 40

2 How many years has the company o o o o o o obeen established?

3 How many years has the company o o o o o o obeen operating from this (these) building(s)?

4 How old are the buildings within o o o o o o owhich your organisation operates? (If your company has more than one building, of different ages, please tick all appropriate boxes)

1-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-100 101-200 Over 200

5 How many employees are o o o o o o o othere within the company?(at this site).

6 How many contractors o o o o o o o owork in the company, on a typical day? (at this site)

61

7. Which of the following methods of transport are used within your workplace and in what quantity: (Please tick as appropriate and state numbers). Excludes vehicles used for transport to work.

Yes Cars o

Vans o

Forklift Trucks o

Heavy Goods Vehicles o

Industrial Trucks o

Mobile Equipment o

Dumpers o

Self Propelled Machinery o

Bicycles o

Motorcycles o

Other (Please State)

Number No Don’t Know o o

o o

o o

o o

o o

o o

o o

o o

o o

o o

8. What is the approximate area of this site? (Please state approximate area in sq miles/ sq metres/ dimensions in no of walking paces/ no of football pitches, for example)

9. What percentage of this area is accessible to vehicles?

0-25% o 50-75% o

25-50% o 75-100% o

10. What does your company do at these premises? (For example, manufacture ball bearings)

11. Is the following information recorded in your company: (Please tick as appropriate)

Yes Accidents (damage only) o

Injuries o

Near misses o

Safety Objectives o

Safety Performance oIndicators

No Don’t Know o o

o o

o o

o o

o o

62

12. Over the past ten years, have there been any of the following accidents within your company? (Please tick as appropriate and state number, if known).

Yes If Yes, No Don’t Know Number

Accidents causing death o o o

Accidents causing major injury (Requiring the injured person o o oto have more than three days off work)

Accidents causing minor injury (requiring the injured person o o oto have less than three days off work)

13. Over the past ten years, have there been any of the following incidents involving workplace transport (Cars/ Vans/ Fork Lift Trucks/ Lorries etc): (Please tick as appropriate and state number).

Objects falling from vehicles People falling from vehicles Vehicles overturning People struck by a vehicle People run over by a vehicle People hit by objects dislodged by vehicles People injured getting on or off vehicles.

Yes If Yes, No Don’t Know Quantity

o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

Vehicle malfunctioning causing accident or injury,. Collision between vehiclesMaintenance of vehicles causing accident or injury. Loading/ Unloading of vehicles causing accident or injury.

o o o o o o o o o o o o

B. WORKPLACE TRANSPORT

1. Please indicate how much you agree or disagree with the following statements:

Strongly Agree Neither Disagree Strongly Agree Agree or Disagree

Disagree This company has taken appropriate steps to ensure workplace transport safety.

The workplace is rarely tidy.

The workplace is organised so vehicles and pedestrians can operate in a safe manner. Employees understand the dangers of workplace transport. We have a problem with reversing vehicles.

63

2. Please tick the appropriate boxes: Yes No Don’t Know

A risk assessment has been conducted for our workplace transport o o o Traffic and warning signs in the workplace are the same as those found on o o o public highways. Regular inspections and services are carried out on vehicles, in accordance o o owith manufacturer’s recommendations. Employees are penalised for having accidents. o o o

Control of vehicle movements is a priority within this organisation. o o o

Daily safety checks are conducted on vehicles. o o o

C. LEGISLATION

1. Please tick the regulations you feel are appropriate to your company:

Yes No Don’t Know Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 o o o

Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 o o o

Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 o o o

Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 o o o

Construction (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 o o o

Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 1994 o o o

Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences, 1985 o o o

D. CONTROL MEASURES

The following questions relate to workplace transport safety control measures that may be found in your workplace. Please tick the appropriate boxes to indicate whether the measures have been implemented in your workplace. Indicate how effective you feel your company’s control measures are at making your workplace transport safer. Score effectiveness from 1 to 10, with 1 being not at all effective and 10 being extremely effective.

1. Pedestrian Safety Yes No Don’t Not Effectiveness Know Needed (score out of 10)

Separate vehicle and pedestrian routes o o o o 444

Separate vehicle, pedestrian and public doors o o o o 444

Subways/ footbridges for pedestrians o o o o 444

Level crossings for pedestrians o o o o 444

Dropped kerbs at all pedestrian crossing places o o o o 444

Signage to warn pedestrians of hazards o o o o 444

Pedestrian deterrent paving. o o o o 444

Safe haven for pedestrians to stand when vehicles are reversing o o o o 444

Barriers positioned so vehicles do not collide with people o o o o 444

when reversing

64

2. Traffic Routes Yes No Don’t Not Effectiveness Know Needed (score out of 10)

Crash barriers. o o o o

Suitable barriers at entrances, exits and corners o o o o

444

444

Height barriers. o o o o 444

No low wiring or lighting/ shielded pipes/ electric cables o o o o 444

Loading bays situated away from overhead cables or on steep o o o o 444

gradients Loading bay and sheeting area protected from adverse weather o o o o

444 conditions Loading bays situated away from passing traffic. o o o o

444

No forklift truck routes crossing public highways o o o o 444

Easy access for emergency vehicles o o o o 444

Sufficient, wide enough traffic routes so vehicles can pass and o o o o 444

circulate easily. One way system. o o o o

444

No blind spots or tight corners on traffic routes o o o o 444

Regular maintenance of traffic routes o o o o 444

Safety banks to prevent vehicles overturning o o o o 444

No forklift truck routes over speed bumps. o o o o 444

Wide entrances/ gates o o o o 444

Traffic routes away from vulnerable or potentially hazardous o o o o 444

structures. Safe, practical, suitable and sufficient parking areas for all o o o o

444 vehicles Suitable lighting o o o o

444

Firm, even flooring. o o o o 444

3. Vehicle Safety Yes No Don’t Not Effectiveness Know Needed (score out of 10)

Seat belt on all vehicles o o o o

Suitable and effective brakes on vehicles o o o o

444

Windscreens with wipers on vehicles. o o o o

444

444

Head lights on vehicles. o o o o 444

Horns on vehicles. o o o o

Bumpers on vehicles o o o o

444

444

Sun visors on vehicles. o o o o

Reversing warning light or sound on vehicles o o o o

444

444

Flashing amber lights on vehicles o o o o 444

65

Warning signs on vehicles, eg slow vehicle.

Control system to prevent vehicles from moving when fork lift trucks are loading or unloading Speed limiter on vehicles

Rollover protection strategy on vehicles

Mirrors on vehicles to aid visibility.

Rear lens on vehicles to aid reversing.

Radar sensors to warn drivers if reversing too near to an object.

Crash Data Recorders on Vehicles (black box technology)

Vehicle ‘skirts’ to minimise damage.

Guarding of dangerous parts on vehicles.

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

444

444

444

444

444

444

444

444

444

444

4. Safety Measures and Signs Yes No Don’t Not Effectiveness Know Needed (score out of 10)

Speed bumps o o o o 444

Speed activated warning signs o o o o 444

Clearly displayed speed limits o o o o 444

Clean, well maintained warning signs o o o o 444

Road markings o o o o 444

Traffic Lights o o o o 444

Vibro-lines, causing an audible signal if the vehicle crosses o o o o 444

them. Vehicle locator system so the whereabouts of vehicles are o o o o

444 known. Guide humps/ rubber stops installed in HGV parking bays o o o o

444

Mirrors on walls/ ceiling/ other structure to aid visibility o o o o 444

Variable speed limits. o o o o 444

CCTV o o o o 444

5. Safe Systems of Work Yes No Don’t Not Effectiveness Know Needed (score out of 10)

Banksman to aid reversing where appropriate. o o o o 444

Courier on vehicles to aid reversing. o o o o 444

Restricted areas for reversing o o o o 444

Exclusion of non-essential personnel from reversing areas o o o o 444

Restriction of vehicle movement when known influx of o o o o personnel

444

Overtaking restrictions. o o o o 444

66

Hours driven by each driver monitored and regular breaks provided.

Plan of workplace at entrance and appropriate points showing vehicle routes, one way systems etc.

Site procedures relayed to all visitors/ contractors

Operational procedures to protect driver during unloading/ loading of heavy goods vehicles. Parking restrictions

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

444

444

444

444

444

6. Training/ Selection Yes No Don’t Not Effectiveness Know Needed (score out of 10)

Thorough selection process for drivers. o o o o 444

Regular physical fitness tests. o o o o 444

Regular vision tests. o o o o 444

Impairment testing of drivers (drink/ drugs) o o o o 444

Competent operators o o o o 444

Skills training for drivers. o o o o 444

Provision of information and instruction for drivers. o o o o

Supervision of vehicles and drivers. o o o o

444

444

7. Personal Protective Equipment Yes No Don’t Not Effectiveness Know Needed (score out of 10)

Personal protective equipment for visitors. o o o o 444

Provision of protective equipment e.g. hard hats o o o o 444

High visibility clothing for workers in all transport areas o o o o 444

Steel toe capped boots for all employees. o o o o 444

Workplace clothing to avoid hazards from loose clothing. o o o o 444

Protection for drivers in adverse weather conditions. o o o o

Employee protection to prevent injury from overturning or o o o o

444

444 falling objects.

67

A small number of organisations will be invited to take part in the second phase of this research. This will involve visiting your premises and viewing some of the workplace transport control measures you have implemented. All information collected during these visits will be completely confidential and will only be used for the purposes of this research.

If you would be willing to participate in this second phase, please complete the details below.

SURNAME: INITIALS: TITLE:

JOB TITLE: WORK TEL NO.

COMPANY NAME:

ADDRESS:

POSTCODE:

Thank you for your assistance.

Please return this questionnaire to TRL Limited by April 6th in the pre-paid envelope provided.

68

Ref No.

CONTROL MEASURES FOR WORKPLACE TRANSPORT SAFETY.

Please complete this questionnaire by ticking the appropriate boxes and writing in the spaces provided. It should only take about 20 minutes to complete. All of the information you provide will be treated in the strictest confidence and complete anonymity can be assured. Thank you for your help.

A. GENERAL

If your organisation has more than one site, please only answer for the site to which this questionnaire was addressed.

(Please tick the boxes as appropriate.)

1. What is your role within this organisation?

Safety/ Risk Manager o Middle Manager o

Safety Advisor o Supervisor o

Senior Manager o Shop Floor Worker o

Transport Manager o Other (Please State)

Years 0-2 3-5 6-10 11-15 16-25 26-40 Over 40

2 How many years has the company been o o o o o o oestablished?

3 How many years has the company been operating o o o o o o ofrom this site?

4 How old are the buildings on this site within which o o o o o o oyour organisation operates? (If your company has more than one building, of different ages, please tick all appropriate boxes)

0-10 11-20 21-40 41-60 61-100 101- Over If over 200, 200 200 Please state no:

5 How many employees are there o o o o o o owithin the company? (at thissite).

6 How many non-permanent members of staff (agency,

o o o o o o o contractors etc.) work at thissite, in a typical month? (at thissite)

7. What tasks do the non-permanent members of staff undertake at this site?

ANONYMOUS AND CONFIDENTIAL 69

7. Which of the following vehicles are used at this work site, (both inside and outside buildings) and in what quantity: Please include all visiting vehicles e.g. delivery. (Please tick as appropriate and state amount either in total or per day/ week etc, if known)

How much of the work site is accessible to this vehicle?

Yes Number No 0-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100%

Cars o total/ per day/ week/ month o o o o o(Delete as appropriate)

Vans o total/ per day/ week/ month o o o o o

Forklift Trucks o total/ per day/ week/ month o o o o o

Heavy Goods Vehicles o total/ per day/ week/ month o o o o o

Trucks/ vans for carrying o total/ per day/ week/ month o o o o oequipment Mobile Equipment eg tugs o total/ per day/ week/ month o o o o oDumper Trucks o total/ per day/ week/ month o o o o o

Self Propelled Machinery o total/ per day/ week/ month o o o o oeg floor cleanersBicycles o total/ per day/ week/ month o o o o o

Motorcycles o total/ per day/ week/ month o o o o o

Other (Please State)

If you have ticked no to all of the above vehicles, please return this questionnaire to TRL in the pre-paid envelope.

8. What is the approximate area of this site? (Please state approximate area in sq miles/ sq. metres/ dimensions in no of walking paces/ no of football pitches, for example)

9. What does your company do at these premises? (For example, manufacture ball bearings)

10. Is the following information recorded in your company: (Please tick as appropriate)

Yes No Don’t Know Accidents (damage to property) o o o

Injuries to people o o o

Near misses o o o

Safety Objectives o o o

Safety Performance Indicators o o o

Spillage (e.g. fuel/ chemicals) o o o

ANONYMOUS AND CONFIDENTIAL 70

11. Over the past three years, have there been any of the following vehicle accidents on your company site? (Exclude accidents on public roads). (Please tick as appropriate and state number, if known).

Yes If Yes, No Don’t KnowNumber

Vehicle accidents causing death o o o

Vehicle accidents causing major injury (Requiring the injured o o operson to have more than three days off work)

Vehicle accidents causing minor injury (requiring the injured o o operson to have less than three days off work)

12. Over the past three years, have there been any of the following incidents at this site (exclude incidents on public roads) involving workplace transport (Cars/ Vans/ ForkLift Trucks/ Lorries etc): (Please tick as appropriate and state number. If one incident fits into more than one of the categories below, please tick the most relevant option).

Yes If Yes, No Don’t Know Number

Objects falling from vehicles o o o People falling from vehicles o o o Vehicles overturning o o o People struck by a vehicle o o o People run over by a vehicle o o o People hit by objects dislodged by vehicles o o o People injured getting on or off vehicles. o o o Vehicle malfunctioning causing accident or injury. o o o Collision between vehicles o o o Collision between vehicles and property. o o o Accident or injury occurring during maintenance of vehicle o o o Loading/ Unloading of vehicles causing accident or injury. o o o

B. WORKPLACE TRANSPORT

1. Please indicate how much you agree or disagree with the following statements:

Strongly Agree Neither Agree Disagree Strongly Agree or Disagree Disagree

This company has taken appropriate steps to ensure workplace transport safety. The workplace is rarely tidy. The workplace is organised so vehicles and pedestrians can operate in a safe manner. Employees understand the dangers of workplace transport. We have a problem with reversing vehicles. This company has found it difficult to reduce dangers arising from workplace transport.

ANONYMOUS AND CONFIDENTIAL 71

2. Please tick the appropriate boxes: Yes No Don’t Not

Know Applicable A risk assessment has been conducted for our workplace transport o o o o Traffic and warning signs in the workplace are the same as those o o o o found on public highways. Regular inspections and services are carried out on all vehicles, in o o o oaccordance with manufacturer’s recommendations. Employees are disciplined for having accidents. o o o oControl of vehicle movements is a priority within this organisation. o o o oDocumented daily/ weekly safety checks are conducted on vehicles. o o o oPersons required to drive company vehicles have their driving o o o olicence checked annually.

C. LEGISLATION

1. Please tick the regulations you feel are appropriate to your company:

Yes No Don’t Know Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 o o o

Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 o o o

Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 o o o

Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 o o o

Construction (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1996 o o o

Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 1994 o o o

Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences, 1995 o o o

D. CONTROL MEASURES

The following questions relate to workplace transport safety control measures that may be found in your workplace. Please tick the appropriate boxes to indicate whether this work site has these control measures and to what extent they are present e.g. if you feel that this site has the control measure in all appropriate places, you would tick the box “yes, 100%”. Indicate how effective you feel the control measures present at this work site are at making your workplace transport safer. Score effectiveness from 1 to 5, with 1 being not at all effective and 5 being extremely effective.

1. Pedestrian Safety Yes 100%

Yes 75 –

Yes 50-

Yes, Less than

No but needed

No not needed

Don’t know.

Effectiveness (Circle the

100% 75% 50% appropriate no.) Separate vehicle and pedestrian routes o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Separate vehicle, pedestrian and public o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 doors Subways/ footbridges for pedestrians o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Level crossings for pedestrians o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Dropped kerbs at all pedestrian crossing o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 places

Signage to warn pedestrians of hazards o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

ANONYMOUS AND CONFIDENTIAL 72

o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 Pedestrian deterrent paving.

Safe haven for pedestrians to stand when o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 vehicles are reversing Barriers positioned so vehicles do not o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 collide with people when reversing

2. Traffic Routes Yes 100%

Yes 75 -

Yes 50-

Yes, Less than

No but needed

No not needed

Don’t know.

Effectiveness (Circle the

100% 75% 50% appropriate no) Crash barriers, where appropriate. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Suitable barriers at entrances, exits and o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 corners Height barriers. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

High wiring, lighting/ shielded pipes and o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 electric cables Loading bays situated away from steep o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 gradients Loading bays situated away from o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 overhead cables Loading bay and sheeting area protected o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 from adverse weather conditions Loading bays situated away from o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 passing traffic and public roads. Forklift truck routes avoiding public o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 roads Easy access for emergency vehicles o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Sufficient, wide enough traffic routes so o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 vehicles can pass and circulate easily. One way system. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Traffic routes without blind spots or o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 tight corners. Regular inspections and maintenance of o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

traffic routes

Safety banks to prevent vehicles o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 overturning on unmade roads Forklift truck routes avoiding speed o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 ramps Wide entrances/ gates o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Traffic routes away from vulnerable or o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 potentially hazardous structures.

Safe, practical, suitable and sufficient o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 parking areas for vehicles

Suitable lighting o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Firm, even ground o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

ANONYMOUS AND CONFIDENTIAL 73

Yes Yes Yes Yes, No but No not Don’t Effectiveness 3. Vehicle Safety 100% 75 - 50- Less than needed needed know. (Circle the

100% 75% 50% appropriate no) Seat belt on vehicles o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Suitable and effective brakes on vehicles o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Windscreens with wipers on vehicles. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Head lights on vehicles. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Horns on vehicles. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Bumpers on vehicles o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Sun visors on vehicles. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Brake lights on vehicles o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Reversing warning light or sound on o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 vehicles

Flashing amber lights on vehicles, where o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 appropriate. Warning signs on vehicles, eg long o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 vehicle, where appropriate. Control system to prevent vehicles from o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 moving when fork lift trucks are loading or unloading Speed limiter on vehicles o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Rollover protection strategy on vehicles o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Mirrors on vehicles to aid visibility. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Rear lens on vehicles to aid reversing, o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 where appropriate. Radar sensors to warn drivers if o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 reversing too near to an object.

CCTV on vehicles to aid reversing. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Crash Data Recorders on Vehicles o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 (black box technology) Vehicle ‘skirts’ to minimise damage. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Guarding of dangerous parts on vehicles o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 eg exposed exhaust pipes, chain drives)

4. Safety Measures and Signs

Speed ramps

Speed activated warning signs

Clearly displayed speed limits

Clean, well maintained warning signs

Road markings

Traffic Lights

Yes Yes Yes Yes, 100% 75 - 50- Less than

100% 75% 50% o o o o

o o o o

o o o o

o o o o

o o o o

o o o o

No but No not Don’t Effectiveness needed needed know. (Circle the

appropriate no) o o o 1 2 3 4 5

o o o 1 2 3 4 5

o o o 1 2 3 4 5

o o o 1 2 3 4 5

o o o 1 2 3 4 5

o o o 1 2 3 4 5

ANONYMOUS AND CONFIDENTIAL 74

Vibro-lines, causing an audible signal if o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 the vehicle crosses them. Vehicle locator system so the o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 whereabouts of vehicles are known. Guide humps/ rubber stops installed in o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 HGV parking bays Mirrors on walls/ ceiling/ other structure o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 to aid visibility Variable speed limits. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Cable/ Chain floor to reduce vehicle o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 movements during loading. CCTV on traffic routes o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

5. Safe Systems of Work Yes 100%

Yes 75 -

Yes 50-

Yes, Less than

No but needed

No not needed

Don’t know.

Effectiveness (Circle the

100% 75% 50% appropriate no) Banksman to aid reversing where o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 appropriate. Designated areas for reversing o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Exclusion of non-essential personnel o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 from reversing areas Restriction of vehicle movement when o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 known influx of personnel

Vehicle horns sounded at intersections. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Overtaking restrictions. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Hours driven by each driver monitored o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 and regular breaks provided.

Plan of workplace at entrance and o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 appropriate points showing vehicle routes, one way systems etc. Site procedures relayed to all visitors/ o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 contractors Operational procedures to protect driver o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 during unloading/ loading of heavy goods vehicles. No parking signage. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Double yellow lines to indicate no o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 parking.

6. Training/ Selection Yes 100%

Yes 75 -

Yes 50-

Yes, Less than

No but needed

No not needed

Don’t know.

Effectiveness (Circle the

100% 75% 50% appropriate no) Suitable selection process for drivers. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Intermittent driver medicals. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Regular vision tests. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Impairment testing of drivers (drink/ o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 drugs) Continual driver assessments including o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 refresher and temporary staff training.

ANONYMOUS AND CONFIDENTIAL 75

Skills training for drivers. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Provision of information and instruction o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 for drivers. Basic vehicle maintenance training. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Supervision of vehicles and drivers. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

7. Personal Protective Equipment Yes 100%

Yes 75 -

Yes 50-

Yes, Less than

No but needed

No not needed

Don’t know.

Effectiveness (Circle the

100% 75% 50% appropriate no) Provision of necessary protective o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 equipment for staff and visitors e.g. hard hats High visibility clothing for workers in o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 all transport areas Steel toe capped boots for all employees. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Workplace clothing to avoid hazards o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 from loose clothing. Protection for drivers in adverse weather o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 conditions.

Please write any additional information or comments in this box:

A small number of organisations will be invited to take part in the second phase of this research. This will involve visiting your premises and viewing some of the workplace transport control measures you have implemented. All information collected during these visits will be completely confidential and will only be used for the purposes of this research.

If you would be willing to participate in this second phase, please complete the details below.

SURNAME: INITIALS: TITLE:

JOB TITLE: WORK TEL NO.

COMPANY NAME:

ADDRESS:

POSTCODE:

Thank you for your assistance.

Please return this questionnaire to TRL Limited by April 6th in the pre-paid envelope provided.

ANONYMOUS AND CONFIDENTIAL 76

Industry sector ref. no.

CONTROL MEASURES FOR WORKPLACE TRANSPORT SAFETY.

Please complete this questionnaire by ticking the appropriate boxes and writing in the spaces provided. It should only take about 20 minutes to complete. All of the information you provide will be treated in the strictest confidence and complete anonymity can be assured. Thank you for your help.

A. GENERAL

If your organisation has more than one site, please only answer for the site to which this questionnaire was addressed.

(Please tick the boxes as appropriate.)

1. What is your role within this organisation?

Safety/ Risk Manager o Middle Manager o

Safety Advisor o Supervisor o

Senior Manager o Shop Floor Worker o

Transport Manager o Other (Please State)

Years 0-2 3-5 6-10 11-15 16-25 26-40 Over 40

2 How many years has the company been o o o o o o oestablished?

3 How many years has the company been operating o o o o o o ofrom this site?

4 How old are the buildings on this site within which o o o o o o oyour organisation operates? (If your company has more than one building, of different ages, please tick all appropriate boxes)

0-10 11-20 21-40 41-60 61-100 101- Over If over 200, 200 200 Please state no:

5 How many employees are there o o o o o o owithin the company? (at thissite).

6 How many non-permanent members of staff (agency,

o o o o o o o contractors etc.) work at thissite, in a typical month? (at thissite)

7. What tasks do the non-permanent members of staff undertake at this site?

ANONYMOUS AND CONFIDENTIAL 77

8. Which of the following vehicles are used at, or driven onto, this work site, (inside or outside buildings) and in what quantity: Please include all visiting vehicles e.g. delivery. (Please tick as appropriate and state amount either in total or per day/ week etc, if known)

How much of the entire work site is accessible to this type of vehicle?

Yes Number (Delete total/ per day etc as No 0-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% appropriate)

Cars o total/ per day/ week/ month o o o o o

Vans o total/ per day/ week/ month o o o o o

Forklift Trucks o total/ per day/ week/ month o o o o o

Heavy Goods Vehicles o total/ per day/ week/ month o o o o o

Trucks/ vans for carrying o total/ per day/ week/ month o o o o oequipment Mobile Equipment eg tugs o total/ per day/ week/ month o o o o oDumper Trucks o total/ per day/ week/ month o o o o o

Self Propelled Machinery o total/ per day/ week/ month o o o o oeg floor cleanersBicycles o total/ per day/ week/ month o o o o o

Motorcycles o total/ per day/ week/ month o o o o o

Other (Please State)

If you have ticked no to all of the above vehicles, please return this questionnaire to TRL

9. What is the approximate area of the whole of this site? (Please state approximate area in sq miles/ sq. metres/ dimensions in no of walking paces/ no of football pitches, for example)

10. What does your company do at these premises? (For example, manufacture ball bearings)

11. Is the following information recorded in your company: (Please tick as appropriate)

Yes No Don’t Know Accidents (damage to property) o o o

Injuries to people o o o

Near misses o o o

Safety Objectives o o o

Safety Performance Indicators o o o

Spillage (e.g. fuel/ chemicals) o o o

ANONYMOUS AND CONFIDENTIAL 78

12. Over the past three years, have there been any of the following vehicle accidents on your company site? (Exclude accidents on public roads). (Please tick as appropriate and state number, if known).

Yes If Yes, No Don’t KnowNumber

Vehicle accidents causing death o o o

Vehicle accidents causing major injury (Requiring the injured o o operson to have three days or more off work)

Vehicle accidents causing minor injury (requiring the injured o o operson to have less than three days off work)

13. Over the past three years, have there been any of the following incidents at this site (exclude incidents on public roads) involving workplace transport (Cars/ Vans/ ForkLift Trucks/ Lorries etc): (Please tick as appropriate and state number. If one incident fits into more than one of the categories below, please tick the most relevant option).

Yes If Yes, No Don’t Know Number

Objects falling from vehicles o o o People falling from vehicles o o o Vehicles overturning o o o People struck by a vehicle o o o People run over by a vehicle o o o People hit by objects dislodged by vehicles o o o People injured getting on or off vehicles. o o o Vehicle malfunctioning causing accident or injury. o o o Collision between vehicles o o o Collision between vehicles and property. o o o Accident or injury occurring during maintenance of vehicle o o o Loading/ Unloading of vehicles causing accident or injury. o o o

B. WORKPLACE TRANSPORT

1. Please indicate how much you agree or disagree with the following statements:

Strongly Agree Neither Agree Disagree Strongly Agree or Disagree Disagree

This company has taken appropriate steps to ensure workplace transport safety. The workplace is rarely tidy. The workplace is organised so vehicles and pedestrians can operate in a safe manner. Employees understand the dangers of workplace transport. We have a problem with reversing vehicles. This company has found it difficult to reduce dangers arising from workplace transport.

ANONYMOUS AND CONFIDENTIAL 79

2. Please tick the appropriate boxes: Yes No Don’t Not

Know Applicable A risk assessment has been conducted for our workplace transport o o o oTraffic and warning signs in the workplace are the same as those o o o ofound on public highways. Regular inspections and services are carried out on all vehicles, in o o o o accordance with manufacturer’s recommendations. Control of vehicle movements is a priority within this organisation. o o o oDocumented daily/ weekly safety checks are conducted on vehicles. o o o oPersons required to drive company vehicles have their driving o o o olicence checked annually.

C. LEGISLATION

1. Please tick the regulations you feel are appropriate to your company:

Yes No Don’t Know Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 o o o

Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 o o o

Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 o o o

Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 o o o

Construction (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1996 o o o

Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 1994 o o o

Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences, 1995 o o o

D. CONTROL MEASURES

The following questions relate to workplace transport safety control measures that may be found in your workplace. · Please tick the appropriate boxes to indicate whether this work site has these control measures and to what

extent they are present e.g. if you feel that this site has the control measure in all appropriate places, you would tick the box “yes, 100%”

· Indicate how effective you feel the control measures present at this work site are at making your workplace transport safer. Score effectiveness from 1 to 5, with 1 being not at all effective and 5 being extremely effective.

1. Pedestrian Safety Yes 100%

Yes 75 –

Yes 50-

Yes, Less than

No but needed

No not needed

Don’t know.

Effectiveness (Circle the

100% 75% 50% appropriate no.) Separate vehicle and pedestrian routes o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Separate vehicle, pedestrian and public o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 doors Subways/ footbridges for pedestrians o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 Level crossings for pedestrians o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 Dropped kerbs at all pedestrian crossing o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 places

Signage to warn pedestrians of hazards o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

ANONYMOUS AND CONFIDENTIAL 80

Yes Yes Yes Yes, No but No not Don’t Effectiveness 100% 75 – 50- Less than needed needed know. (Circle the

100% 75% 50% appropriate no.) 1 2 3 4 5 Pedestrian deterrent paving. o o o o o o o

1 2 3 4 5 vehicles are reversing Barriers positioned so vehicles do not

Safe haven for pedestrians to stand when o o o o o o o

1 2 3 4 5 collide with people when reversing

o o o o o o o

2. Traffic Routes Yes 100%

Yes 75 -

Yes 50-

Yes, Less than

No but needed

No not needed

Don’t know.

Effectiveness (Circle the

100% 75% 50% appropriate no) Crash barriers, where appropriate. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Suitable barriers at entrances, exits and o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 corners Height barriers. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

High wiring, lighting/ shielded pipes and o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 electric cables Loading bays situated away from steep o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 gradients Loading bays situated away from o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 overhead cables Loading bay and sheeting area protected o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 from adverse weather conditions Loading bays situated away from o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 passing traffic and public roads. Forklift truck routes avoiding public o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 roads Easy access for emergency vehicles o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Sufficient, wide enough traffic routes so o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 vehicles can pass and circulate easily. One way system. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Traffic routes without blind spots or o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 tight corners. Regular inspections and maintenance of o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 traffic routes Safety banks to prevent vehicles o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 overturning on unmade roads Forklift truck routes avoiding speed o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 ramps

Wide entrances/ gates o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Traffic routes away from vulnerable or o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 potentially hazardous structures.

Safe, practical, suitable and sufficient o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 parking areas for vehicles

Suitable lighting o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Firm, even ground o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

ANONYMOUS AND CONFIDENTIAL 81

3. Vehicle Safety Yes 100%

Yes 75 -

Yes 50-

Yes, Less than

No but needed

No not needed

Don’t know.

Effectiveness (Circle the

100% 75% 50% appropriate no) Seat belt on vehicles o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Suitable and effective brakes on vehicles o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Windscreens with wipers on vehicles. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Head lights on vehicles. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Horns on vehicles. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Bumpers on vehicles o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Sun visors on vehicles. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Brake lights on vehicles o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Reversing warning light or sound on o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 vehicles

Flashing amber lights on vehicles, where o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 appropriate. Warning signs on vehicles, eg long o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 vehicle, where appropriate. Control system to prevent vehicles from o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 moving when fork lift trucks are loading or unloading Speed limiter on vehicles o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Rollover protection strategy on vehicles o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Mirrors on vehicles to aid visibility. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Rear lens on vehicles to aid reversing, o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 where appropriate. Radar sensors to warn drivers if o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 reversing too near to an object.

CCTV on vehicles to aid reversing. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Crash Data Recorders on vehicles (black o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 box technology) Vehicle ‘skirts’ to minimise damage. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Guarding of dangerous parts on vehicles o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 eg exposed exhaust pipes, chain drives)

4. Safety Measures and Signs

Speed ramps

Speed activated warning signs

Clearly displayed speed limits

Clean, well maintained warning signs

Road markings

Traffic Lights

Yes 100%

o

o

o

o

o

o

Yes 75 ­100% o

o

o

o

o

o

Yes 50­75% o

o

o

o

o

o

Yes, Less than 50% o

o

o

o

o

o

No but needed

o

o

o

o

o

o

No not needed

o

o

o

o

o

o

Don’t know.

o

o

o

o

o

o

Effectiveness (Circle the appropriate no) 1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

ANONYMOUS AND CONFIDENTIAL 82

Yes Yes Yes Yes, No but No not Don’t Effectiveness 100% 75 – 50- Less than needed needed know. (Circle the

100% 75% 50% appropriate no.) Vibro-lines, causing an audible signal if o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 the vehicle crosses them. Vehicle locator system so the o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 whereabouts of vehicles are known. Guide humps/ rubber stops installed in o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 HGV parking bays Mirrors on walls/ ceiling/ other structure o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 to aid visibility Variable speed limits. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Cable/ Chain floor to reduce vehicle o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 movements during loading. CCTV on traffic routes o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

5. Safe Systems of Work Yes 100%

Yes 75 -

Yes 50-

Yes, Less than

No but needed

No not needed

Don’t know.

Effectiveness (Circle the

100% 75% 50% appropriate no) Banksman to aid reversing where o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 appropriate. Designated areas for reversing o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Exclusion of non-essential personnel o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 from reversing areas Restriction of vehicle movement when o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 known influx of personnel

Vehicle horns sounded at intersections. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Overtaking restrictions. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Hours driven by each driver monitored o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 and regular breaks provided.

Plan of workplace at entrance and o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 appropriate points showing vehicle routes, one way systems etc. Site procedures relayed to all visitors/ o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 contractors Operational procedures to protect driver o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 during unloading/ loading of heavy goods vehicles. No parking signage. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Double yellow lines to indicate no o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 parking.

6. Training/ Selection Yes 100%

Yes 75 -

Yes 50-

Yes, Less than

No but needed

No not needed

Don’t know.

Effectiveness (Circle the

100% 75% 50% appropriate no) Suitable selection process for drivers. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Intermittent driver medicals. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Regular vision tests. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Impairment testing of drivers (drink/ o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 drugs)

ANONYMOUS AND CONFIDENTIAL 83

Yes Yes Yes Yes, No but No not Don’t Effectiveness 100% 75 – 50- Less than needed needed know. (Circle the

100% 75% 50% appropriate no.) Continual driver assessments including o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 refresher and temporary staff training. Skills training for drivers. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Provision of information and instruction o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 for drivers. Basic vehicle maintenance training. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Supervision of vehicles and drivers. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

7. Personal Protective Equipment Yes 100%

Yes 75 -

Yes 50-

Yes, Less than

No but needed

No not needed

Don’t know.

Effectiveness (Circle the

100% 75% 50% appropriate no) Provision of necessary protective o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 equipment for staff and visitors e.g. hard hats High visibility clothing for workers in o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 all transport areas Steel toe capped boots for all employees. o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5

Workplace clothing to avoid hazards o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 from loose clothing. Protection for drivers in adverse weather o o o o o o o 1 2 3 4 5 conditions.

Please write any additional information or comments in this box:

A small number of organisations will be invited to take part in the second phase of this research. This will involve one visit to your premises to view some of the workplace transport control measures you have implemented. All information collected during these visits will be completely confidential and will only be used for the purposes of this research. If more information is required, please contact Camilla Fowler on 01344 770710 or [email protected].

If you would be willing to participate in this second phase, please complete the details below.

SURNAME: INITIALS: TITLE:

JOB TITLE: WORK TEL NO.

COMPANY NAME:

ADDRESS:

POSTCODE:

Thank you for your assistance.

Please return this questionnaire to TRL Limited by April 27th

ANONYMOUS AND CONFIDENTIAL 84

APPENDIX THREE – TABLE SHOWING THE IMPLEMENTATION AND EFFECTIVENESS SCORES FOR

INDIVIDUAL CONTROL MEASURES:

85

86

Control Measure Number of companies who

have implemented the identified control measure

Mean extent to which the measure has been

implemented

Mean perceived effectiveness

1. Pedestrian Safety Separate vehicle and pedestrian routes 124 61.2 3.5

Separate vehicle, pedestrian and public doors

130 72.3 3.6

Subways/ footbridges for pedestrians 17 50.0 3.0

Level crossings for pedestrians 36 45.1 3.3

Dropped kerbs at all pedestrian crossing places

40 70.0 3.6

Signage to warn pedestrians of hazards 130 71.2 3.4

Pedestrian deterrent paving. 25 32.0 3.1

Safe haven for pedestrians to stand when vehicles are reversing

71 54.6 3.3

Barriers positioned so vehicles do not collide with people when reversing

63 43.5 3.2

2. Traffic Routes Crash barriers, where appropriate. 87 59.1 3.5

Suitable barriers at entrances, exits and corners

109 60.2 3.5

Height barriers. 40 43.1 3.2 High wiring, lighting/ shielded pipes and electric cables

78 76.6 3.7

Loading bays situated away from steep gradients

115 83.2 3.8

Loading bays situated away from overhead cables

117 87.9 3.9

Loading bay and sheeting area protected from adverse weather conditions

110 62.2 3.6

Loading bays situated away from passing traffic and public roads.

138 82.0 3.8

Forklift truck routes avoiding public roads 116 83.1 4.0

Easy access for emergency vehicles 186 92.0 3.9

87

Sufficient, wide enough traffic routes so vehicles can pass and circulate easily.

167 77.7 3.6

One way system. 59 51.5 3.4 Traffic routes without blind spots or tight corners.

131 72.0 3.3

Regular inspections and maintenance of traffic routes

134 68.3 3.4

Safety banks to prevent vehicles overturning on unmade roads

29 30.2 3.2

Forklift truck routes avoiding speed ramps 53 71.5 3.9

Wide entrances/ gates 168 88.6 3.8

Traffic routes away from vulnerable or potentially hazardous structures.

132 80.9 3.6

Safe, practical, suitable and sufficient parking areas for vehicles

194 85.2 3.8

Suitable lighting 192 86.6 3.8 Firm, even ground 197 86.7 3.8

3. Vehicle Safety Seat belt on vehicles 170 90.4 3.9 Suitable and effective brakes on vehicles 198 98.7 4.1

Windscreens with wipers on vehicles. 181 95.6 4.0

Head lights on vehicles. 188 97.3 4.1

Horns on vehicles. 196 98.6 4.1 Bumpers on vehicles 175 95.4 4.0 Sun visors on vehicles. 172 87.6 3.9

Brake lights on vehicles 188 96.1 4.0

Reversing warning light or sound on vehicles 177 89.8 4.0

Flashing amber lights on vehicles, where appropriate.

132 89.9 3.9

Warning signs on vehicles, eg long vehicle, where appropriate.

82 88.9 4.0

Control system to prevent vehicles from moving when fork lift trucks are loading or unloading

63 65.9 3.6

Speed limiter on vehicles 89 77.7 3.7

88

Rollover protection strategy on vehicles 98 82.0 3.6

Mirrors on vehicles to aid visibility. 174 91.7 3.8

Rear lens on vehicles to aid reversing, where appropriate.

81 73.3 3.6

Radar sensors to warn drivers if reversing too near to an object.

30 48.8 3.2

CCTV on vehicles to aid reversing. 22 25.0 3.4

Crash Data Recorders on vehicles (black box technology)

19 40.1 3.3

Vehicle ‘skirts’ to minimise damage. 56 57.8 3.4

Guarding of dangerous parts on vehicles eg exposed exhaust pipes, chain drives)

92 84.5 3.6

4. Safety Measures and Signs Speed ramps 65 58.7 3.5 Speed activated warning signs 22 34.7 3.1

Clearly displayed speed limits 112 73.1 3.3

Clean, well maintained warning signs 131 78.1 3.4

Road markings 92 67.9 3.3 Traffic Lights 22 42.0 3.5 Vibro-lines, causing an audible signal if the vehicle crosses them.

18 16.7 3.2

Vehicle locator system so the whereabouts of vehicles are known.

25 38.0 3.5

Guide humps/ rubber stops installed in HGV parking bays

35 50.7 3.6

Mirrors on walls/ ceiling/ other structure to aid visibility

58 49.4 3.4

Variable speed limits. 30 37.1 3.1 Cable/ Chain floor to reduce vehicle movements during loading.

23 16.8 3.1

CCTV on traffic routes 48 70.8 3.4

89

5. Safe Systems of Work Banksman to aid reversing where appropriate.

76 65.6 3.6

Designated areas for reversing 65 59.8 3.4

Exclusion of non­essential personnel from reversing areas

92 59.9 3.4

Restriction of vehicle movement when known influx of personnel

65 51.2 3.2

Vehicle horns sounded at intersections. 79 62.0 3.5

Overtaking restrictions. 45 61.7 3.5

Hours driven by each driver monitored and regular breaks provided.

98 86.7 3.8

Plan of workplace at entrance and appropriate points showing vehicle routes, one way systems etc.

66 45.5 3.3

Site procedures relayed to all visitors/ contractors 114 63.3 3.5

Operational procedures to protect driver during unloading/ loading of heavy goods vehicles.

107 58.1 3.4

No parking signage. 88 59.9 3.3 Double yellow lines to indicate no parking. 61 64.1 3.3

6. Training/ Selection

Suitable selection process for drivers. 153 85.3 3.7

Intermittent driver medicals. 95 54.5 3.4

Regular vision tests. 116 50.6 3.4 Impairment testing of drivers (drink/ drugs) 80 33.8 3.1

Continual driver assessments including refresher and temporary staff training.

120 62.5 3.4

Skills training for drivers. 97 64.6 3.3

Provision of information and instruction for drivers.

134 71.0 3.4

90

Basic vehicle maintenance training. 101 65.2 3.3

Supervision of vehicles and drivers. 128 76.4 3.5

7. Personal Protective Equipment Provision of necessary protective equipment for staff and visitors e.g. hard hats

140 91.0 3.7

High visibility clothing for workers in all transport areas

124 73.9 3.5

Steel toe capped boots for all employees. 146 87.0 3.8

Workplace clothing to avoid hazards from loose clothing.

139 88.1 3.7

Protection for drivers in adverse weather conditions.

144 86.3 3.7

91

92

HSE Health & Safety

Executive

Review of workplace control measures to reduce risks arising

from the movement of vehicles

Phase 2

Camilla Fowler Transport Research Laboratory

Old Wokingham Road Crowthorne

Berkshire RG45 6AU

United Kingdom

The aim of the research is to obtain information about workplace transport safety including the types and effectiveness of the control measures and systems implemented in industry, so best practice can be established. The research has been conducted in two phases. Phase one involved obtaining and analysing data on workplace transport control measures through a postal questionnaire to a number of specified industry sectors. Phase two involved undertaking more in-depth studies of workplace controls through the inspection of twenty industrial sites. This report marks the completion of phase two.

This report and the work it describes were funded by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE). Its contents, including any opinions and/or conclusions expressed, are those of the author alone and do not necessarily reflect HSE policy.

HSE BOOKS

ii

1.2. 2.1 2.2 2.3 3.4.4.1 4.1.1

4.1.2

4.1.3

4.1.4

4.1.5

4.2 4.2.1

4.2.2

4.2.3

4.2.4

4.2.5

4.2.6

4.2.7

4.2.8

4.3 4.3.1

4.3.2

4.3.3

4.4 4.4.1

4.4.2

4.4.3

4.4.4

CONTENTS

Page

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY v

near misses

INTRODUCTION 1

AIMS OF THE RESEARCH PROJECT 4 Overall aims 4

Summary of phase one 5 Detailed aims for phase two 7

METHODOLOGY 8

RESULTS 10

Risk assessment and safety management systems 10 Risk assessment 10

Safety documentation 11

Communication 11

Safety Culture 12

Improvement notices 12

Safe systems of work 12 Regular inspections of driving licences 13

Monitoring of driver hours and frequency of breaks 13

Use of banksmen to aid reversing 13

Sounding the horn of vehicles at intersections in warehouses 13

Contractor and visitor safety 14

Designated areas for reversing 14

Safe loading and unloading of vehicles 15

Additional safe systems of work 15

Accident and incident reporting 16 Recording of accidents, incidents and near misses 16

Use of accident, incident and near miss data 16

Incentives and disincentives to report accidents, incidents and 16

Vehicle safety 17

Engineered reversing aids 17

Service and maintenance of vehicles 18

Vehicle checks 18

Additional control measures 19

iii

4.4.5

4.5 4.6 4.6.1

4.6.2

4.6.3

4.6.4

4.6.5

4.7 4.7.1

4.7.2

4.8 4.9 4.10 5.6. 7. 8.9. 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7

Overall vehicle safety 19

Traffic routes and safety engineering measures 19 Pedestrian safety 25

Segregated vehicle and pedestrian routes 25

Pedestrian routes that are protected from vehicles 25

Pedestrian crossings 26

Pedestrian deterrent paving 26

Suitable pedestrian safety for the number of pedestrians using the 26

site

Selection and training 26

Selection 26

Training 27

Personal protective equipment 27 Cost of implementation 28 Compliance with legislation 30

DISCUSSION 36

CONCLUSIONS 40 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER WORK 42

REFERENCES

CASE STUDIES Case study one

Case study two

Case study three

Case study four

Case study five

Case study six

Additional best practice

43 45 47

54

59

63

69

73

77

APPENDIX ONE – SITE CHECKLIST FOR CONTROL 83

MEASURES

ENGINEERED CONTROL MEASURES COMPARED BETWEEN COMPANIES

APPENDIX TWO – SUMMARY TABLES OF THE DATA 91

COLLECTED FROM EACH COMPANY APPENDIX THREE – THE EFFECTIVENESS OF KEY 107

iv

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The aim of the research is to obtain information about workplace transport safety including the types and effectiveness of the control measures and systems implemented in industry, so best practice can be established. The research has been conducted in two phases. Phase one involved obtaining and analysing data on workplace transport control measures through a postal questionnaire to a number of specified industry sectors. Phase two involved undertaking more in­depth studies of workplace controls through the inspection of twenty industrial sites. This report marks the completion of phase two. Phase one is detailed in project report PR/SE/325/01 (Fowler, 2000).

Twenty companies were selected for phase two of the research out of the sixty-five companies that volunteered to participate. It was ensured that the twenty companies selected were from a range of industry sectors, with varying number of employees, vehicle types and quantities, and age of premises. It was also ensured that all of the control measures identified in phase one and detailed on the questionnaire had been implemented by at least one company. The selected companies were contacted and appointments made. The companies were assured confidentiality and anonymity.

At each of the sites, traffic movements were observed and the implemented control measures noted using a previously designed checklist. The effectiveness of each control measure observed was subjectively evaluated based on observations made and professional judgement. An interview was conducted with the safety or transport manager from each of the companies as well as a driver and pedestrian. The aim of the interviews was to gain information about the company safety systems, safe working practices, safe systems of work, the effectiveness of these systems, risk assessment, accident and incident reporting, the company safety culture, communication, awareness of legislation and the cost of implementing the control measures observed. At the sites where it was inconvenient to conduct a formal interview with a pedestrian or driver, they were questioned informally, if possible, whilst observations were being conducted. Once all information had been collated about the control measures and safety systems implemented, a subjective assessment was made about the overall effectiveness of the measures and systems implemented to control workplace transport. The majority of the companies visited could not supply information about the cost of implementing control. Therefore this data was obtained independently from various information sources.

Two of the twenty companies visited were deemed to have implemented adequate systems and control measures to ensure workplace transport safety. However the six companies revealing the best practice observed were selected as case studies.

It is considered that workplace transport safety can only be achieved through the implementation of an entire system, including safety documentation, risk assessment, accident, incident and near miss reporting and analysis, training and education, communication, risk assessment and the implementation of control measures to reduce identified risks. If one or several elements of the system are omitted, the system becomes less effective. For example one of the companies visited had only implemented safe systems of work to control workplace transport. Through observations at this company it was noted that as the frequency of traffic movements increased, the compliance with the implemented safe systems of work decreased. Had engineered control measures been implemented, this may have

v

encouraged employees to comply with the safe systems of work by creating physical reminders of the systems. There is likely to be a beneficial, two-way interaction between engineered control measures and measures based on training and education. Not only will the education improve acceptance of engineering measures as mentioned above, but the fact that the company has introduced engineering measures is likely to reinforce the perceived importance of what is learned during training.

The effectiveness of control measures depends on several variables, including the types and number of vehicles being used, the frequency of traffic movements, the tasks being undertaken, the dimensions and condition of the site, the number of pedestrians and members of the public, the safety systems implemented and the overall safety culture of the company.

The companies visited had a lower level of compliance with The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 1994 and The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 than with other relevant legislation. This may be because companies were not aware of the need to comply with the traffic signs regulations, and companies tend not to be aware of the need to conduct a risk assessment for workplace transport.

It was noted that the companies who had been issued with improvement notices from the HSE had high level of awareness about workplace transport safety and had conducted a suitable and sufficient risk assessment. Guidance on the content and the need to conduct a risk assessment for workplace transport may be required. Some companies felt that the safety of their site could be significantly improved if they were able to communicate with the HSE without being inhibited by concerns about negative repercussions. They felt that the HSE should demonstrate a proactive approach to safety and conduct inspections before an accident happens or a safety issue raised.

A tendency was observed at the companies visited to implement systems and measures that they were already familiar with. For example, there was a high level of vehicle safety and the most frequently implemented control measures were standard measures that are not necessarily implemented for safety, for example drainage and lighting. Few companies had implemented measures specifically to ensure workplace transport safety. These measures were more likely to be implemented in companies that had conducted a risk assessment on workplace transport and had identified the specific risks that needed to be reduced.

The findings of this research are based on inspections and findings made at twenty companies. It would be desirable to conduct further, more in depth evaluations on a larger sample of companies to ensure that the conclusions drawn apply generally.

vi

1. INTRODUCTION

The Health and Safety at Work Act, 1974, states:

‘It shall be the duty of every employer to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of his employees.’ (Section 2(1)).

Section 3 of the Act extends the employer’s duty of care to include the health and safety of persons not in his employment who may be affected by the risks posed by his undertaking.

Underpinning this Act are the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations, 1999. These state that every employer shall conduct a suitable and sufficient assessment of the risk to the health and safety of persons in his employment and persons who may be affected by his undertaking. The employer must record the findings of this assessment and implement any preventative or protective measures to reduce the risks posed, as low as reasonably practicable.

Therefore, legislation requires a risk assessment to be conducted for all workplace activities including workplace transport. Workplace transport refers to any vehicle or piece of mobile equipment, used by employers, employees, self-employed people or visitors in any work setting. Examples of workplace transport vehicles and equipment are listed below:

· Cars · Vans · Fork Lift Trucks · Heavy Goods Vehicles · Light Goods Vehicles · Industrial Trucks · Mobile Equipment · Dumper Trucks · Straddle Carriers · Rubber Tyred Gantries · Self Propelled Machinery · Motorcycles · Bicycles

The risks posed by workplace transport must be identified, minimised and controlled. Measures that can be taken to reduce the inherent risk posed by workplace transport are outlined in The Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992. Further Regulations include The Construction (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1996 (only applicable to constructions sites) and The Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations, 1998. Further guidance on workplace transport risks and control measures includes:

· Workplace Transport Safety, HS(G)136

· Managing Vehicle safety at the Workplace, INDG. 199

1

· Safety Policy Directorate – Workplace Transport and Workplaces (www.hse.gov.uk/spd/noframes/spdwktra.htm) (www.hse.gov.uk/spd/noframes/spdwkpl.htm)

· Danger, Vehicles at Work – HSE video.

The HSE hierarchy of risk control measures (HS(G)65) is as follows:

1. Eliminate risks or substitute activity, substance or process by a less hazardous activity/ substance/ process.

2. Combat risk at source by engineering control measures.

3. Minimise risk by suitable safe systems of work, for example reduce exposure to hazards.

4. Mitigate the consequences.

Workplace layout is often the primary control measure, but it is important not to overlook other essential control measures. Workplace transport safety control measures can be grouped into seven main categories:

1. Pedestrian Safety, for example, pedestrian crossings and separate vehicle and pedestrian traffic routes.

2. Traffic Routes, for example, crash barriers and one way systems.

3. Vehicle Safety, for example, seat belts and reversing lights.

4. Safety Measures and Signs, for example, speed ramps and warning signs. (Hereafter referred to as ‘site safety engineering measures and signs’)

5. Safe Systems of Work, for example, designated areas for reversing and overtaking restrictions.

6. Training and Selection, for example, driving assessments and vehicle maintenance training.

7. Personal Protective Equipment, for example, hard hats and high visibility clothing.

On average, 70 people are killed and 2000 seriously injured in workplace transport accidents every year (HSC Newsletter, October 1999). Vehicles are the second highest cause of death in the workplace. Whilst the type of equipment and the working environment may differ significantly across workplaces, transport is recognised as a significant risk for all industries.

The greatest number of deaths from workplace transport arises from the movement of vehicles, including people being struck by objects falling from vehicles (usually part of the load) or vehicles overturning. Reversing vehicles also presents a particular hazard. (HSC Newsletter, October, 1999)

These facts alone demonstrate that the risks posed by workplace transport are not being suitably identified and sufficiently controlled. Therefore, employer’s compliance with UK health and safety legislation is questionable.

2

It is important to establish the extent that recommended control measures have been implemented and gain an insight into the types of organisation and industry that contribute to the high death rate from workplace transport accidents. Such industries can then be targeted for guidance and assistance from regulatory bodies in the future.

Many organisations have implemented measures and systems to control the risks posed by vehicles in their workplace. It is important to examine these measures, assess their effectiveness in reducing the inherent risk and calculate their cost of implementation and maintenance. Lessons can be learnt from these companies’ experience and considered when establishing best practice.

The HSE is aware of the large number of industrial accidents that are attributable to workplace transport. The HSE believe that industries hold a negative attitude towards the control of vehicle movements and are concerned that the level of compliance with relevant health and safety legislation is low. The HSE recognises the need to develop a workable, comprehensive and transparent strategy on workplace transport and need information from research to develop supporting material.

This research aims to gain an insight into the types of measures used within industry to control workplace transport and the effectiveness, implementation costs and maintenance costs of such measures. Compliance with legislation will be examined and the reasons why safety problems arising from vehicle movements in workplaces is neglected, explored. From the research, best practice will be established and fed into the HSE transport strategy and future workplace transport guidance.

3

2. AIMS OF THE RESEARCH PROJECT 2.1 OVERALL AIMS

The aims of the project, as specified by the HSE are as follows:

· Determine the types of workplace control measures in use to reduce the risk from vehicle movements.

· Establish the degree to which control measures are implemented across industry and evaluate compliance with Workplace Regulations and the Construction (Health, Safety and Welfare Regulations 1996.

· Review the effectiveness of different types of control measures, their cost of implementation and cost of maintenance.

· Establish changes to the workplace and best practice demonstrated. · Gain an understanding of why the control of vehicle movements in workplaces is

neglected or not seen as a problem. · Examine interface with the public and extended workforce. · Provide six suitable case studies for HSE publications. · Identify further suitable case study material.

The project has been conducted in two phases. Phase one involved obtaining and analysing data on workplace transport control measures through a postal questionnaire to a number of specified industry sectors. Phase two involves undertaking more in depth studies of workplace controls through the inspection of twenty industrial sites. This report marks the completion of phase two. Phase one is detailed in project report PR/SE/325/01 (Fowler, 2000).

4

2.2 SUMMARY OF PHASE ONE

One hundred companies were randomly selected from each of the identified industry sectors. The companies were of varying size (number of employees) and were operating from premises of different ages. Through a brainstorming session key technical members of the project team compiled a list of potential measures that could be used to control workplace transport. The measures could be grouped under the following categories: pedestrian safety, traffic routes, vehicle safety, site safety engineering measures and signs, safe systems of work, training and selection and personal protective equipment.

After an extensive literature search and familiarisation with relevant legislation and guidance, a questionnaire was designed. The information being sought included general information about the company, such as the number of employees, the types of vehicles in use within the work site, accident reporting, general workplace transport safety, awareness of legislation, the implementation of control measures and their perceived effectiveness.

The questionnaire was piloted on ten local companies through face to face interviewing. Comments were noted and suggestions fed into the redesign of the questionnaire. The questionnaire was then re-piloted on twenty-five companies through telephone interviewing. The final version of the questionnaire was mailed to two thousand companies and a covering letter and pre-paid envelope were included.

Sufficient responses were received to allow statistical analysis and the responses were weighted in line with the total number of organisations in each industry sector, so conclusions could be drawn about the population as a whole.

There was a reasonably high reported level of awareness of health and safety legislation, but a sizeable minority of companies had little awareness, and did not record accident data. About 40% of the companies that reported being aware of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations said they had not conducted a risk assessment of workplace transport. These findings suggest that there is considerable scope for improving the promulgation of regulations, guidance on good practice, and enforcement.

As the number of vehicles on site increased, the rated effectiveness of vehicle safety measures, safe systems of work, and personal protective equipment decreased. However, the use of training, selection and site safety engineering measures and signs tended to increase. It may be that, with many vehicles on site, the complexity of the safety problem is seen to require these additional types of measure. Also, some sites with many vehicles will be ones in which company-based vehicle safety measures are inappropriate as the cars are owned and maintained outside the control of the organisation.

Control of vehicle movements in the workplace seen as a high priority for 41% of the sampled companies, and 52% of the sample said they had conducted risk assessments to identify and evaluate the risks posed. All participating companies had implemented some measures to control workplace transport safety. The measures implemented by the most companies were suitable and effective brakes on vehicles, horns on vehicles and suitable lighting in the workplace.

There was a tendency for implementation and perceived effectiveness scores for workplace transport safety control measures to increase as number of employees increased. Such a tendency is probably to be expected since larger companies will

5

tend to have more complex workplace transport safety problems requiring a wider spectrum of control measures. However, another part of the explanation may be that larger companies have better organised and better resourced health and safety functions, suggesting that the smaller companies may be a particularly important target for future efforts to improve workplace transport safety.

6

2.3 DETAILED AIMS FOR PHASE TWO

Phase two of the research involves undertaking in depth studies of workplace control measures through the inspection of twenty industrial sites.

The aims of phase two are as follows:

§ To evaluate compliance with health and safety legislation that is applicable to workplace transport safety.

§ To review the effectiveness of different types of control measures and their cost of implementation.

§ To gain an understanding of whether the control of vehicle movements in workplaces is neglected and if so, why?

§ To determine the steps taken by companies to identify, evaluate and reduce the risks posed by workplace transport.

§ To examine, where appropriate, the interface of workplace transport with the public and extended workforce.

§ Establish best practice for controlling workplace transport.

§ To provide six case studies for future HSE publications.

7

3. METHODOLOGY Phase two of the research involved undertaking in-depth studies of the measures used to control workplace transport at selected industrial sites. Sixty-five companies indicated on the phase one questionnaire that they would be willing to participate in phase two of the research. The Health and Safety Executive indicated in the project specification that visits to twenty companies would be sufficient for this phase. It was ensured that the twenty companies selected were from a range of industry sectors, with varying number of employees, vehicle types and quantities, and age of premises. It was also ensured that all of the control measures identified in phase one and detailed on the questionnaire had been implemented by at least one company. The selection of the companies relied on the companies volunteering to participate, it is therefore likely that the sample tends to over-represent companies that have reasonably good practice in workplace transport safety.

The selected companies were contacted by telephone and appointments made to visit the company sites. The companies were assured confidentiality and anonymity and were briefed on the outline agenda for the visit. The outline agenda for the visits included observing the traffic movements on the site, evaluating the effectiveness of the control measures observed and informal interviews with a pedestrian, a driver and the safety or transport manager.

Prior to visiting the twenty companies, a site checklist was designed detailing all of potential control measures that could be observed. The checklist was divided into the following categories:

i) Pedestrian safety, for example pedestrian crossings.ii) Traffic routes, for example one way systems.iii) Vehicle safety, for example audible reversing alarms.iv) Site safety engineering measures and signs, for example road markings. v) Safe systems of work, for example designated areas for reversing.vi) Personal protective equipment, for example safety boots.vii) Additional observations, for example damage to vehicles or skid marks.

The checklist can be seen in Appendix 1. Guidance questions were also developed for the interviews with the driver and the safety or transport manager. A more realistic and overall impression of the company could be obtained from talking to a pedestrian and driver as well as the company safety or transport manager. The aim of the interviews was to gain information about the company safety systems, safe working practices, safe systems of work, the effectiveness of these systems, risk assessment, accident and incident reporting, the company safety culture, communication, awareness of legislation and the cost of implementing the control measures observed.

At each of the sites, traffic movements were observed and the control measures noted. The effectiveness of each control measure observed was subjectively evaluated based on observations made and professional judgement. Video footage and still photographs were taken at each of the sites visited to act as an aide memoir.

An interview was conducted with the safety or transport manager from each of the companies. Some of the companies visited felt that it would be inconvenient to conduct an interview with a driver or pedestrian. At these sites, wherever possible, pedestrians and drivers were questioned informally whilst observations were being conducted. Once all information had been collated about the control measures and

8

safety systems, a subjective assessment was made about the overall effectiveness of the measures and systems to control workplace transport.

The majority of the companies visited could not supply information about the cost of implementing control measures either because they did not have sufficient records detailing this information or because they felt it was inappropriate to supply this information. Therefore this data was obtained independently from various supply companies, information on the Internet and Spon’s Civil Engineering and Highway Works Price Book (Davis, Langdon and Everest, 1995).

Once all of the selected companies had been visited it became apparent that two of the identified control measures had not been observed. Therefore, a further two sites were visited that were known to have these measures. In depth studies were not conducted at these sites, but the control measures were observed and a subjective evaluation made on their effectiveness.

The Health and Safety Executive stipulated in the project specification that six case studies would be required for future HSE publications. The six companies revealing the best practice observed were selected as these case studies. It must be remembered that the conclusions drawn are based on assessments conducted at a relatively small sample of volunteering companies over a period of one day.

9

4. RESULTS

Twenty companies were visited and through interviews, observations and professional judgement subjective evaluations were made of the effectiveness of the systems and measures implemented to control workplace transport. Summary tables of the data collected from each company are presented in Appendix Two. The effectiveness of key engineered control measures is compared in Appendix Three.

4.1 RISK ASSESSMENT AND SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

The following factors were considered when examining risk assessment and safety management systems:

i. Whether a risk assessment had been conducted for workplace transport. ii. Whether the risk assessment was suitable, sufficient, appropriately documented. iii. Whether the company had a safety manual, safety procedures and documented

safe working practices. iv. Whether safety was adequately communicated. Safety committees and forums

were included here. v. Whether the company revealed a positive culture, based on the attitude of staff,

effective implementation of the safety management system, commitment of management to safety and communication.

4.1.1 Risk Assessment

Fourteen of the twenty companies visited had conducted a risk assessment on their workplace transport.

Seven of the fourteen risk assessments conducted were considered to be suitable, sufficient and appropriately documented. In each of these seven companies, risks had been assessed for each mode of transport used and the tasks for which the vehicle was used. Hazards had been identified, consequences analysed, risks evaluated and corrective measures used to eliminate or reduce the risks posed. The assessments had been fully documented and the actions closed out within a specified date.

Two of the seven companies that had assessed their risks had also conducted traffic assessments, involving traffic counts and the identification of hazards through the use of CCTV or personal observations. One of the companies visited involves the entire workforce in the assessment of risks. A monthly awareness forum is held, where all staff are required to identify the risks posed in their individual tasks. The identified hazards are then fed into the risk assessments, which result in specific actions to reduce risks and mitigate consequences.

Risk assessments undertaken by seven of the fourteen companies were not considered to be suitable or sufficient. Two of the companies that had conducted risk assessments for workplace transport had not documented the assessment, findings or actions required to eliminate or reduce the risks posed. One company had conducted a single generic risk assessment intended to cover all of their twenty sites. This was not considered to be suitable because there had been no consideration of the different risks that may be present at each site.

An additional two of the seven companies employ a health and safety agency to conduct risk assessments and to ensure compliance with relevant legislation. The

10

health and safety agency visit the sites approximately six times per year and conduct their assessments of the risks purely on observations made during these visits without consultation with the relevant staff. It is likely that the agency did not wholly understand the processes, company procedures and practices, and the risks posed on a daily basis to the workforce. Therefore such risk assessments were not deemed as suitable or sufficient.

Two of the companies had followed the guidance ‘Five Steps to Risk Assessment’ issued by the HSE, when conducting their assessments. This guidance provides a suitable generic risk assessment model, to guide assessors when assessing risks and to encourage lateral thinking. However, these companies had taken the guidance too literally and only considered the hazards listed in the publication. This had led to significant hazards, such as pedestrian and vehicle conflicts, being overlooked or ignored because the companies felt they had conducted an assessment and therefore complied with legislation.

Six companies had not conducted a risk assessment for workplace transport. Three of these companies were not aware of the need to undertake such assessments for transport, but made it clear that they had conducted risk assessments for other tasks undertaken on the site. Two of the companies had minimal knowledge of risks, hazards or health and safety legislation and seemed unconcerned with the safety of their employees. They considered risk assessments to be unnecessary and time consuming. One company did not concern themselves with transport safety, as they did not believe that their traffic movements posed any risk. However, this company had approximately 60 vehicle movements per day with 50% of these movements coming from vehicles belonging to members of the public. In addition to these vehicle movements there was also an average of one hundred pedestrians visiting or working at the site per day.

4.1.2 Safety Documentation

Sixteen of the companies visited had a safety manual, safety procedures and documented safe working practices. However, only ten companies had implemented these procedures and safe working practices. The remaining five companies had documented the safety procedures in line with HSE guidance. The documents were not communicated to staff, resulting in the systems not being integrated into normal working practices. One of these companies had lifted paragraphs of text from various guidance booklets to create a safety manual. The manual contained thorough, comprehensive safety procedures but they were not entirely relevant to the company and were considered to be highly ambitious.

The four companies that did not have a safety manual or procedures were not aware of the need to have such documentation.

4.1.3 Communication

Fifty percent of the companies visited were deemed to have adequate systems in place to communicate safety issues. In seven of the ten companies, safety issues were discussed in the safety committee’s monthly or quarterly meetings and information subsequently tiered down through the management structure. Three companies revealed particularly strong communication links involving two-way safety forums, monthly safety briefs, open door policies and daily safety reminders via electronic mail.

11

The companies without suitable communication mechanisms included the companies that had not conducted risk assessments or implemented safety procedures or systems.

4.1.4 Safety Culture

A subjective assessment was made on the companies’ overall safety culture including issues such as the attitude of staff towards safety, commitment of management to safety, safety management systems and the mechanisms used to communicate safety. Eleven of the twenty companies were deemed to have a positive safety culture. Interestingly, some of these companies had not conducted sufficient risk assessments and had not communicated their safety management system effectively but the actions and attitudes of employees and certain managers revealed their concern about safety and enthusiasm to improve. Some of the companies visited have a limited knowledge of safety legislation and risk management but through senior management’s unwillingness to recruit staff with such expertise and allocate adequate resources to safety, the employees were unable to develop solutions to the identified risks. However, the employees were aware of the risks and showed a positive attitude to combating them through unofficial systems.

4.1.5 Improvement Notices

Four out of the twenty companies visited had been issued with at least one improvement notice from the HSE regarding transport safety. They felt that the improvement notices had raised awareness of transport safety within the company and encouraged senior management to budget for safety improvements. The period of time spent closing out the improvement notices had improved their communication links and relationship with the HSE. The safety culture of the four companies was considered to be positive and each company revealed documented and implemented risk assessments and safe systems of work. Three of the remaining sixteen companies expressed concerns about the HSE as a regulatory body. They felt that they could not approach the HSE for advice, and as a result did not address health and safety issues sufficiently. These companies believed that being able to communicate with the HSE without being inhibited by the possibility of negative repercussions would significantly improve the safety at their site. They felt that the HSE should demonstrate a proactive approach to safety and conduct inspections before an accident happens or a safety issue raised.

4.2 SAFE SYSTEMS OF WORK

The safe systems of work implemented by the visited companies for workplace transport safety form eight groups:

i) Regular inspections of driving licences.ii) Monitoring of driver hours and frequency of breaks.iii) Use of banksmen to aid reversing.iv) Sounding the horn of vehicles at intersections in warehouses.v) Contractor and visitor safety.vi) Designated areas for reversing.vii) Safe loading and unloading of vehicles.viii) Additional safe systems of work.

12

4.2.1 Regular inspections of driving licences

Five of the companies visited regularly inspected employee’s driving licences for any driving convictions. These inspections were conducted either annually or every six months. The five companies felt that checking driving licences regularly would encourage drivers to drive safely and ensure that all drivers employed were legally permitted to drive on the public highways.

4.2.2 Monitoring of driver hours and frequency of breaks

Eight of the companies visited monitored the number of hours driven by each of their drivers and the frequency and duration of breaks taken. Four of these companies monitored driving hours and breaks through the analysis of tachographs. Three companies relied on data entered by the drivers on weekly timesheets and one company cross-referenced time sheet data with the amount of fuel purchased.

One company had implemented data recorders on vehicles that required drivers to enter a personal identification number before the engine could be started. This data enabled hours driven and the frequency and duration of breaks to be accurately monitored for each driver.

Twelve companies did not monitor driver hours or breaks. One of these companies subcontracted all long distance deliveries, thereby eliminating their need to employ long distance drivers. Five companies only had on-site vehicles that were not driven by one person all day and six companies believed that the monitoring of driver hours and breaks was not relevant within their organisation. The monitoring of driver hours and breaks is a legal requirement outlined in ‘Drivers’ hours and Tachograph Rules for Goods Vehicles in the UK and Europe (GV262)’ and is relevant to any company employing long distance drivers.

4.2.3 Use of banksmen to aid reversing.

Two companies employed banksmen to aid the reversing of all vehicles. The banksmen had been appropriately trained and the drivers educated in the signals the banksmen would be using. In one of the companies, the banksman wore a different coloured high visibility jacket to the other staff so he could be easily distinguished.

Four companies used staff periodically to act as a banksman to aid reversing. These banksmen tended to be the second person in a double crew vehicle and acted as banksmen only if the reversing manoeuvres presented unusual hazards.

Two companies had systems in place prohibiting the use of banksmen. This was because, firstly the companies had not trained staff in the appropriate signals and secondly pedestrians were prohibited in the reversing areas and the presence of a banksman could create an additional, unnecessary risk. It is felt that the use of a banksman is only effective if identified risks would be significantly reduced by their guidance and the allocated banksman and drivers have been appropriately trained.

4.2.4 Sounding the horn of vehicles at intersections in warehouses

Twelve of the companies visited used a forklift truck on a daily basis. Ten of these companies required forklift trucks to be used inside warehouses. Half of the companies using forklift trucks in warehouses had implemented a system whereby forklift trucks were required to sound their horn on entering the warehouse and at intersections.

13

In companies where several forklift trucks were being used simultaneously, it was difficult to determine where the horns were being sounded, as the sound of horns was seemingly continuous. The drivers of the forklift trucks, however, appeared to rely on this system and presumed that as they had sounded their horn, it was automatically their right of way at the approaching intersection. In companies where fewer fork lift trucks were being operated, the sounding of the horn appeared to be more effective at warning pedestrians and other vehicles of their presence because it was easier, with fewer vehicles, to determine where the horn sound originated from.

Two of the five companies that required drivers to sound the horn of vehicles at intersections also required staff to wear hearing defenders in the warehouse. It was considered that hearing defenders would significantly reduce the effectiveness of sounding horns at intersections.

4.2.5 Contractor and visitor safety

Seven of the companies visited had systems in place to ensure visitors and contractors were aware of the site safety procedures. Four of these companies required visitors and contractors to sign a visitor book on arrival. Visitors and contractors would then be issued with an identification pass once they had been informed of the safety procedures. Two of these companies were food manufacturers and also required visitors and contractors to complete and sign a health questionnaire to minimise the risk of infection on site.

To ensure contractor safety and the safety of those affected by the contractor’s work, one company had implemented a system that required contractors to erect a site safety board in their area of work. The board was required to state the appropriate dress code, current hazards and risks, necessary induction training, the company’s policy on accident and incident reporting and the number of reportable accidents to date.

One company had experienced customers and contractors disregarding safe working practices and safety warning signs due to an over-familiarity with the site. A leaflet was sent to all customers, staff and contractors stating company safety procedures and outlining their duty of care. The company reported that contractor and visitor safety had been significantly improved since the launch of this initiative.

One company required all visitors and contractors to watch a five minute safety video before entering the site. The video included information about where to park, where to load and unload vehicles, the site speed limit and transport movement awareness, pedestrian safety, identification of traffic routes, hazards, control measures, personal protective equipment and incident reporting.

4.2.6 Designated areas for reversing

Seven companies had designated areas for reversing vehicles. These tended to be areas marked out with road markings situated near loading bays. Drivers and pedestrians were aware that vehicles would be reversing in these areas through training, awareness and the warning signs. Reversing vehicles in other areas was prohibited. The purpose of designated areas for reversing is to reduce the potential for vehicle and pedestrian conflicts as a result of a driver failing to observe a pedestrian when reversing. However, only two of these companies had restricted or eliminated pedestrian activity in these areas. In six of the seven companies, vehicles were observed reversing in areas that were not designated reversing areas. Through

14

the implementation of designated areas, pedestrians may become less aware of the potential for reversing vehicles outside the designated areas, thereby increasing the risk of pedestrian and vehicle conflicts.

4.2.7 Safe loading and unloading of vehicles

Eight companies had safe systems of work in place to ensure the safe loading and unloading of vehicles. Four companies operated a system whereby a shunt vehicle driven by a trained company driver transferred the containers from good vehicles to the appropriate loading bays and then returned the loaded containers to the appropriate goods vehicle cabs. This system ensured that the person required to reverse the vehicle into the loading bay had adequate training and competencies to perform the required tasks. It also reduced the potential congestion and traffic conflicts that may have been caused by several vehicles reversing into the loading area simultaneously. One of these companies used an additional system whereby the loading bays were controlled by a traffic light system. The vehicle was only permitted to leave the loading bay when the traffic light was green indicating that it was safe to move the vehicle.

One company used a system that required drivers to hang their vehicle keys on a hook positioned on the ‘up and over’ loading bay door prior to opening it. When the loading bay door was opened the keys would be suspended out of the driver’s reach, meaning the vehicle could not be driven away until the loading bay door had been closed. The company had experienced drivers disregarding this system, but this had always resulted in disciplinary action.

Goods vehicles tend to have two gates on a tail lift at the rear of a lorry. During loading, pallets are wheeled onto the tail lift and the tailgates secured in an upright position whilst the hydraulic tail lift lifts the pallets into the rear of the vehicle. One company had experienced drivers suffering from back problems due to the continual lifting of the tailgates into upright positions. To reduce the amount of lifting and therefore the risk of back problems, one of the two tailgates was permanently left in the upright position. This meant that a pallet could be easily wheeled onto the tail lift over the horizontal tailgate and positioned by the upright tailgate to prevent the movement of the pallets during loading.

4.2.8 Additional safe systems of work

Four companies operated a permit to work system for transport safety. Drivers could not enter the site or undertake any tasks on site without being issued with a permit to work from an authorised person.

Two companies had reduced the risk of traffic conflicts through arranging goods to be delivered out of the normal working hours.

One company operated a regular bus service to transfer customers and staff between sites and to public transport stations, to reduce the number of vehicle movements on site.

Reversing lights are positioned at the rear of vehicles and audible reversing alarms are only clearly audible to a person outside. A driver of a vehicle positioned in front of a reversing vehicle may not hear the audible reversing alarm and would not be able to see the reversing lights. Therefore, two companies had a system in place that required vehicles to use their hazard lights when reversing, to warn other drivers of their movements.

15

One company required visitors, contractors and employees to wear different coloured hats whilst on site. Records were kept of the number of people in each of the different groups observed not following company safety procedures. Safety awareness would then be targeted at the higher risk groups. One of the companies visited relied heavily on safe systems of work to ensure workplace transport safety. Systems included the use of hazard lights to warn other vehicles of their movements, designated areas for specific vehicle activities and a trained banksman to aid reversing. Through observations it was apparent that the systems were effective during periods of low traffic movements but as the traffic movements increased the safe systems of work were increasingly disregarded.

4.3 ACCIDENT AND INCIDENT REPORTING

4.3.1 Recording of accidents, incidents and near misses

Eighteen of the companies visited recorded accidents, although only fifteen of these companies were aware of the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1995. One of the companies that did not record accidents was not aware of the need to and the second company stated that ‘accidents, incidents and near misses are not recorded because we don’t have any’. Out of the eighteen companies that recorded accidents, eleven also recorded near misses. However, five of these companies experienced underreporting of near misses. It is not a legal requirement to report occupational road traffic accidents to the HSE under RIDDOR, but it was encouraging that companies record the information regardless.

4.3.2 Use of accident, incident and near miss data

Seven companies collected accident data solely to allow insurance claims to be made or to comply with legislation. Two of the companies visisted used accident data to feed into subsequent risk assessments and one company used the data to investigate litigation claims.

Eight of the eleven companies analysed the data regularly and provided reports on the number and type of accidents. Lessons learnt were then fed back to all staff, to reduce the risk of the accident recurring. Corrective action was also taken including the implementation of engineered control measures or increased safety awareness. These companies felt that the analysis of data allowed high-risk areas and procedures to be focused on, as well as providing justification for expenditure on safety improvements. Three of the companies used accident data as a key safety performance indicator.

4.3.3 Incentives or disincentives to report accidents, incidents and near misses.

Nine of the companies visited actively encouraged staff to report accidents but four companies had systems in place that were deemed to actively discourage staff from reporting accidents. Seven companies neither actively encouraged nor discouraged staff to report accidents.

Eight of the nine companies that were deemed to actively encourage staff to report accidents did so through training and awareness. Staff were trained in the reporting procedure and made aware of the benefits of reporting accidents and incidents. All

16

of the eight companies offered a ‘no blame’ culture and stated that the accident is investigated, not the person.

The ninth company also encouraged employees to report accidents did so through the implementation of crash data recorders. Prior to driving a vehicle, a personal identification number needed to be input into the recorder by the driver. The crash data recorder would record five seconds prior to impact and five seconds after impact. The accidents could then be linked directly to the person driving the vehicle at the time of the accident. The company felt that this system actively encouraged employees to report accidents because an accident revealed by the crash data recorder that had not been officially reported would result in disciplinary action.

Four companies had systems in place that were deemed to actively discourage staff from reporting accidents. Two of the companies required staff to pay the excess on any insurance claim resulting from an accident considered to be their fault. One of these companies felt that this discouraged staff from making claims through the insurance and encouraged the staff to mend the vehicles themselves. However, the representative spoken to at the other company felt that the system made it more difficult to investigate the accidents and take corrective action, because the root causes of the accident could not be established due to the driver continually rejecting responsibility.

One of the companies automatically cut a drivers bonus payment if they had been involved in an accident and one company suspended the driver without pay whilst the accident was investigated.

4.4 VEHICLE SAFETY

Two of the companies visited leased all of their vehicles from external companies, eight companies owned all of their vehicles and one company subcontracted all work involving the use of vehicles. The vehicles observed included automated vehicles (not requiring a driver), forklift trucks, vans, light goods vehicles, heavy goods vehicles, cars and tugs. Twelve companies used at least one forklift truck on a daily basis.

The principal factors inspected at the companies with regards to vehicle safety were as follows:

i. Engineered reversing aids. ii. Servicing and maintenance of the vehicles. iii. Vehicle safety checks. iv. Additional control measures implemented for vehicle safety. v. Overall vehicle safety.

4.4.1 Engineered reversing aids

Fourteen of the companies visited had reversing alarms fitted to vehicles. Where vehicles were being used at night or in residential areas the alarms could be overridden and switched off. Thirteen companies had reversing lights fitted to vehicles. The companies that had not fitted reversing lights to vehicles, did not use any vehicles on the public highways. The effectiveness of the reversing lights on forklift trucks was questionable, as their visibility to other drivers and pedestrians, and their ability to illuminate the area being reversed into in an adequately lit warehouse or in daylight was negligible.

17

One company had fitted a reversing lens on the rear window of their van. For the majority of the vehicles observed, this was not a viable option as there was no visibility out of the rear of the vehicle.

Six companies had engineered systems to aid reversing. Two of the companies had implemented close circuit television at the rear of at least one vehicle. When the driver engaged reverse, the view behind the vehicle could be observed on a monitor positioned adjacent to the steering wheel. Three reversing sensor systems were observed. A sensor system had been fitted to the front and rear of the automated vehicles observed at one company. If the automated vehicle manoeuvred too close to an object, the vehicle would automatically shut down thereby eliminating the risk of a collision. The vehicles are fitted with mechanisms to ensure that the vehicles do not fail-to-danger. The other two sensor systems sent signals to the cab of the vehicle, if it was being reversed within three metres of a fixed object. One of the systems warned the driver with an audible signal and the other with flashing lights. Neither system had back-up signals if the principal signal failed.

The sixth company had recently piloted a reversing sensor system on their goods vehicles. The system involved the automatic application of vehicle brakes if the vehicle reversed too close to an object. However, the system had significant flaws, whereby the brakes were being activated whilst the vehicle was travelling forwards if another vehicle drove too close to the rear.

4.4.2 Service and maintenance of vehicles

All companies regularly serviced and maintained the vehicles used on public highways and the on-site vehicles that had been leased. The frequency of services and maintenance varied between companies ranging from weekly to every six months depending on usage. All companies claimed to comply with the manufacturer’s guidelines. However, on-site vehicles owned by the companies tended by less regularly serviced and maintained.

Vehicles were observed at five companies that were poorly maintained and revealed basic but significant defects, for example bald tyres and malfunctioning lights and indicators.

4.4.3 Vehicle checks

Thirteen companies conducted daily vehicle checks and two companies conducted weekly vehicle checks. The items included in these checks were largely consistent between companies. They included lights, tyres, water, oil and brake efficiency.

However, regular checking of vehicles is a difficult procedure to implement and enforce. This was confirmed by the negative attitude of staff towards the vehicle checks. All fifteen companies required the checks to be documented but several drivers admitted that they completed the forms as and when management requested them, as opposed to on a daily or weekly basis.

Two companies had implemented systems to enforce the completion of daily checks. One company required the drivers to pay for any vehicle repairs that resulted from daily checks not being conducted. This is difficult to enforce as a vehicle malfunctioning may be attributable to a variety of causes rather than as a direct result from not conducting daily vehicle checks. The second company had a system whereby the vehicle keys would not be issued to the driver until the checks had been

18

undertaken and the appropriate documentation signed. This system can only be effective in companies where the driver is required to collect vehicle keys on a regular basis.

4.4.4 Additional control measures

The additional control measures observed included mirrors on vehicles, seat belts on vehicles and warning signs on vehicles such as ‘long vehicle’ or ‘keep clear’. These control measures tended to be implemented on vehicles used on the public highway as opposed to the vehicles limited to site use.

All companies visited had limited the speed of their goods vehicles to below sixty miles per hour, as required by law. However, one company admitted that drivers disable the speed limiter when undertaking long distance driving.

Five of the twelve companies using forklift trucks on a daily basis had limited the speed of the trucks to below twelve miles per hour. Two additional companies had found that when they attempted to limit the speed on the forklift trucks, there was insufficient torque to either lift the required load or travel up a slight gradient.

4.4.5 Overall vehicle safety

A subjective assessment was made at each site regarding the overall safety of the vehicles. The evaluation was based on whether the vehicles were so poorly maintained or inadequate that they posed an unnecessary risk to drivers of the vehicle, drivers of other vehicles, pedestrians, members of the public or the maintenance worker. It was decided that only two of the twenty companies were using vehicles that posed this unnecessary risk. It was considered that eighteen companies revealed overall adequate vehicle safety.

4.5 TRAFFIC ROUTES AND SITE SAFETY ENGINEERING MEASURES

A checklist was used at each of the twenty sites visited to determine which control measures had been implemented to ensure safety on their traffic routes. The checklist can be seen in Appendix 1. The effectiveness of individual control measures was subjectively evaluated taking into consideration the traffic flows at the site and the vehicles used. The combined effectiveness of control measures was also evaluated. Table 1 identifies the control measures observed at each of the companies visited, the number of companies that had implemented that measure and specific comments on the observed effectiveness of each measure. The effectiveness of these measures is discussed in greater depth in Section 5. The combination of control measures at each site can be seen in the summary tables presented in Appendix 2.

Table 1 Identification of measures implemented at the companies visited to increase safety on

their traffic routes

Control measure

Number of companies

in which

Comments/ Effectiveness

measure observed

Drainage 19 One company had not implemented any drainage and suffered flooding as a result. The remaining nineteen companies had implemented sufficient drainage systems to reduce this risk.

19

Lighting 18 Two companies had not implemented any lighting. Flood lighting was observed in nine companies and this was deemed more effective than street lighting. Lighting had been implemented in fifteen of the companies to ensure security rather than safety.

Firm even flooring

16 Four of the companies visited had severely pot holed flooring. All of these companies also operated forklift trucks. Two of the companies with pot holed flooring had attempted to re­ lay the surfacing, but had not undertaken this task effectively, resulting in the surfacing being churned up by the subsequent movement of vehicles.

Wide traffic routes

16 Four of the companies observed did not have wide enough traffic routes for vehicles to pass each other. However, none of these companies could widen the routes because of restrictions due to buildings, natural features or preservation orders.

Mirrors to aid visibility at blind junctions

3 Three companies had implemented mirrors at intersections, to increase visibility at blind junctions. The effectiveness of mirrors is questionable because visibility in the mirrors depends on how clean the mirrors are and the amount of light reflected from the mirror. The distorted image that mirrors provide combined with excess light being reflected from them may lead to the mirrors posing additional hazards rather than reducing them.

Vegetation cut back

1 One company had vegetation on either side of the traffic route. The vegetation could not be removed because of preservation orders but had been cut back sufficiently to ensure that the traffic route was as wide as possible. Vegetation did not effect any other company visited.

Reversing guide humps

4 Reversing guide humps were observed at four of the companies visited. Two of the companies had implemented speed humps as reversing guide humps. This was ineffective in one company and effective in the other. In the first company, vehicles were required to reverse up to the guide humps and stop when their rear wheels touched the humps. However speed humps are designed to be driven over rather than to stop a vehicle. The extensive damage to the barrier positioned behind the reversing guide hump indicated that the guide humps were ineffective. In the second company, vehicles were required to reverse until their rear wheels had travelled over the hump. This use of speed humps as reversing guides was considered to be effective, assuming that all vehicles using the device had the same rear overhang. Another company used a ridge in the traffic route as a reversing guide hump. The guide hump was not considered effective, as drivers were unaware of its purpose. The final company used half logs fixed to the ground as reversing guide humps. These were considered to be effective as vehicles could not easily reverse over the humps and they were inexpensive to implement.

Speed humps

6 Six companies had implemented speed humps to reduce the speed of traffic through their site. Each of the sets of speed humps observed were deemed to be fit for purpose. However, seven additional companies commented that they had not implemented speed humps because they caused loads in goods vehicles to become unstable, thereby creating an additional, unnecessary risk.

Road signs 8 Four of the eight companies observed had implemented road signs that were compliant with The Traffic Signs Regulations

20

and General Directions 1994. Based on observations made at the sites, these signs appeared to be more effective than implemented road signs that were unique to the company. This may have been due to the motorists being more familiar with the signs they were used to observing on the public highway.

Warning signs and safety posters

17 All companies that operated forklift trucks had implemented signs warning pedestrians and other drivers about their presence. One company had implemented ‘Are you driving too fast?’ signs around the site. The company had noticed a reduction in vehicle speed through the site since their implementation. Other signs implemented included pedestrian warning signs, prohibition signs and signs informing employees about the required personal protective equipment in the area.

Safety fencing

12 All of the companies that had implemented safety fencing had done so to protect the infrastructure of buildings, pipe-work or fire hydrants. It was considered that the safety fencing implemented at one company was positioned too low, as the under-run bars on vehicles were higher than the safety fence. One company had implemented a length of safety fence adjacent to a cutting, to mitigate the consequences of a vehicle egressing from the traffic route.

Canopy to protect employees from adverse weather conditions

10 Canopies were observed at ten companies. Their effectiveness depended on the width and positioning of the canopy. In one company, the canopy offered little protection because it was only approximately one metre wide. Canopies were deemed particularly useful positioned over areas where vehicles were required to travel in and out of warehouses. The canopies reduced the amount of water being taken into the warehouses on vehicle tyres.

Bollards 9 Eight companies had implemented bollards to protect the infrastructure of buildings. One company had used bollards to prevent vehicles being parked in areas where parking was prohibited.

Roundabouts 3 Three companies had implemented roundabouts. When implementing roundabouts, the turning circle and stability of vehicles using the roundabout must be considered. The effectiveness of a roundabout is increased when implemented in conjunction with appropriate road signs and road markings.

Height barriers

5 Height barriers are an effective control measure and were implemented in the companies visited effectively. They were predominantly used to prevent forklift trucks entering areas where their use was prohibited. The implementation of warning signs with the height barrier is desirable, to avoid unnecessary collisions. However, care must be taken to position the warning signs within the driver’s sight line.

‘No entrance’ barriers

6 Physical barriers were considered to be an effective method of preventing vehicle from entering a prohibited area. Physical barriers were considered to be less effective at preventing pedestrians from entering prohibited areas.

Vehicle locator system

3 Three of the companies visited had implemented a vehicle locator system. Two of these companies had implemented global positioning systems on vehicles being used on the public highway. One company used a radar system to control the warehouse vehicles. Each driver was instructed by the system where to collect goods from and the route the vehicle should take to deliver the goods to the appropriate place. The radar system organised the vehicles in such a way that collisions were eliminated.

21

Use of forklift 2 Two companies used forklift trucks periodically on public trucks on highways to transfer goods and the forklift truck between sites. public Other companies that were required to move their forklift truck highways or goods between sites transported the forklift trucks or goods

in goods vehicles. Overhead 4 Four of the companies visited required forklift trucks to collect Storage items from overhead storage. None of the companies supplied

the relevant staff with safety helmets. Two of the companies visited used overhead storage areas that were regularly accessed by pedestrians. The companies had implemented different measures to reduce the risk of these pedestrians falling from heights. One company had implemented a removable guard. However, employees tended to remove the guard at the beginning of the shift and replace it at the end of the shift. The removable guard was therefore not considered to be an effective means of protecting the pedestrians from falling from heights. The other company had implemented a one way gate. This meant that the gates could only be pushed open by a forklift truck operating from the ground floor. These were considered effective as the risk of a person falling from the storage area was significantly reduced.

Road 9 Road markings were observed in nine of the companies markings visited. The effectiveness of the road markings observed were

variable. Through observations made, it was concluded that road markings that were clear and the same as those found on the public highway were more effective than those that were faded or not familiar to the person using them.

Marked 9 Marked loading bays were observed in nine companies and loading bays were deemed effective at ensuring vehicles parked, loaded and

unloaded in appropriate places. CCTV 11 The majority of companies that had implemented CCTV used it

to ensure security. However two of the companies used CCTV footage to investigate reported accidents or to identify high risk areas and procedures.

One way 8 One way systems were observed in eight companies. For a system one way system to be effective there has to be enough space

on the site to implement it entirely. Ineffective one way systems were observed in four companies. The systems were ineffective because although a one way system operated, vehicles were still required to travel against the organised flow of traffic on a regular basis. In one company vehicles were required to reverse down the one way system to exit the site! An enforced one way system was considered to be very effective, but implementing a one way system and informing drivers of it, when vehicles still travel against the flow of traffic was considered to be creating a higher risk than if the route was two way and drivers were aware of this.

Speed activated warning signs

Displayed Speed limit

0 None of the companies visited had implemented speed activated warning signs. However, an additional site was visited solely to observe this measure. If a vehicle approaching the sign were travelling in excess of the speed limit the sign would illuminate and reveal ‘Slow 20 mph’. The company had monitored the speed of vehicles before and after the implementation of the measure and had found a significant decrease in the speed of vehicles.

16 A displayed speed limit was observed in sixteen of the twenty companies visited. Through observing the speed of the traffic at the sites visited the following observations were made.

22

§ A speed limit was considered to be more effective if staff were aware of the dangers of travelling in excess of it.

§ Signs showing the speed limit needed to be positioned in the sight line of the driver to increase effectiveness.

§ A speed limit of 5 mph was less likely to be complied with. From talking to drivers they argued that a 5 mph speed limit is unrealistic and difficult for the driver to monitor because the minimum speed that is monitored on a vehicle speedometer is usually 10 mph.

23

Table 2 identifies the control measures implemented at the sites visited to control parking and discusses the effectiveness of these measures.

Table 2 Measures implemented at the companies visited to control parking on site

Parking Number of companies measure observed in.

Comments/ Effectiveness

Sufficient parking 10 Out of the twenty companies visited, thirteen Marked parking bays Double yellow lines Yellow hatchings No parking signage Physical barriers to prevent parking Enforcement system Parking systems judged to be effective?

15 12 9

15 2

7 13

companies were deemed to have an effective parking system. Marked parking bays, double yellow lines, yellow hatchings and no-parking signage have limited effectiveness if there is insufficient parking and no enforcement system. If a company has not implemented sufficient parking facilities and does not have a system of enforcement, physical barriers to prevent vehicles parking in prohibited areas was deemed as the most effective measure.

Table 3 identifies specific deficiencies noted at some of the sites visited concentrating on those that are not directly attributable to the ineffectiveness of implemented control measures. These are in addition to the deficiencies of control measures shown in Table 1.

Table 3 Deficiencies observed on the traffic routes of companies visited

Deficiencies observed

Blind corners with no control measures Uneven flooring Untidy premises Gradient on forklift truck route Narrow access and egress routes Low electricity cable Shared access and egress Flammable liquids stored next to exit route

Number of companies in which deficiency observed

7 6 4 6 6 1 6 2

Seven of the sites visited had blind corners on their traffic routes. None of these companies had considered the implementation of control measures to reduce the risk of vehicle conflicts at these junctions. Six sites had uneven flooring on traffic routes, six sites required their forklift trucks to manoeuvre up a gradient and four sites had particularly untidy premises. Uneven flooring, gradients and untidiness were considered to be less than desirable characteristics for vehicle routes. This was particularly so for forklift truck routes, owing to the unstable nature of forklift trucks and their loads.

Six sites had narrow access and egress routes. In companies with few deliveries and minimal traffic movements this was not deemed as a significant problem. However, on sites with more frequent vehicle movements, including the movement of heavy goods vehicles, narrow access and egress routes were considered to be insufficient. Six companies shared access and egress routes with other companies. The problem identified with the shared routes was that none of the companies using

24

the route were willing to take responsibility for maintenance, repair and the implementation of safety measures. This resulted in routes with few safety control measures but heavy traffic movements and potentially frequent traffic conflicts.

One company had a very low electricity cable across their forklift truck route. There were no signs to warn drivers and no attempt had been made by the company to rectify the situation. From observations made at the site, it was apparent that a forklift truck would not be able to safely drive under the electricity cable with the vehicle forks raised. Two companies had chosen to store flammable liquids next to the warehouses’ emergency exits. This was considered to be a fire hazard and therefore less than desirable.

4.6 PEDESTRIAN SAFETY

The following factors were considered when examining pedestrian safety at each of the sites visited:

i. Segregated vehicle and pedestrian routes. ii. Pedestrian routes that are protected from vehicles. iii. Pedestrian crossings. iv. Prohibited pedestrian areas or safe havens for pedestrians to stand during

vehicle activity. v. Pedestrian deterrent paving. vi. Suitable pedestrian safety for the number of pedestrians using the site.

4.6.1 Segregated vehicle and pedestrian routes

Nine of the twenty companies visited had segregated vehicle and pedestrian routes. However, two of these companies had only put in pedestrian routes in some areas of the sites. The areas with pedestrian walkways had not been selected as a result of a risk assessment revealing intolerable risk but because there was sufficient space to implement walkways in these areas.

Four companies had indicated pedestrian routes with appropriate signage. One company had painted all pedestrian routes red, two companies had marked a pedestrian symbol on the designated routes and one company had marked a broken yellow line on all pedestrian routes. Two companies also had pedestrian gantries, raised above the shop floor. The gantries meant that pedestrians could access all areas of the site without any risk of conflict with vehicles. There were, however limited provisions for disabled people on the site, as the gantries could only be accessed via a staircase. One company had constructed a footbridge from the car park into the main building to ensure pedestrians and vehicles were entirely segregated. One company had extended speed humps into the pedestrian walkways that were positioned adjacent to the traffic route. The aim of this was to prevent vehicles travelling into the pedestrian walkways to avoid speed humps.

4.6.2 Pedestrian routes that are protected from vehicles

Seven of the nine companies with pedestrian walkways also had barriers on some of the pedestrian routes to protect pedestrians from errant vehicles. In addition to barriers, two companies had walkways that were set a distance away from the traffic routes. One of these companies used chain fencing or kerbs positioned half a metre away from the kerb of the pedestrian walkway to deter vehicles from travelling too close to the pedestrian walkway.

25

Barriers positioned alongside a pedestrian walkway prevent pedestrians from crossing the traffic route except at identified safe locations. However, the barriers are equally as effective at preventing pedestrians from rejoining the walkway if they have egressed, thereby potentially creating an additional risk.

4.6.3 Pedestrian crossings

Seven of the twenty companies visited had implemented pedestrian crossings across traffic routes. Four of these companies had crossings that were the same as those found on the public highway and three companies had used different coloured road markings, as opposed to the standard black and white stripes. These companies stated that they had not implemented a standard design because pedestrians were required to give way to vehicles on the site and the implementation of a standard design crossing may confuse the pedestrians required to use it.

One of the companies visited had crossings positioned diagonally across the traffic routes, to reflect pedestrian desire lines. Two additional companies had plans to implement such changes to their pedestrian crossings.

One of the companies had implemented a level crossing on the site for pedestrians. When a sufficient number of pedestrians were waiting to cross the traffic route, the barriers either side of the crossing were lowered to prevent vehicle access whilst the pedestrians crossed the route. Due to the infrequent traffic movements on this route, few pedestrians waited for the barriers to be lowered before using the crossing.

4.6.4 Pedestrian deterrent paving

None of the twenty companies visited had implemented pedestrian deterrent paving, so an additional company was visited who had implemented this measure. The deterrent paving was positioned on the access road to the site to encourage pedestrians to use the designated walkways to access the site. The paving was also positioned adjacent to the pedestrian crossing to discourage pedestrians from egressing from the crossing. Through observations made the pedestrian deterrent paving was considered to be fit for purpose.

4.6.5 Suitable pedestrian safety for the number of pedestrians using the site

At each of the sites visited, a subjective assessment was made as to whether the control measures implemented to ensure pedestrian safety were adequate for the number of pedestrian using the site. Twelve of the companies visited were considered to have adequate pedestrian safety. Four of these companies had not implemented any measures to ensure pedestrian safety but due to the minimal pedestrian movements on the site, pedestrian safety was deemed adequate. Similarly, one of the companies that had protected pedestrian routes in some areas and pedestrian crossings was not considered to have adequate pedestrian safety because of the large amount of pedestrian activity on the site.

4.7 SELECTION AND TRAINING

4.7.1 Selection

Twelve of the companies visited did not have a specific selection process for drivers but six of these companies trained drivers in the skills required once appointed. Two companies based their selection process on previous experience and qualifications and two companies only appointed drivers with no previous history of road traffic

26

accidents or driving convictions. Three companies tested the competency of drivers prior to appointment, two through a practical driving test and one through the completion of a questionnaire. One company only appointed drivers that lived in the area where they would be required to deliver goods.

Eleven companies required all staff to undertake a medical examination on appointment. This included a vision test for employees being appointment as drivers. Five of these companies required employees to undertake regular medicals throughout their employment in that organisation. Two companies also required regular impairment testing for drugs and alcohol, through blood and urine testing.

4.7.2 Training

Twelve of the companies visited used forklift trucks daily. All employees required to drive the forklift trucks had undertaken specific forklift truck training and gained the required operating licence. The forklift truck training included training on the safe loading and unloading of vehicles. However, nine companies supplied additional training on the safe loading and unloading of vehicles.

Four of the companies visited trained all staff in risk assessment and seven companies trained all staff in the dangers of workplace transport safety.

Eleven companies required drivers to undertake driver training and eight of these companies offered refresher training periodically. The effectiveness of training programs and selection processes are not known, as no training courses were observed and the contents of the training courses not supplied by the companies.

4.8 PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT

Employees were required to wear personal protective equipment in nineteen of the twenty companies visited. Safety boots and high visibility jackets were observed in all of these companies. Other personal protective equipment included safety helmets, safety gloves, ear defenders, respirators, wellington boots and safety goggles.

Twelve companies had conducted a risk assessment to determine whether personal protective equipment was required and the most appropriate type of personal protective equipment for the different tasks undertaken. The companies visited tended to have the attitude that personal protective equipment eliminated the risks associated with workplace transport. Personal protective equipment can be used to reduce certain risks associated with workplace transport but should not be relied upon as the most effective measure. However, the one company that did not use personal protective equipment as a measure to control the risks posed by workplace transport had conducted a risk assessment for the use of personal protective equipment and deemed it as unnecessary.

Eleven companies enforced the use of personal protective equipment through educating staff on the importance of personal protective equipment, and ensuring staff observed without the appropriate equipment were suitably disciplined. The nine companies that did not enforce the use of personal protective equipment, felt that by ensuring the staff had access to the equipment, the company was complying with legislation. They believed it was the responsibility of the employee to decide whether to wear the supplied personal protective equipment. However, Regulation ten of the Personal Protective Equipment Regulations 1992 states that it is the duty of both the

27

employer and the employee to ensure that the personal protective equipment supplied is properly used.

Three of the companies visited did not pay for all of the personal protective equipment used by employees. One of the companies had identified through risk assessment that the use of safety boots in the warehouse was not essential. The company therefore subsidised the cost of safety boots, rather than supplying them with no charge, for those who chose to wear them. However, two of these companies enforced the use of personal protective equipment but required the employee to pay for it. This practice is not compliant with regulation four of the Personal Protective Equipment Regulations 1992 or section nine of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, that state that it is the responsibility of employers to supply and pay for safety equipment.

4.9 COST OF IMPLEMENTATION

The majority of the companies visited would not supply information about the cost of implementing their control measures. Ideally information would be gathered on the whole lifecycle of the control measure including implementation, maintenance and decommissioning but to gather this information from sources other than the companies visited was considered to be outside the scope of this project. Therefore, where possible miscellaneous information on the cost of implementing measures to control workplace transport was obtained through various supply companies, information on the Internet and Spon’s Civil Engineering and Highway Works Price Book (Davis Langdon and Everest, 1995). Additional information on cost is supplied in Appendix three.

Table 4 lists various control measures and their associated price of implementation. Many of the listed costs are estimated and the actual cost of implementation would depend on factors such as site conditions, the cost of labour and the chosen supplier. The costs are difficult to compare because some are the costs are for an entire item, such as a high visibility jacket but some of the costs are per area, such as road markings. Similarly some of the costs are estimated per item and the number required will depend on the particular item. For example, on a site one speed activated warning sign may be sufficient, but one reflectorised road stud would not.

Therefore the total cost of each control measure for a hypothetical company have been calculated, so the costs can be more easily compared. The hypothetical company has fifty employees, each requiring personal protective equipment. The company uses four forklift trucks and ten lorries on a daily basis. The area of the site is one hundred metres by one hundred metres with two traffic routes, each one hundred metres long. The site currently has no control measures.

Table 4 lists the control measures in order of cost, from the least to the most expensive. It must be remembered that the overall costs are based on a hypothetical company and can, therefore only be referred to as a comparative guide. The figures listed are the likely costs of the measures at the outset and take no account of life­span or the maintenance required.

28

Printed and published by the Health and Safety Executive1/98

Table 4 The cost of implementing measures to control workplace transport per item and the

total costs for a hypothetical company

Control Measure

Disabled marked parking bay Yellow hatchings Traffic cones Road markings Reversing warning light Rear lens on vehicles Dropped kerbs Temporary signs Double yellow lines Standard marked parking bay Waterproof clothing Horn on vehicle Drainage Flashing amber lights on vehicle Sun visor on vehicle Plan of workplace Speed limit signs Warning signs on vehicles Hard hat Ear defenders Signage High visibility trousers Additional door for pedestrians Height barrier Mirrors on walls to aid visibility Flood lighting Speed ramps Mirrors on vehicles Audible reversing alarm Reflectorised road studs Traffic lights Safety boots Reversing guide humps Radar system to aid reversing CanopyHigh visibility jacket CCTV on vehicles to aid reversing Subway for pedestrians Crash barrier Pedestrian island Cycle lane Footway for pedestrians GPS system Speed activated warning signs Zebra Crossing Pedestrian walkway guarded by railings Extra lane Resurfacing Non skid surfacing Pelican crossing CCTV on traffic routes

Cost Number required for hypothetical

Overall cost

£6.00 each C30 5 company

£30.00 £0.75 per m 50 £37.50 £6.20 each 10 £62.00 £0.50 per m 200 £100.00

£10 each 14 £140.00 £10 each 14 £140.00 £35 each 4 £140.00

£29.11 each 6 £174.66 £2 per m 100 £200.00

£4.50 each 45 £202.50 £4.41 each 50 £220.50

£16 each 14 £224.00 £2.68 per m 100 £268.00

£20 each 14 £280.00

£25 each 14 £350.00 £89 each 4 £356.00 £70 each 6 £420.00

£42.92 each 10 £429.20 £8.93 each 50 £446.50 £8.95 each 50 £447.50

£65 each 8 £520.00 £14.18 each 50 £709.00

£800 each 1 £800.00 £800 each 1 £800.00 £150 each 6 £900.00 £225 each 4 £900.00 £165 per m 6 £990.00

£40 each 28 £1,120.00 £80 each 14 £1,120.00

£6.50 each 200 £1,300.00 £1,388 each 1 £1,388.00

£30 each 50 £1,500.00 £200 each 10 £2,000.00

£149.95 each 14 £2,099.30 £2,361 each 1 £2,361.00

£49.28 each 50 £2,464.00 £274.95 each 10 £2,749.50

£141.55 per m3 25 £3,538.75 £50 per m 75 £3,750.00

£5,000 each 1 £5,000.00 £30 per m 200 £6,000.00 £30 per m 200 £6,000.00

£575.75 each 14 £8,060.50 £5,000 each 2 £10,000.00 £7,000 each 2 £14,000.00 £99.42 per m 200 £19,884.00

£100 per m £8 per m2

£10 per m2

200 5,000 5,000

£20,000.00 £40,000.00 £50,000.00

£30,000 each 2 £60,000.00 £60,000 each 1 £60,000.00

29

4.10 COMPLIANCE WITH LEGISLATION

The main pieces of legislation that are applicable to workplace transport safety are as follows:

i. The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999. Regulation three requires employers to make a suitable and sufficient assessment of the risks to the health and safety of employees at work and the health and safety of persons who may be affected by his undertaking. The employer also has a duty to record the findings of the assessment. Regulation thirteen requires employers to provide employees with adequate health and safety training and to refresh the training when required.

ii. The Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992. Regulation twelve places requirements on the employer about the condition of floors and traffic routes. The floors should not be uneven or slippery, should have suitable drainage and should be kept free of obstructions. Slopes and staircases should have handrails. Regulation 17 concentrates on the organisation of traffic routes. Pedestrians and vehicles must be able to circulate in a safe manner, there must be sufficient separation between pedestrians and vehicles and traffic routes must be suitably indicated for reasons of health or safety. Traffic routes must be sufficient in number and size, be in a suitable position and suitable for the persons and vehicles using them. Regulation five requires employers to ensure that workplace equipment is maintained in an efficient state and is in good repair.

iii. The Personal Protective Equipment at Work Regulations 1992. Regulation four states that suitable personal protective equipment must be provided to employees who may be exposed to a risk at work. Regulation six requires employers to conduct an assessment to determine whether the personal protective equipment is suitable. Regulation ten requires employers to ensure that the personal protective equipment provided is properly used.

iv. The Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 (section nine) states that it is the duty of an employer not to charge employees for things done or provided pursuant to certain specific requirements.

v. The Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1995. Regulation seven requires employers to record reportable injuries, diseases and dangerous occurrences.

vi. Drivers Hours and Tachographs Rules for Goods Vehicles in UK and Europe (GV262). This document includes legal requirements regarding the monitoring of driver hours and tachographs, the nine hours daily driving limit and the requirement for drivers to take a forty five minute break after every four and a half hour driving period.

vii. The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 1994. The companies visited are legally required to comply with this legislation and it is considered to be good practice to implement standard road signs normally found on the public highway.

Tables 5 to 13 show the number of companies visited that complied with the relevant sections of legislation regarding workplace transport safety. The results for each of the twenty companies visited can be seen in Appendix 2.

30

Table 5 Compliance with The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999

Legislation The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999

Relevant Suitable and Record findings of Adequate health and safety Requirements sufficient risk risk assessment training.

assessment Number of compliant

companies visited

7 (35%) 7 (35%) 7 (35%)

Table 5 shows that seven of the twenty companies visited had conducted suitable and sufficient risk assessments for workplace transport safety, seven of the twenty companies had recorded the significant findings and seven of the twenty companies ensured all employees received adequate health and safety training. Six of the companies visited, complied on all of the three requirements.

31

Table 6 Compliance with The Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992

Legislation The Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 Relevant Even and Drainage Traffic route Handrails on Pedestrians and

Requirements non slip flooring

free from obstructions

slopes and staircases

vehicles able to circulate in a safe manner

Number of compliant

companies visited

16 (80%) 19 (95%) 16 (80%) 20 (100%) 12 (60%)

Table 7 Compliance with The Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992

Legislation The Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 Relevant

Requirements Separation between

vehicles and pedestrians

Traffic route suitably

indicated

Sufficient number and size of traffic

routes

Workplace equipment

maintained and repaired regularly

Number of 7 (35%) 11 (55%) 13 (65%) 18 (90%) compliant

companies visited

Tables 6 and 7 show that the majority of companies visited had suitable drainage, even flooring that was free from obstructions, hand rails on staircases and well maintained and repaired vehicles. However, there were thirteen companies that did not separate vehicles from pedestrians, seven companies that did not have sufficiently wide traffic routes and eight companies where it was decided that vehicles and pedestrians could not circulate in a safe manner.

32

Table 8 Compliance with The Personal Protective Equipment Regulations 1992

Legislation The Personal Protective Equipment Regulations 1992

Relevant Requirements

PPE provided Assessment made Use of PPE enforced

Number of compliant

companies visited

19 (95%) 13 (65%) 11 (55%)

Table 8 shows that nineteen of the companies visited supplied employees with personal protective equipment. Thirteen of these companies had conducted an assessment to determine the most appropriate personal protective equipment and eleven of the companies visited enforced the use of personal protective equipment. Ten of the companies visited complied with all three of the relevant regulations.

Table 9 Compliance with The Health and Safety at Work Act 1974

Legislation The Health and Safety at Work Act 1974

Relevant Do not charge employees for equipment Requirements

Number of 17 (85%) compliant

companies visited

Table 9 shows that three of the twenty companies visited charged employees for at least a percentage of the cost of personal protective equipment. However, one of these companies only charged employees for personal protective equipment that was shown not to be essential through risk assessment. The use of this personal protective equipment was not enforced.

33

Table 10 Compliance with The Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences

Regulations 1995

Legislation The Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1995

Relevant Record reportable information Requirements

Number of 15 (75%) compliant

companies visited

Fifteen of the twenty companies visited recorded the necessary information about reportable accidents and reported them to the HSE, under The Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1995.

Table 11 Compliance with Drivers Hours and Tachograph Rules for Goods Vehicles in UK and

Europe (GV262)

Legislation Drivers Hours and Tachograph Rules for Goods Vehicles in UK and Europe (GV262)

Relevant Monitor driver hours 9 hour daily driving 45 minute break after 4.5 Requirements and tachographs limit hours of driving

Number of 8 (40%) 19 (95%) 8 (40%) compliant

companies visited

Sixteen of the twenty companies visited did not monitor driver hours and did not require drivers to take regular breaks from driving. However, nineteen of the companies visited did not allow drivers to work in excess of forty-five hours each week, which equates to nine hours of driving per day, presuming a five-day week.

34

Table 12 Compliance with The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 1994

Legislation The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 1994

Number of 4 (20%) compliant

companies visited

The companies visited are required to comply with The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 1994 and it was considered best practice to comply especially on sites used by members of the public. Four of the companies visited complied with these Regulations. Members of the public regularly used three of the compliant sites.

The summary table in Appendix 2 on compliance with legislation, lists each of the appropriate regulations to workplace transport safety and shows which of the companies visited complied. The percentage of the Regulations each company visited complied with was also calculated. These percentages are shown in Table 13.

Table 13 Overall compliance with relevant legislation for each of the companies visited

Company Reference Number

19 7 6 20 5 9 1 2 3 14 12 11 4 13 15 16 10 17 18 8

Overall Compliance with legislation (percentage)

19% 24% 33% 38% 43% 43% 52% 62% 62% 62% 66% 71% 76% 81% 81% 81% 90% 90% 95% 100%

Table 13 shows that the levels of compliance with the legislation relevant to workplace transport safety ranged from 19% to 100%. The average percentage is 63% compliant with relevant legislation.

35

5. DISCUSSION

After visiting twenty companies and examining their safety management systems, observing their work practices, inspecting their control measures and evaluating their workplace transport safety, a model workplace transport safety management system was devised. This was based on the insights gained from the company visits and on HSE guidance HS(G)65 and British Standard 8800. It is considered that through the integration of workplace transport into a recognised safety management system, workplace transport safety could be improved. The main components of this system are summarised in diagram 1.

Diagram 1 Workplace Transport Safety Management System

ion

A i ii

Ri§

§

§

is

§ il

§ iivi

§ i

i ing

§ Mi i

§ Miti

-icles

i ii

- ii

Safety Documentation

External awareness and guidance

Legislat

Training and education

Communication

cc dent and Inc dent Report ng System

sk Assessment Identify Hazards Analyse the consequences Estimate/ measure r sks Determine whether risktolerable Decide on r sk contro strategy

Hierarchy of Controls Eliminate r sks or substitute act ty Combat r sk at source by eng neercontrol measures

nim se risk by suitable safe systems of work

gate the consequences.

Cost of Implementation

One way system - Automated veh

- Personal protective equipment - Safety fencing

- Overtak ng restr ctions - Des gnated areas for reversing

CCTV on vehicles to aid revers ng - Segregated pedestr an routes

SAFETY CULTURE

EXAMPLES

SAFETY CULTURE

36

It is likely that adequate workplace transport safety can only be achieved through the effective implementation of all stages. Only two of the twenty companies visited had implemented all aspects of this system. All other companies visited had at least one significant element missing. The missing element was largely the conducting of a suitable and sufficient risk assessment, which only seven of the twenty companies visited had achieved. A suitable and sufficient risk assessment should identify all hazards, including continuing hazards and hazardous events, analyse the consequences, estimate or measure the risks, determine whether the risk is tolerable and then decide on a risk control strategy to reduce risks to a tolerable level. The risk control strategy should reflect the HSE hierarchy of risk control measures (HS(G)65) which is as follows:

i. Eliminate risks or substitute activity, substance or process by a less hazardous activity/ substance/ process.

ii. Combat risk at source by engineering control measures. iii. Minimise risk by suitable safe systems of work. iv. Mitigate the consequences.

Findings of the risk assessment must be fully documented and suitably communicated to the appropriate members of staff.

One of the areas that companies were not undertaking sufficiently with regards to risk assessment was identifying the hazards. Two of the companies had relied on the hazards identified in the HSE guidance ‘Five Steps to Risk Assessment’ which was not considered to be sufficient. One company had conducted a generic risk assessment intended to cover all of their twenty sites and had not considered the different risks presented at each site and two of the companies relied on external consultants to conduct the risk assessments without detailed knowledge of the site activities and processes.

However, some of the companies visited seemed to have identified all hazards. Two companies used CCTV footage to identify high risk areas and procedures, two companies used accident data to identify hazards and one company held a monthly awareness forum where staff were required to identify the hazards involved in the tasks they were required to undertake. All of these methods were considered to be good practice.

Four of the companies visited had been issued with improvement notices from the HSE regarding workplace transport. It is interesting to note that with the improved links with the HSE and guidance from inspectors, all four of these companies had conducted a suitable and sufficient risk assessment for workplace transport. This information combined with the observation that two other companies relied on hazards outlined in ‘Five Steps to Risk Assessment’ guidance indicates that additional guidance on conducting risk assessments for workplace transport may be required. The fact that six of the companies visited had not conducted any form of risk assessment for workplace transport suggests that awareness of the risks posed by workplace transport and the legal requirement to conduct a risk assessment needs to be raised.

One of the key elements of risk assessment is to implement a suitable risk control strategy to reduce the identified risks to a tolerable level. Nineteen of the companies visited had used personal protective equipment as part of this risk control strategy. Personal protective equipment falls within the remit of the final measure suggested by the hierarchy of control measures. Over fifty percent of the companies operated from sites with adequate drainage, lighting, warning signs, safety posters, speed limit

37

signs, wide traffic routes, firm even flooring, safety fencing to protect infrastructure and CCTV. However, with the exception of signage, these measures had not been implemented primarily for safety or as remedial measures to combat identified risks.

Engineered control measures should be used to eliminate or reduce the risks identified through the proactive risk assessment process or through reactive accident investigation. There is no ‘one size fits all’ solution to the implementation of control measures. It is not possible to state for example, that all companies with pedestrians should implement a zebra crossing, or all companies using heavy goods vehicles should implement traffic lights, because the effectiveness of control measures largely depends on the individual company. A control measure that is considered to be effective in one company may give rise to additional hazards in another. The effectiveness of individual control measures depends on the following factors:

§ The types of vehicles being used § The number of vehicles being used § The number of traffic movements § The tasks being undertaken on the site § The dimensions and condition of the site § The number of pedestrians § The number of members of the public using the site. § The safety systems implemented and the overall safety culture of the company.

Once suitable control measures have been implemented to reflect findings of the risk assessment, their effectiveness depends on them being used or followed appropriately and adequately maintained. For example, road markings and road signs are potentially effective measures for controlling traffic movements, but if the road markings have been partially worn away or the road signs are dirty or broken their effectiveness is immediately reduced. With regards to road markings and signage, their effectiveness is increased if the people using them are familiar with them. This can be achieved through education and training but it is considered to be a better option to implement measures that are consistent with those found on the public highway, as these are measures people are already accustomed to.

Similarly pedestrian crossings, pedestrian routes and one way systems are potentially effective control measures assuming that the pedestrians use the allocated walkways and designated crossing areas and drivers follow the one way system.

Engineered control measures can be overridden or violated if there is a desire to do so. For example, in one of the companies visited the drivers disabled the speed­limiting device on their vehicles. There are several approaches to solving this problem. One is to use enforcement, penalties or incentives to persuade people to accept and use the control measure. Another is to improve their understanding of the risks involved and the importance of the control measures. A third approach is to modify the control measure itself - either so that it is more difficult to over-ride or so that it is becomes more acceptable. For example, one company had implemented one-way doors to reduce the risk of pedestrians falling from heights, whereas the removable guard used in another company for the same purpose was simply removed by the staff. Similarly, three of the companies visited had implemented or planned to implement pedestrian crossings that followed the identified pedestrian desire lines.

There is likely to be a beneficial, two-way interaction between engineered control measures and measures based on training and education. Not only will the

38

education improve acceptance of engineering measures as mentioned above, but the fact that the company has introduced engineering measures is likely to reinforce the perceived importance of what is learned during training. Seven of the companies visited trained staff in the dangers of workplace transport and ten companies were deemed to have adequate systems in place to communicate safety issues. Communication and adequate training should be key elements in any safety management system and it is likely that improved communication and training would improve the safety culture of a company and subsequently workplace transport safety.

Adequate communication is also vital for the effective implementation of safety documentation. Sixteen of the companies visited had a safety manual, safety procedures and documented safe working practices, but only ten of these companies had integrated the safety procedures into normal working practices. These companies were the same ten companies deemed to have effective communication systems. Six of the companies visited had documented safety procedures solely to comply with legislation. Similarly, seven of the companies visited recorded accident data to just ensure compliance with The Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1995.

The collection and analysis of information about accidents, incidents and near misses can, however, be a useful tool. Through the analysis of such data, high-risk areas and processes can be identified and remedial action taken. Lessons learnt through accident investigation and near miss reports can be fed back to staff to raise awareness and to reduce the likelihood of an undesired event reoccurring. Two of the companies visited used accident data for this purpose and an additional three companies used the data gathered to assess the companies’ safety performance.

However, for accident data to be meaningful and constructively used, the information gathered must be accurate. Employees should be educated on the reporting system and the importance of recording such data. If employees are to report accidents, incidents and near misses, they must believe that these reports are valued and that they will not be personally penalised or disciplined as a result. However, failure to report an important event should have consequences for the individual or team. Eight of the companies visited offered a blame free culture and stated that they investigate an accident not a person. However, four of the companies visited financially penalised individuals involved in accidents. It is though that such action is likely to discourage the reporting of accidents and cause difficulties in identifying the root causes and the remedial action required.

Out of the twenty companies visited, two companies were considered to reveal good practice in all elements of the identified workplace transport safety management system. However, a further four companies revealed good practice in a large percentage of the elements of the system. These companies will be discussed in greater depth in the case studies section.

39

6. CONCLUSIONS

Two of the twenty companies visited were deemed to have adequate systems and control measures to ensure workplace transport safety. The remaining eighteen companies had not implemented at least one key element to ensure workplace transport safety. It is considered that workplace transport safety can only be achieved through the implementation of an entire system, including safety documentation; risk assessment; accident, incident and near miss reporting and analysis; training and education; communication; risk assessment and the implementation of control measures to reduce identified risks.

If one or several elements of the system are omitted, the system becomes less effective. For example one of the companies visited had only implemented safe systems of work to control workplace transport. Through observations it was noted that as the frequency of traffic movements increased, the compliance with the safe systems of work decreased. Had engineered control measures been implemented this may have encouraged employees to comply with the safe systems of work by creating physical reminders of the systems. Engineered control measures should be used to enforce safe systems of work and the lessons already learnt through education, training and awareness.

The effectiveness of control measures depends on several variables, including the types and number of vehicles being used, the frequency of traffic movements, the tasks being undertaken, the dimensions and condition of the site, the number of pedestrians and members of the public, the safety systems implemented and the overall safety culture of the company.

The companies visited had a lower level of compliance with The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions and The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 than with the other legislation examined. This may be because companies are not aware of the need to comply with the traffic signs regulations and companies tend not to be aware of the need to conduct a risk assessment for workplace transport.

Interestingly, four of the companies visited had been issued with improvement notices from the HSE regarding workplace transport. Since receiving these notices, these companies had all conducted suitable and sufficient risk assessments for workplace transport and showed a high level of awareness of the risks. This indicates that additional guidance on the content and the need to conduct a risk assessment for workplace transport may be required to encourage other companies to comply. An additional three companies felt that the safety of their site could be significantly improved if they were able to communicate with the HSE without concerns about negative repercussions. They felt that the HSE should demonstrate a proactive approach to safety and conduct inspections before an accident happens or a safety issue raised.

A tendency was observed at the companies visited to implement systems and measures that they were already familiar with. For example, there was a high level of vehicle safety including maintenance and repair, and the most frequently implemented control measures were standard measures that are not necessarily implemented for safety, for example drainage, lighting, CCTV and even flooring. Few companies had implemented measures specifically to ensure workplace transport safety, for example speed activated warning signs, pedestrian deterrent paving and one way systems. These measures were more likely to be implemented in

40

companies that had conducted a risk assessment on workplace transport and had identified the specific risks that needed to be reduced.

These conclusions are based on inspections and findings made at twenty companies. It would be desirable to conduct further, more in depth evaluations on a larger sample of companies to ensure that the conclusions drawn are applicable generally.

41

7. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER WORK

The findings of this research have highlighted areas where further work may be required. These are outlined below:

§ Develop guidance for companies on conducting a risk assessment for workplace transport.

§ Develop awareness material for companies on the role of the HSE. § Six of the companies visited subcontracted long distance deliveries of goods to

road haulage companies. This research received a very low response rate from road haulage companies, so it would be desirable to conduct further research on workplace transport safety in this industry sector.

§ Validate the workplace transport safety management system developed from the findings of this research.

§ Examine the effectiveness of health and safety training, in particular training on workplace transport safety.

§ Gather further information on the costs of control measures including cost of implementation, maintenance and decommissioning.

42

8. REFERENCES

BS 8800: 1996 Guide to occupational health and safety management systems.

Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (2000), Drivers’ hours and tachograph rules for goods vehicles in the UK and Europe, GV262

Health and Safety Commission (1999), Newsletter, Issue 127, October

Health and Safety at Work Act (1974). London: HMSO

Statutory Instrument (1999) Management of health and safety at work regulations No 3242 London: HMSO

Statutory Instrument (1995) The reporting of injuries, diseases and dangerous occurrences regulations No. 3163 London: HMSO

Statutory Instrument (1996) The construction (health, safety and welfare) regulations No. 1592 London: HMSO

Statutory Instrument (1998) The provision and use of work equipment regulations No. 3163 London: HMSO

Statutory Instrument (1992) The personal protective equipment regulations at work regulations No. 2966 London: HMSO

HSE (1992) Workplace (health, safety and welfare): Approved code of practice. L24 HSE Books

HSE (1995) Workplace transport safety: Guidance for employers. HS(G)136 London: HMSO

Institute of Occupational Medicine (1998) The evaluation of the Six-Pack Regulations 1992. HSE Contract Research Report 177/1998.

Langdon D and Everest (1995) Spons civil engineering and highway works price book. London: E & FN Spon

43

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS TRL Limited wishes to thank the twenty-two companies who participated in this research project for their co-operation and assistance. The author gratefully acknowledges the contribution made to site visits by TRL colleagues, Judith Barker, Jayne Dando-Budgen, Sam Keating, Lee Smith and Tim Sterling.

44

9. CASE STUDIES

45

46

9. CASE STUDIES

9.1 CASE STUDY ONE (Manufacturer and distributor of drink)

Number of employees: 500 per shift

Vehicle Type Quantity (per day)

Articulated lorries 30

Forklift trucks Numerous

Cars 500

Tugs 4

§ All accidents, incidents and near misses are reported. Near misses are

underreported but it has improved in the past year through training and

awareness. All accidents are investigated and reports are analysed to find trends.

§ Risk assessments have been conducted for all vehicles and all tasks. They are

reviewed annually unless there is a change, in which case they are reviewed

immediately so changes can be incorporated. Traffic and pedestrian surveys are

also undertaken, so areas with more traffic movements can be identified and

additional measures implemented.

§ A yellow dotted line leads pedestrians around the site on a safe route.

(Photograph 1)

Photograph 1

47

§ Some of the pedestrian crossings are red and white stripes, to ensure that

pedestrian give way to traffic rather than expecting the route to be their right of

way, as it is on the public highway. Pedestrian crossings follow desire lines, so

many are set at 45 degrees to the route (Photograph 2)

Photograph 2

§ Black and yellow chain fencing is used to prevent pedestrians from egressing

from the route. This is situated approximately 0.5 metres away from the kerb, to

prevent vehicles driving too close to the pedestrian walkway. (Photograph 3). In

some areas, an additional kerb has been implemented for the same purpose

(Photograph 4).

Photograph 3 Photograph 4

48

§ Pedestrians and forklift trucks are always segregated. Height barriers positioned

to prevent forklift trucks entering parts of warehouse where their access is

prohibited. (Photograph 5)

Photograph 5

§ Non-slip flooring has been implemented in the warehouses where forklift trucks

are required to operate.

§ Barriers have been positioned on the corners of traffic routes to prevent vehicles

taking corners at high speed. (Photograph 6)

Photograph 6

49

§ Pedestrians are prohibited from reversing areas unless there is a protected

walkway. Signage has been implemented to remind pedestrians of the prohibited

areas (Photograph 7). Signage has been implemented on pedestrian routes

where a risk is posed from vehicles, such as ‘Beware vehicles reversing’ and

‘Use extreme care when crossing here’ (Photograph 8). Some areas have a safe

haven for pedestrians to stand whilst vehicles are reversing.

Photograph 7 Photograph 8

§ Hazard lights are used on vehicles when reversing.

§ Reversing guide humps have been implemented in appropriate places. The

guide humps used are actually speed humps normally used to reduce vehicle

speed. However, vehicles are required to reverse their back wheels over the

hump before stopping. Therefore, their purpose on this site is not to stop

vehicles, but to guide them (Photograph 9).

Photograph 9

§ A one way system has been implemented throughout the site.

§ The company has implemented a dedicated lane on the access route to the site

for emergency vehicles.

50

§ A sign has been positioned on the exit route from the site saying ‘please drive

carefully, safety does not stop here’. This sign is for the benefit of staff and

visitors as well as goods vehicle drivers. Other signs implemented include stop

signs and speed limit signs (Photograph 10).

Photograph 10

§ Amber lights are located where a traffic route meets with a fire exit. If there is a

need to evacuate from the building, the lights flash to stop vehicles and allow

pedestrians out of the building (Photograph 11).

Photograph 11

51

§ Mirrors have been implemented on buildings where a blind corner exists to aid

visibility (Photograph 12).

Photograph 12

§ The site is flood lit.

§ The company has implemented marked parking bays and loading bays including

a specific trailer park, where trailers can be collected and shunted to the

appropriate areas (Photograph 13). Double yellow lines have been implemented

to show no parking areas.

Photograph 13

§ Driver’s hours and breaks are monitored weekly through the analysis of

tachographs. Driving licences are also checked annually for any convictions.

§ Daily checks are conducted on vehicles, for example tyres, water, oil, lights and

brakes. Drivers are required to undertake the checks and sign a check sheet

before the vehicle keys are given to them.

§ A video is shown to all visitors and contractors on arrival on site. The video

includes information about where to park, where to load and unload, speed limit

and transport movement awareness, identification of pedestrian routes, hazards,

control measures, PPE and incident reporting system.

§ If drivers are not experienced they are accompanied on the job until they are

considered to be competent. Drivers are given medicals and vision tests every

52

three years. There is a very strict no alcohol policy on site and employees are

aware that drinking on duty would lead to instant dismissal.

§ All staff are trained in the dangers of workplace transport and the company

procedures, to ensure the employees health and safety.

§ Any expenditure for safety does not need to be justified.

53

9.2 CASE STUDY TWO (Hospital)

Number of employees: 7,500 employees (plus members of the public)

Vehicle Type Quantity (per day)

Cars 2000

Vans 100

Heavy goods vehicles 50

Trucks 50

Bicycles 100

Motorcycles 100

§ The company has developed their own system for incident and accident

reporting, which is now being used by other similar companies. The accident

reporting policy requires all staff to report near misses, as well as accidents and

incidents. All new staff undertake a two-day induction training course where the

importance of reporting accidents, incidents and near misses is lectured on. The

training course combined with a ‘no blame’ culture has significantly increased the

number of accidents and near misses that are reported. All information about

accidents, incidents and near misses is recorded on an incident form that is

subsequently entered onto a database. Information from the database is

presented on a monthly, quarterly, half yearly, annually and biannually basis to all

departments. This form of feed back encourages all people to learn lessons from

accidents that have happened in other areas of the company and enables a

proactive approach to be taken to prevent a more serious event occurring. The

analysis of the database identifies high-risk areas, which are then prioritised for

action. These reports help to justify expenditure on safety.

§ A risk assessment is conducted to identify the personal protective equipment

required for employees. It is ensured that any equipment purchased is of the

highest standard.

§ Transport risk assessments have been undertaken in all areas and suitable

control measures identified.

54

§ The company has implemented segregated vehicle and pedestrian routes. In

identified high-risk areas pedestrian walkways are protected by barriers

(Photograph 14) or set back from the traffic route (Photograph 15). Pavements

with dropped kerbs have been implemented at all designated pedestrian crossing

areas. Bollards are also used to protect the pedestrian walkway from reversing

vehicles (Photograph 16). A canopy has been implemented to protect people in

adverse weather conditions. (Photograph 14)

Photograph 14 Photograph 15

Photograph 16

§ The majority of the vehicles have been fitted with an audible alarm that states

‘vehicle reversing’ when the vehicle engages reverse. Recently purchased

vehicles also have sensors on to warn drivers if they are reversing too close to an

object. All vehicles have been labelled with the appropriate warning signage, for

example long vehicle

55

§ The frequency of traffic movements have been reduced on the site through:

i. Implementing a supplies building positioned away from the main workplace

and public areas. Goods are then transported locally, on an ad hoc basis

rather than the goods vehicles delivering all over the site.

ii. Limiting delivery times of goods to times when there are fewer pedestrian

movements.

iii. Implementing a company bus service that transports employees and

members of the public between sites and to public transport stations.

§ Parking on the site is controlled by:

i. Double yellow lines and yellow hatching (Photograph 17).

ii. Bollards located on grass verges to prevent parking in unsuitable locations,

for example in motorists sight lines at junctions (Photograph 18).

iii. Keep clear road markings to keep entrances clear of parked vehicles

iv. No parking road markings on adjoining roads to egress points to ensure that

vehicles do not park in motorists sight lines. (Photograph 19).

v. Marked parking bays. (Photograph 20).

Photograph 17 Photograph 18

Photograph 19 Photograph 20

56

§ CCTV has been implemented to monitor all traffic routes (Photograph 21).

Photograph 21

§ Vegetation cut back from the traffic route, to ensure the traffic route is as wide as

possible (Photograph 22).

Photograph 22

§ A one way system has been implemented on some of the traffic routes. This is

enforced with the appropriate signage. Two-way traffic signs have been

implemented to remind motorists when they are using two-way traffic routes.

§ High visibility no entry signage and a barrier have been implemented to prevent

vehicles entering prohibited areas. Good directional signage has been

implemented throughout the site. Road signs and road markings that have been

implemented comply with the Road Traffic Act. Due to the considerable number

57

of members of the public using the private road network, the company considered

this to be essential. (Photograph 23)

Photograph 23

§ Speed humps have been implemented in areas where they will not disrupt the

loads of goods vehicles.

§ Roundabouts have been implemented at identified high-risk junctions. Signage to

warn motorists of the approaching roundabouts has been positioned within the

motorists’ sight lines.

§ Tachographs have been implemented on all good vehicles. These are analysed

to monitor driver hours and the frequency and duration of breaks. This

information is cross-referenced with the information supplied on time sheets.

§ All drivers undergo formal external driver training, which is refreshed annually.

§ Drivers are required to have a medical every twelve months, which includes

vision and impairment testing.

§ The company safety manager has the power to issue internal prohibition notices

if an activity is identified as posing an intolerable risk.

§ All employees and contractors are give adequate training on workplace transport

safety.

58

9.3 CASE STUDY THREE (Hospital)

Number of employees: 3,500 (plus members of the public)

Vehicle Type Quantity (per day)

Cars 3000

Vans 200

Forklift trucks 2

Heavy goods vehicles 20

Trucks 30

Tugs 20

Floor cleaners 50

Bicycles 80

Motorbikes 20

§ All accidents, incidents and near misses are reported and logged. Staff are

encouraged to report accidents as it is one way that they can bid for money to

improve safety – it provides evidence to justify expenditure. An accident, incident

or near miss is investigated rather than a person. Staff are not disciplined for

having an accident but drivers displaying unsafe behaviour, regardless of

whether they have had an accident are disciplined. Through the analysis of

accident data they have noted significant accident reduction since the

implementation of control measures.

§ Risk assessments and traffic assessments are regularly undertaken on the site.

High-risk areas or operations are identified and measures implemented to reduce

or control the risk. They are currently making numerous improvements to the site

including segregating pedestrians and vehicles by building a covered footbridge

between the car park and the main building (Photograph 24).

Photograph 24

59

§ They are also implementing additional car parking, resurfacing traffic routes,

implementing flood lighting and marked parking bays. They are also improving

access and egress to and from the site, implementing additional signage

positioned in the sight line of motorists, additional speed limit signs and directions

to the necessary departments. A pedestrian crossing that is currently situated on

a bend is being removed and positioned in a safer, more suitable location

(Photograph 25).

Photograph 25

§ As part of the improvements for workplace transport, a new car park has been

developed. Zebra crossings have been implemented leading to and from all

access and egress points to and from the car park and from the central

pedestrian walkway. The pedestrian walkway is guarded from vehicles by

bollards and is indicated with suitable signage, yellow hatchings and pictures of

pedestrians on the surfacing (Photograph 26).

Photograph 26

60

§ There is a height barrier entering the car park to prevent large vehicles entering

the car park (Photograph 27).

Photograph 27

§ Vehicles being clamped enforce parking restrictions. If the position of the vehicle

is deemed dangerous, it is towed away and then clamped.

§ Dropped kerbs have been implemented at all designated pedestrian crossing

points (Photograph 28).

Photograph 28

§ Contractors undertaking construction work on the site are required to erect a site

board stating the required personal protective equipment, current hazards or

risks, the necessary induction training, policy on accident, incident and near miss

reporting, the number of reportable accidents to date and their target (Photograph

29)

Photograph 29

61

§ Staff are supplied with PPE as and when they require it, for example high visibility

jackets, safety boots and hard hats in construction areas. Risk assessments are

used to identify what PPE is needed and in what situations.

§ Vehicles with rear windows have been fitted with rear lenses fitted to aid

reversing.

§ Tugs are fitted with flashing amber lights and audible reversing alarms.

§ Staff are given both internal training and external training on safe driving and the

dangers of workplace transport.

§ Tug drivers are taught how to manoeuvre the tugs safely, especially indoors

where there is likely to be pedestrians.

§ Speed ramps entering the site because the speed of vehicles was identified as a

risk (Photograph 30).

Photograph 30

§ Signs showing that roads have returned to two ways after a one way system

(Photograph 31).

Photograph 31

§ Road markings have been implemented on all traffic routes and these comply

with the highway road markings.

62

9.4 CASE STUDY FOUR (Manufacturer and distributor of food)

Number of employees: 1,500

Vehicle Type Quantity (per day)

Cars 150

Vans 20

Forklift trucks 10

Heavy goods vehicles 60

§ The company encourages employees to report accidents through the

implementation of crash data recorders. Prior to driving a vehicle, a personal

identification number must be input into the recorder by the driver. The crash

data recorder records five seconds prior to impact and five seconds after impact.

The accidents can then be linked directly to the person driving the vehicle at the

time of the accident.

§ Staff are disciplined if an accident revealed by the crash data recorder had not

been officially reported. This has increased the reporting of accidents and

incidents, at the same time as seeing the reduction in accidents. All accidents are

investigated and the root causes identified and corrective action taken. The crash

data recorders also monitor driver hours. The company has found that there has

been a severe reduction in the unauthorised usage of vehicles.

§ Accident investigation conclusions are fed back to staff on a weekly basis. This

is communicated through staff notice boards and e-mail. Depending on the

severity, accidents are also communicated at the start of a shift or immediately.

63

§ All areas of site can be accessed via pedestrian walkways; there are also

numerous zebra crossing points. Speed bumps extend into the pedestrian

walkway, to discourage vehicles from driving in the pedestrian walkway to avoid

the speed humps (Photograph 32).

Photograph 32

§ Zebra crossings are going to be replaced at a 45-degree angle to suit pedestrian

desire lines.

§ Pedestrian routes are marked with a symbol of a pedestrian (Photograph 33).

Photograph 33

§ Vehicles’ speed is limited to 12 mph. This was originally 10 mph but the forklift

trucks could not develop enough power to get up the incline.

64

§ Forklift trucks have reversing lights, flashing beacon, audible reversing alarm and

horns.

§ Vehicles are serviced and maintained monthly, unless there is a fault with the

vehicle. The maintenance company is on twenty four hour call out.

§ The company has implemented marked parking bays, loading bays and

segregated marked bays for tankers to avoid congestion on the traffic routes

(Photograph 34).

Photograph 34

§ Crash barriers are positioned adjacent to traffic routes to protect the infrastructure

of buildings. Crash barriers are also positioned in areas where it would be unsafe

to park (Photograph 35).

Photograph 35

65

§ There is a displayed 10-mph speed limit throughout site. A 5-mph speed limit

was deemed inappropriate as the majority of vehicles register 10 mph as the

minimum speed (Photograph 36).

Photograph 36

§ Give way and right of way signage has been implemented at all junctions

(Photograph 37).

Photograph 37

66

§ ‘Are you driving too fast’ signage is located throughout the site. These were

supplied by the council on request as part of the councils drive safely scheme.

(Photograph 38)

Photograph 38

§ Forklift trucks are not permitted inside the warehouses, so height restriction

barriers have been implemented to prevent such vehicles entering (Photograph

39).

Photograph 39

§ As a rule banksmen are not used to aid reversing, as it was felt that this would

increase the risk of an accident, as pedestrians are not allowed in the designated

reversing areas.

67

§ The company has implemented a system that requires drivers to hang their

vehicle keys on a hook positioned on the loading bay door prior to opening the

loading bay hatch. When the hatch is opened the keys are suspended out of the

drivers reach, meaning the vehicle cannot be driven away until the loading bay

hatch has been closed. The company has experienced drivers disregarding this

system, but this has always resulted in disciplinary action (Photographs 40 and

41).

Photograph 40

Photograph 41

§ All contractors are required to attend induction training before they are issued

with a permit to work. Site procedures, including transport safety procedures are

related to visitors at reception.

§ All drivers undertake an internal driving course and test on appointment. Drivers

are re-tested intermittently or if they have an accident. Drivers are also given

instructions on safe driving, in the form of a video presentation.

§ Shifts are briefed monthly on safety issues. All issues are discussed in a two­

way forum. This has been happening for four months and there is a marked

improvement in staff’s attitude towards safety.

68

9.5 CASE STUDY FIVE (Manufacturer and distributor of drink)

Number of employees: 350

Vehicle Type Quantity (per day)

Cars 700

Vans 60

Forklift trucks 6

Heavy goods vehicles 50

Trucks 20

Tugs 12

Automated vehicles 4

Bicycles 40

Motorcycles 6

§ Accidents, incidents and near misses are reported and investigated. The health

and safety committees drive the ownership of safety out to the shop floor workers

to encourage incident reporting. Staff are also trained in the importance of

reporting accidents. Periodically reports are issues to all staff showing the

number of accidents over preceding months and years. The apparent reduction

in accidents motivates staff to work safely. Accident reports are also used to

justify expenditure on health and safety improvements. All reports are

investigated and remedial actions are noted. These are closed off when the

action is complete. Reports are regularly audited to ensure that all actions are

fulfilled. The company was experiencing a high rate of accidents by contractors.

This has been improved through increased awareness, induction training, the

development of a preferred contractor list and by not allowing contractor vehicles

on site. Employees of the company who have undertaken specific training

undertake all vehicle movements.

69

§ Pedestrian walkways are situated throughout the site. These are painted red

(Photograph 42)

Photograph 42

§ Pedestrian gantries are located throughout the warehouse, to enable the

processes to be observed without being on the shop floor. They also provide a

safe route for pedestrians to take, avoiding potential conflict with workplace

transport. They have a guardrail surrounding them (Photograph 43).

Photograph 43

70

§ Pedestrians are penned into the walkways from the access points to the building.

There are strategic points where the pedestrian walkway can be left but the

gateways are positioned adjacent to pedestrian crossings, which lead to other

pedestrian walkways. Crash barriers are located at pedestrian access points to

protect the pedestrian (Photograph 44)

Photograph 44

§ Sensors are located on doorways leading to pedestrian free areas to detect

pedestrians if they enter, sound an alarm and shut all machinery down. This is

particularly important in the area where the manufacturing process is conducted

by automated vehicles.

§ Automatic guided vehicles are used in one of the warehouses to eliminate both

pedestrians and vehicles from the area. The automated vehicles have front and

rear sensors that automatically stop the vehicle if it is about to collide with an

object.

§ There are segregated car, good vehicle and pedestrian routes entering the site.

§ Mirrors are located at intersections to aid visibility.

§ Drivers are expected to check lights, brakes, oil, water and batteries daily. There

is a checklist in each vehicle to remind the driver of what to check. The check

sheets are audited regularly.

§ Contractors, visitors and employees wear different coloured hats to differentiate

between them. This ensures that there is no presumed safety knowledge

between visitors and employees, for example. First aiders wear green hats so

they can be easily identified. It is a disciplinary offence to wear the wrong

coloured hat.

§ All drivers are assessed for competency periodically and refresher training given.

71

§ There is currently a roll out program of risk assessment training to all staff.

§ Health and safety committees meet with a safety representative from each of the

warehouses. They drive the ownership of safety out to the shop floor workers, to

improve the safety culture of the company.

72

9.6 CASE STUDY SIX (Storage and distribution of food)

Number of employees: 2000

Vehicle Type Quantity (per day)

Heavy goods vehicles 250

Cars 1500

Forklift trucks 26

Picking truck 120

Unloading trucks 20

Pallet trucks Numerous

§ Risk assessments have been undertaken to identify the appropriate personal

protective equipment for employees. Employees are supplied with waterproof

jackets, high visibility jackets, gloves and goggles. The company requires staff to

wear safety helmets in racked areas.

§ Risk assessments have been conducted in consultation with all employees

concerned for workplace transport. They are reviewed annually or more

frequently if required. A safety committee made up of a cross section of staff

meets regularly to discuss risk assessment findings and other safety issues.

§ As a result of the risk assessment findings, the company has implemented

marked pedestrian routes that are protected from vehicles by a barrier

(Photograph 45). They have also implemented a pedestrian crossing with

flashing amber lights and dropped kerbs. (Photograph 46)

Photograph 45 Photograph 46

73

§ The road markings used are same as those found on the public highway

including the word ‘slow’ on the traffic route surfaces to remind drivers to reduce

their speed in higher risk areas (Photograph 47).

Photograph 47

§ All traffic routes are marked with the appropriate road markings.

§ Areas of the traffic route are marked with yellow hatchings to ensure that vehicles

to not park in vehicle turning areas (Photograph 48).

Photograph 48

§ A one way system operates through the majority of the site.

74

§ Speed limit of 15 mph is adequately displayed throughout site both on signs and

marked on the traffic route (Photograph 49).

Photograph 49

§ Audible reversing alarms are fitted to good vehicles, but these can be switched

off if the vehicle is reversing at night-time in residential areas.

§ On site, vehicles are required to use their hazard warning lights when they are

reversing.

§ Height barriers are used at the loading bay openings, to prevent forklift trucks

entering the vehicle being loaded (Photograph 50).

Photograph 50

§ The loading bays are controlled with a traffic light system. A vehicle is only

permitted to leave the loading bay when the traffic light is green indicating that it

is safe to move the vehicle (Photographs 50 and 51).

75

Photograph 51

§ Vehicle movements within the warehouse are controlled by a radar system. Each

driver was instructed by the system where to collect goods from and the route the

vehicle should take to deliver the goods to the appropriate place. The radar

system organised the vehicles in such a way that collisions were eliminated. In

addition to this, forklift trucks were required to sound their horn at intersections.

§ Tachographs are fitted to all vehicles. They are analysed by an external company

to investigate any public complaints and analysed internally to monitor driver

hours.

§ Driving licenses are checked annually to ensure that all drivers are legally

allowed to drive on public highways.

§ Drivers are selected on experience and qualifications. They are then trained to

the company standard on a three-day induction course. A qualified driving

instructor assesses drivers annually, unless it is required more frequently. All

employees are retrained in the dangers of workplace transport and the safe

loading and unloading of vehicles every three months. Employees have a

personal training record so that their training needs can be monitored.

76

9.7 ADDITIONAL BEST PRACTICE MEASURES OBSERVED

9.7.1 Pedestrian Deterrent Paving (Retail Outlet)

Photograph 52 showing pedestrian deterrent paving

The pedestrian deterrent paving has been positioned on the access road to the site,

to encourage pedestrians to use the designated walkways. The paving is also

positioned adjacent to the pedestrian crossing to discourage pedestrians from

egressing from the crossing.

9.7.2 Speed Activated Warning Signs (Engineering company)

Photograph 53 showing a speed activated warning sign If a vehicle approaching this sign is travelling in

excess of the speed limit the sign illuminates to

reveal ‘SLOW 20 MPH’. The company has

monitored the speed of vehicles before and

after the implementation of the sign and has

found a significant decrease in the speed of

vehicles.

77

9.7.3 Overhead storage barriers (Two storage and distribution companies)

Photographs to show two measures used to reduce the risk of pedestrians falling from overhead storage areas.

Photograph 54 Photograph 55

Photograph 54 shows a removable guard being used to reduce the risk of

pedestrians falling from heights. In the company visited, employees tended to

remove the guard at the beginning of the shift and replace it at the end of the shift,

thereby significantly reducing the effectiveness of the measure.

Photograph 55 shows a one way gate being used to reduce the risk of pedestrians

from falling from heights. The gates only open inwards to the overhead storage

meaning that they would not open if a pedestrian were to fall against them. These

gates were considered to reveal the best practice measure observed to reduce the

risks posed by overhead storage.

9.7.4 Reversing guide humps (Laundry service and manufacturer and distributor of drink) Photographs to show the use of speed humps in two companies.

Photograph 56 Photograph 57

78

Both of these photographs show speed humps being used as reversing guide

humps. The measure was considered to be ineffective in the company shown in

photograph 56 but effective in the company shown in photograph 57. In the site

shown in photograph 56, the vehicles were required to reverse up to the guide

humps and stop when their rear wheels touched the humps. However, speed humps

are designed to be driven over, rather than to stop a vehicle. The extensive damage

to the barrier positioned to the rear of the reversing guide hump indicates that the

guide humps were ineffective.

In the site shown in photograph 57, vehicles were required to reverse until their rear

wheels had travelled over the hump. This use of speed humps as reversing guide

humps was considered to be effective, assuming that all vehicles using the device

have the same rear overhang.

9.7.5 CCTV to aid loading (Manufacturer and distributor of food)

Photograph 58 to show CCTV being used to aid the loading of vehicles.

A camera has been implemented over the area where container lorries are loaded.

The monitor is located in an adjacent office, so drivers can watch the loading process

and ensure that the containers are not over filled. This use of CCTV to ensure safe

loading was considered to be best practice.

79

9.7.6 CCTV to aid reversing (Hospital)

Photographs to show CCTV implemented in a vehicle to aid reversing.

Photograph 59 Photograph 60

Photograph 59 shows the camera positioned at the rear of the vehicle and

photograph 60 shows the monitor positioned adjacent to the vehicle steering wheel.

When the driver engages reverse, the view behind the vehicle can be observed on

the monitor.

9.7.7 Safety advice on egressing from the site (Shopping centre)

Photograph 61 to show a sign implemented to advise drivers on a safe method of egressing from the site.

Members of the public, who may not

necessarily be familiar with the area, used the

site where this sign had been implemented on

a daily basis. The sign was considered to

reveal good practice as it advised drivers of

the safest method of egressing from the site

during peak traffic.

80

9.7.8 Risk assessment

One of the companies visited revealed best practice for identifying hazards for the

risk assessment process. At a monthly awareness forum, staff are required to

identify the risks posed by their individual tasks. The details from the hazard

identification process are fed into the risk assessment. The consequences are

analysed, risks evaluated and corrective measures implemented to eliminate or

reduce the identified risk. Staff are issued with hazard awareness sheets monthly to

raise awareness of all of the hazards identified.

9.7.9 Safety Awareness

One company had experienced members of the public and contractors disregarding

safe working practices and safety warning signs due to an over-familiarity with the

site. An awareness leaflet was sent to all customers, staff and contractors stating

safety procedures and outlining their duty of care.

9.7.10 Safety information.

One company has issued all employees with a ‘pocket size’ safety booklet that they

are required to carry with them at all times. The safety booklet contains information

about driver safety, vehicle safety, company safety procedures, safe systems of

work, safe working practices, responsibilities and identified risks and hazards.

81

82

APPENDIX ONE:

SITE CHECKLIST FOR CONTROL MEASURES

83

84

Site

Ref

eren

ce N

umbe

r: C

ompa

ny:

Con

tact

: Jo

b Ti

tle:

Res

earc

her:

Dat

e:

OBS

ERVA

TIO

N

1.

Iden

tify

all c

ontro

l mea

sure

s in

pla

ce w

ithin

the

prem

ises

:

Con

trol M

easu

re

Impl

emen

ted?

C

omm

ents

on

effe

ctiv

enes

s PE

DES

TRIA

N S

AFET

Y Se

para

te v

ehic

le a

nd p

edes

trian

rout

es

Sepa

rate

veh

icle

, ped

estri

an a

nd p

ublic

doo

rs

Subw

ays/

foot

brid

ges

for p

edes

trian

s Le

vel c

ross

ings

for p

edes

trian

s D

ropp

ed k

erbs

at a

ll pe

dest

rian

cros

sing

pla

ces

Roa

d m

arki

ngs

to in

dica

te c

ross

ings

C

ross

ings

cle

arly

indi

cate

d e.

g. fl

ashi

ng li

ghts

etc

Si

gnag

e to

war

n pe

dest

rians

of h

azar

ds

Pede

stria

n de

terre

nt p

avin

g.

Safe

hav

en fo

r ped

estri

ans

to s

tand

whe

n ve

hicl

es a

re re

vers

ing

Barri

ers

posi

tione

d so

veh

icle

s do

not

col

lide

with

peo

ple

whe

n re

vers

ing

Safe

ped

estri

an a

cces

s an

d eg

ress

TR

AFFI

C R

OU

TES

Cra

sh b

arrie

rs, w

here

app

ropr

iate

. Su

itabl

e ba

rrier

s at

ent

ranc

es, e

xits

and

cor

ners

85

Hei

ght b

arrie

rs.

Hig

h w

iring

, lig

htin

g/ s

hiel

ded

pipe

s an

d el

ectri

c ca

bles

Lo

adin

g ba

ys s

ituat

ed a

way

from

ste

ep g

radi

ents

Lo

adin

g ba

ys s

ituat

ed a

way

from

ove

rhea

d ca

bles

Lo

adin

g ba

y an

d sh

eetin

g ar

ea p

rote

cted

from

adv

erse

wea

ther

con

ditio

ns

Load

ing

bays

situ

ated

aw

ay fr

om p

assi

ng tr

affic

and

pub

lic ro

ads.

In

tera

ctio

n w

ith p

ublic

hig

hway

s cl

early

indi

cate

d Fo

rklif

t tru

ck ro

utes

avo

idin

g pu

blic

road

s Ea

sy a

cces

s fo

r em

erge

ncy

vehi

cles

Su

ffici

ent,

wid

e en

ough

traf

fic ro

utes

so

vehi

cles

can

pas

s an

d ci

rcul

ate

easi

ly.

One

way

sys

tem

. Pr

iorit

y co

ntro

l Tr

affic

rout

es w

ithou

t blin

d sp

ots

or ti

ght c

orne

rs.

Reg

ular

insp

ectio

ns a

nd m

aint

enan

ce o

f tra

ffic

rout

es

Safe

ty b

anks

to p

reve

nt v

ehic

les

over

turn

ing

on u

nmad

e ro

ads

Fork

lift t

ruck

rout

es a

void

ing

spee

d ra

mps

W

ide

entra

nces

/ gat

es

Traf

fic ro

utes

aw

ay fr

om v

ulne

rabl

e or

pot

entia

lly h

azar

dous

stru

ctur

es.

Safe

, pra

ctic

al, s

uita

ble

and

suffi

cien

t par

king

are

as fo

r veh

icle

s D

river

s le

avin

g pa

rkin

g ar

ea to

do

not h

ave

to c

ross

dan

gero

us w

orki

ng

area

s.

Park

ing

wel

l lit

and

sign

pos

ted

Park

ing

rest

rictio

ns.

Suita

ble

light

ing

Roa

ds, m

anoe

uvrin

g ar

eas

and

yard

s, w

ell l

it w

ith p

artic

ular

atte

ntio

n to

ju

nctio

ns, b

uild

ings

, pla

nt a

nd p

edes

trian

are

as.

Firm

, eve

n gr

ound

N

on-s

kid

surfa

cing

Ef

fect

ive

mea

ns o

f dra

inag

e Fr

ee fr

om a

rticl

es li

kely

to c

ause

slip

s, tr

ips

or fa

lls

86

Gas

sta

tions

/ fue

l pum

ps p

ositi

oned

aw

ay fr

om m

ain

traffi

c ro

utes

Su

ffici

ent s

pace

for e

quip

men

t to

roll

Han

drai

l on

slop

es

Han

drai

l or g

uard

ing

on s

tairc

ases

. Pe

rman

ent o

bstru

ctio

ns c

lear

ly in

dica

ted

Te

mpo

rary

obs

truct

ions

mar

ked

with

war

ning

sig

ns/ c

ones

. VE

HIC

LE S

AFET

Y Pr

ovis

ion

of a

sea

t on

vehi

cles

Se

at b

elt o

n ve

hicl

es

Suita

ble

and

effe

ctiv

e br

akes

on

vehi

cles

W

inds

cree

ns w

ith w

iper

s on

veh

icle

s.

Ref

lect

ors

Hea

d lig

hts

on v

ehic

les.

H

orns

on

vehi

cles

. Bu

mpe

rs o

n ve

hicl

es

Sun

viso

rs o

n ve

hicl

es.

Brak

e lig

hts

on v

ehic

les

Rev

ersi

ng w

arni

ng li

ght

Rev

ersi

ng s

ound

on

vehi

cles

Fl

ashi

ng a

mbe

r lig

hts

on v

ehic

les,

whe

re a

ppro

pria

te.

War

ning

sig

ns o

n ve

hicl

es, e

.g. l

ong

vehi

cle,

whe

re a

ppro

pria

te.

Con

trol s

yste

m to

pre

vent

veh

icle

s fro

m m

ovin

g w

hen

fork

lift

truck

s ar

e lo

adin

g or

unl

oadi

ng

Rol

love

r pro

tect

ion

stra

tegy

on

vehi

cles

M

irror

s on

veh

icle

s to

aid

vis

ibilit

y.

Rea

r len

s on

veh

icle

s to

aid

reve

rsin

g, w

here

app

ropr

iate

. C

CTV

on

vehi

cles

to a

id re

vers

ing.

Ve

hicl

e ‘s

kirts

’ to

min

imis

e da

mag

e.

Gua

rdin

g of

dan

gero

us p

arts

on

vehi

cles

e.g

. ex

pose

d ex

haus

t pi

pes,

ch

ain

driv

es)

87

SITE

SAF

ETY

ENG

INEE

RIN

G M

EASU

RES

AN

D S

IGN

S Sp

eed

ram

ps

Sign

s vi

sibl

e at

nig

ht

Sign

s sa

me

as th

ose

used

on

publ

ic h

ighw

ays

Spee

d ac

tivat

ed w

arni

ng s

igns

C

lear

ly d

ispl

ayed

spe

ed li

mits

C

lean

, wel

l mai

ntai

ned

war

ning

sig

ns

Roa

d m

arki

ngs

Roa

d m

arki

ngs

to s

how

veh

icle

rout

es

Traf

fic L

ight

s Vi

bro-

lines

, cau

sing

an

audi

ble

sign

al if

the

vehi

cle

cros

ses

them

. Ve

hicl

e lo

cato

r sys

tem

so

the

whe

reab

outs

of v

ehic

les

are

know

n.

Gui

de h

umps

/ rub

ber s

tops

inst

alle

d in

HG

V pa

rkin

g ba

ys

Mirr

ors

on w

alls

/ cei

ling/

oth

er s

truct

ure

to a

id v

isib

ility

Varia

ble

spee

d lim

its.

Cab

le/ C

hain

floo

r to

redu

ce v

ehic

le m

ovem

ents

dur

ing

load

ing.

C

CTV

on

traffi

c ro

utes

SA

FE S

YSTE

MS

OF

WO

RK

Ba

nksm

an to

aid

reve

rsin

g w

here

app

ropr

iate

. D

esig

nate

d ar

eas

for r

ever

sing

Ex

clus

ion

of n

on-e

ssen

tial p

erso

nnel

from

reve

rsin

g ar

eas

Min

imis

e th

e ne

ed fo

r rev

ersi

ng

Res

trict

ion

of v

ehic

le m

ovem

ent w

hen

know

n in

flux

of p

erso

nnel

Ve

hicl

e ho

rns

soun

ded

at in

ters

ectio

ns.

Ove

rtaki

ng re

stric

tions

. Pl

an o

f wor

kpla

ce a

t ent

ranc

e an

d ap

prop

riate

poi

nts

show

ing

vehi

cle

rout

es, o

ne w

ay s

yste

ms

etc.

N

o pa

rkin

g si

gnag

e.

Dou

ble

yello

w li

nes

to in

dica

te n

o pa

rkin

g.

Res

trict

veh

icle

acc

ess

whe

re h

igh

risk

subs

tanc

es a

re s

tore

d Lo

adin

g ba

y ac

tivity

con

trolle

d to

avo

id c

ollis

ions

88

Pot h

oles

repa

ired

prom

ptly

PE

RSO

NAL

PR

OTE

CTI

VE E

QU

IPM

ENT

Prov

isio

n of

nec

essa

ry p

rote

ctiv

e eq

uipm

ent f

or s

taff

and

visi

tors

e.g

. har

d ha

ts

Hig

h vi

sibi

lity

clot

hing

for w

orke

rs in

all

trans

port

area

s St

eel t

oe c

appe

d bo

ots

for a

ll em

ploy

ees.

W

orkp

lace

clo

thin

g to

avo

id h

azar

ds fr

om lo

ose

clot

hing

. Ea

r def

ende

rs

Prot

ectio

n fo

r driv

ers

in a

dver

se w

eath

er c

ondi

tions

. Pr

otec

tion

for p

eopl

e at

risk

from

fallin

g lo

ads

Dai

ly c

heck

s on

veh

icle

s –

tyre

s br

akes

, ste

erin

g, m

irror

s, w

inds

cree

n w

ashe

rs, w

iper

s, w

arni

ng s

igna

ls, s

afet

y sy

stem

s.

2. N

ote

dam

age

to v

ehic

les,

cra

sh b

arrie

rs a

nd s

urro

undi

ng a

rea.

3. N

ote

skid

mar

ks o

n tra

ffic

rout

es.

4. N

ote

any

gene

ral s

afet

y in

form

atio

n: in

form

atio

n po

ster

s, tr

ip h

azar

ds, m

achi

nery

saf

ety

etc.

5. N

ote

the

effe

ctiv

enes

s of

the

com

bine

d co

ntro

l mea

sure

s e.

g. e

ar d

efen

ders

and

a p

olic

y to

sou

nd h

orn

at in

ters

ectio

ns.

ADD

ITIO

NAL

INFO

RM

ATIO

N:

89

90

APPENDIX TWO:

SUMMARY TABLES OF THE DATA COLLECTED FROM EACH COMPANY

91

92

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

Tabl

e A2

.1

Sum

mar

y of

the

data

col

lect

ed fr

om e

ach

com

pany

vis

ited

rega

rdin

g ris

k as

sess

men

t and

saf

ety

man

agem

ent s

yste

ms

Com

pany

R

isk

asse

ssm

ent

Suita

ble

and

Safe

ty m

anua

l, Im

plem

ente

d sa

fety

C

omm

unic

atio

n Po

sitiv

e sa

fety

co

nduc

ted?

su

ffici

ent r

isk

proc

edur

es a

nd

docu

men

tatio

n?

cultu

re

asse

ssm

ent?

sa

fe w

orki

ng

prac

tices

N

Y N

Y Y Y N

Y Y Y Y Y Y N

Y Y Y Y N

N

N

Y N

N

N

N

N

Y N

Y N

N

Y N

Y N

Y Y N

N

Y Y N

Y Y Y N

Y Y Y Y Y Y N

Y Y Y Y N

Y

N

Y N

N

N

N

N

Y N

Y Y Y Y N

Y Y Y Y N

N

N

Y N

N

N

N

N

Y N

Y Y Y Y N

Y Y Y Y N

N

N

Y N

Y N

N

N

Y N

Y Y Y Y N

Y Y Y Y N

N

93

Tabl

e A2

.2

Sum

mar

y of

the

data

col

lect

ed fr

om e

ach

com

pany

vis

ited

rega

rdin

g sa

fe s

yste

ms

of w

ork

Com

pany

D

rivin

g lic

ense

s D

river

hou

rs a

nd B

anks

man

to a

id

Soun

d ho

rn a

t C

ontr

acto

r and

D

esig

nate

d Sa

fe lo

adin

g an

d re

gula

rly

brea

ks

reve

rsin

g in

ters

ectio

ns

visi

tor s

afet

y ar

eas

for

unlo

adin

g of

ch

ecke

d m

onito

red

reve

rsin

g ve

hicl

es

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

N

N

N

Y Y N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y N

N

N

Y Y N

N

Y N

N

Y N

N

N

Y N

N

N

Y N

N

Y Y Y Y N

N

N

N

N

Y N

N

N

Y N

N

N

Y Y N

Y N

N

N

N

Y

N

N

N

N

N

Y N

N

N

N

N

Y N

N

N

Y Y Y N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y N

Y Y Y N

N

Y Y N

Y N

N

N

Y N

N

N

Y

Y N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y

N

N

N

N

N

Y Y

N

Y N

N

N

N

Y

Y Y

Y Y

Y Y

Y N

N

N

N

94

Tabl

e A2

.3

Sum

mar

y of

the

data

col

lect

ed fr

om e

ach

com

pany

vis

ited

rega

rdin

g ac

cide

nt a

nd in

cide

nt re

port

ing

Com

pany

Ac

cide

nts

and

Nea

r mis

ses

Acci

dent

dat

a Aw

are

of

Staf

f enc

oura

ged

Staf

f dis

cour

aged

in

cide

nts

reco

rded

? an

alys

ed a

nd u

sed

RID

DO

R?

to re

port

fr

om re

port

ing

reco

rded

? ef

fect

ivel

y?

acci

dent

s?

acci

dent

s?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

Y Y Y Y Y Y N

Y Y Y Y Y Y N

Y Y Y Y Y Y

N

Y Y Y N

N

N

Y Y Y Y N

Y N

Y Y N

Y N

N

Y Y Y Y N

N

N

Y N

Y Y Y N

N

N

Y Y Y N

N

Y Y Y Y Y N

N

Y Y Y Y Y Y N

Y Y Y Y N

N

N

N

Y N

Y

N

N

Y N

N

N

N

N

N

Y

N

Y N

Y

N

Y N

N

N

N

N

N

Y

N

N

Y N

Y

N

Y N

N

Y

N

Y

95

Tabl

e A2

.4

Sum

mar

y of

the

data

col

lect

ed fr

om e

ach

com

pany

vis

ited

rega

rdin

g ve

hicl

e sa

fety

Com

pany

Fo

rklif

t tr

ucks

use

d on

dai

ly

basi

s?

Rev

ersi

ng a

ids

Reg

ular

serv

icin

g an

d m

aint

enan

ce

Vehi

cle

chec

ks

Ow

ners

hip

of v

ehic

les

Ove

rall

adeq

uate

ve

hicl

e sa

fety

? Fl

ashi

ngam

ber

light

Rev

ersi

ng

light

s R

ever

sing

al

arm

R

ever

sing

sy

stem

Leas

ed

Subc

ontr

acte

d O

wne

d

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

N

Y Y N

N

Y Y N

Y N

Y Y N

N

N

Y Y Y Y Y

N

Y N

N

Y

Y Y

N

Y Y

Y N

N

Y

Y N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y

Y N

N

Y

Y Y

Y Y

Y N

Y

Y Y

N

Y N

N

Y

Y Y

Y N

Y

Y Y

Y N

Y

N

N

Y N

Y

N

Y Y

Y N

Y

N

Y Y

Y Y

Y N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y

N

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y N

Y Y N

Y N

Y N

Y Y N

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y N

N

Y

Y N

N

N

Y

N

N

Y N

N

Y

N

Y Y

Y N

N

N

Y

N

N

Y Y

N

N

Y Y

Y N

N

N

Y

N

N

Y Y

N

Y Y

N

Y Y

N

Y Y

N

Y Y

Y Y

N

N

Y N

N

Y

Y Y Y Y Y N

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N

Y

96

Tabl

e A2

.5

Sum

mar

y of

the

data

col

lect

ed fr

om e

ach

com

pany

vis

ited

rega

rdin

g tr

affic

rout

es a

nd s

ite s

afet

y en

gine

erin

g m

easu

res

and

sign

s

Com

pany

1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

Con

trol

mea

sure

D

rain

age

Y Y

Y Y

Y Y

N

Y Y

Y Y

Y Y

Y Y

Y Y

Y Y

Y Li

ghtin

g Y

Y Y

Y Y

Y N

Y

Y Y

Y Y

Y Y

Y Y

Y Y

N

Y Fi

rm e

ven

floor

ing

Y N

Y

Y Y

N

N

Y Y

Y Y

Y Y

Y Y

Y Y

Y N

Y

Wid

e tr

affic

rout

es

N

Y Y

Y N

Y

Y Y

N

Y Y

Y Y

Y Y

Y Y

Y N

Y

Mirr

ors

to a

id v

isib

ility

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y

Y N

N

N

N

N

N

Y

N

N

at b

lind

junc

tions

Ve

geta

tion

cut b

ack

N/A

N

/A

N/A

N

/A

N/A

N

/A

N/A

Y

N/A

N

/A

N/A

N

/A

N/A

N

/A

N/A

N

/A

N/A

N

/A

N/A

N

/A

Rev

ersi

ng g

uide

Y

N

N

N

Y N

N

N

N

N

N

Y

N

N

N

N

N

Y N

N

hu

mps

Spee

d hu

mps

N

N

Y

N

N

N

N

Y N

Y

N

Y N

Y

N

Y N

N

N

N

Tr

affic

ligh

ts

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Roa

d si

gns

N

N

Y N

N

N

N

Y

Y Y

N

N

N

Y N

Y

Y Y

N

N

War

ning

sig

ns a

nd

N

Y Y

Y Y

Y N

Y

Y Y

Y Y

Y Y

Y Y

Y Y

N

Y sa

fety

pos

ters

Sa

fety

fenc

ing

Y Y

Y N

N

N

N

Y

N

Y Y

N

N

Y N

Y

Y Y

Y Y

Can

opy

to p

rote

ct

Y N

N

Y

N

N

N

Y N

Y

N

Y Y

Y Y

N

N

Y N

Y

empl

oyee

s fr

om

adve

rse

wea

ther

co

nditi

ons

Bol

lard

s N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y

Y Y

Y N

Y

Y N

Y

Y Y

N

N

Rou

ndab

outs

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y

Y Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Hei

ght b

arrie

rs

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y N

N

Y

N

N

Y Y

Y N

N

‘N

o en

tran

ce’ b

arrie

rs

N

N

Y Y

N

N

N

Y Y

Y N

N

N

N

N

N

Y

Y N

N

Ve

hicl

e lo

cato

r sys

tem

N

N

N

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y N

N

N

Y

N

N

N

Use

of f

orkl

ift tr

ucks

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y on

pub

lic h

ighw

ays

97

Ove

rhea

d St

orag

e R

oad

mar

king

s M

arke

d lo

adin

g ba

ys

CC

TV

One

way

sys

tem

Sp

eed

activ

ated

w

arni

ng s

igns

D

ispl

ayed

Spe

ed li

mit

Suffi

cien

t par

king

M

arke

d pa

rkin

g ba

ys

Dou

ble

yello

w li

nes

Yello

w h

atch

ings

N

o pa

rkin

g si

gnag

e Ph

ysic

al b

arrie

rs to

pr

even

t par

king

En

forc

emen

t sys

tem

Pa

rkin

g m

easu

res

effe

ctiv

e?

Blin

d co

rner

s w

ith n

o co

ntro

l mea

sure

s U

neve

n flo

orin

g U

ntid

y pr

emis

es

Gra

dien

t on

fork

lift

truc

k ro

ute

Nar

row

acc

ess

and

egre

ss ro

utes

Lo

w e

lect

ricity

cab

le

Shar

ed a

cces

s an

d eg

ress

Fl

amm

able

liqu

ids

stor

ed n

ext t

o ex

it ro

ute

N

N

N

Y N

N

Y N

N

Y Y Y N

N

N

Y N

N

N

N

N

Y N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y Y Y N

N

N

N

Y Y N

Y Y Y Y N

N

N

N

Y Y Y Y N

Y N

Y Y Y Y N

Y Y N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y N

Y N

Y Y Y Y Y Y N

N

Y Y N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y N

N

Y N

Y N

Y Y Y Y N

N

N

Y Y N

Y Y N

N

N

Y N

N

N

N

N

Y Y Y N

N

N

N

N

Y Y Y Y Y N

N

Y N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y Y Y N

Y Y Y Y

N

Y Y Y Y N

Y N

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N

N

N

N

Y N

N

N

Y N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y N

Y Y N

Y N

N

Y Y Y Y N

Y N

Y Y Y Y N

Y Y N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y Y N

N

N

Y Y Y Y N

Y N

N

Y N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y N

N

Y N

N

Y Y N

N

N

Y N

N

Y N

Y N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y Y N

N

N

N

Y Y Y Y N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y N

Y N

N

Y Y Y Y N

Y N

Y Y Y N

N

N

N

N

Y N

N

N

N

Y N

N

Y Y Y N

N

Y N

N

Y N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y Y Y N

N

Y Y Y Y N

Y Y N

Y N

N

N

Y N

N

N

N

Y Y Y Y Y N

Y Y Y Y Y Y N

Y Y N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y Y Y Y N

Y Y Y Y Y Y N

Y Y N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y Y Y N

Y Y

N

N

N

N

Y N

Y N

N

N

N

Y N

N

N

Y N

N

N

N

N

N

N

98

Tabl

e A2

.6

Sum

mar

y of

the

data

col

lect

ed fr

om e

ach

com

pany

vis

ited

rega

rdin

g pe

dest

rian

safe

ty

Com

pany

Pe

dest

rian

rout

es

Pede

stria

n ro

utes

Pe

dest

rian

cros

sing

Pr

ohib

ited

pede

stria

n Su

itabl

e pe

dest

rian

prot

ecte

d fr

om

area

s or

saf

e ha

vens

sa

fety

for t

he n

umbe

r ve

hicl

es

for p

edes

tria

ns

of p

edes

tria

ns?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

N

N

Y Y N

N

N

Y N

Y Y N

N

Y N

Y Y Y N

N

N

N

Y N

N

N

N

Y N

Y Y N

N

Y N

N

Y Y N

N

N

N

Y N

N

N

N

N

N

Y Y N

N

Y N

Y Y Y N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y N

N

Y N

N

N

N

N

N

Y N

N

N

N

N

Y N

Y N

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N

Y Y Y N

N

99

Tabl

e A2

.7

Sum

mar

y of

the

data

col

lect

ed fr

om e

ach

com

pany

vis

ited

rega

rdin

g se

lect

ion

and

trai

ning

Com

pany

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

M

edic

al o

n ap

poin

tmen

t

Y N

Y Y N

N

N

Y N

Y Y Y Y N

N

Y Y Y N

N

Perio

dic

med

ical

s

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y N

N

Y Y N

N

N

N

Y Y N

N

Ris

k as

sess

men

t tr

aini

ng

N

Y N

Y N

N

N

N

N

N

Y N

N

N

N

N

N

Y N

N

Driv

er tr

aini

ng

N

N

N

Y Y N

N

Y N

Y Y N

Y N

Y Y Y Y Y N

Safe

load

ing

Trai

ning

on

FLT

trai

ning

tr

aini

ng (i

n w

orkp

lace

ad

ditio

n to

FLT

tr

ansp

ort s

afet

y.

trai

ning

) Y N

N

Y N

N

N

Y N

Y N

Y Y N

N

Y Y Y N

N

N

Y N

N

N

N

N Y N Y N

N

Y N

Y Y N

Y N

N

N

Y Y N

N

Y Y N

Y N

Y Y N

N

N

Y Y Y Y Y

100

Tabl

e A2

.8

Sum

mar

y of

the

data

col

lect

ed fr

om e

ach

com

pany

vis

ited

rega

rdin

g pe

rson

al p

rote

ctiv

e eq

uipm

ent

Com

pany

Em

ploy

ees

wea

r PPE

? R

isk

asse

ssm

ent c

ondu

cted

W

earin

g of

PPE

enf

orce

d?

Com

pany

pay

for P

PE

to id

entif

y PP

E re

quire

d?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

Y Y Y Y N

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

N

Y Y Y Y N

N

Y N

Y Y Y Y N

Y Y Y Y N

N

N

N

Y Y N

N

N

Y N

Y Y N

Y N

Y Y Y Y N

Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N

Y N

Y

101

Tabl

e A2

.9 (1

)

Sum

mar

y of

the

data

col

lect

ed fr

om e

ach

com

pany

vis

ited

rega

rdin

g co

mpl

ianc

e w

ith le

gisl

atio

n

Com

pany

Th

e M

anag

emen

t of H

ealth

and

Saf

ety

at W

ork

Reg

ulat

ions

199

9

Suita

ble

and

suffi

cien

t ris

k R

ecor

d fin

ding

s of

risk

Ad

equa

te h

ealth

and

saf

ety

Perc

enta

ge c

ompl

iant

. as

sess

men

t as

sess

men

t tr

aini

ng.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

N

Y N

N

N

N

N

Y N

Y N

N

Y N

Y N

Y Y N

N

N

Y N

N

N

N

N

Y N

Y N

N

Y N

Y N

Y Y N

N

N

Y N

N

N

N

N

Y N

Y N

N

Y N

Y Y N

Y N

N

0 100 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 100 0 0 100 0 100

33

66

100 0 0

102

Tabl

e A2

.9 (2

) Su

mm

ary

of th

e da

ta c

olle

cted

from

eac

h co

mpa

ny v

isite

d re

gard

ing

com

plia

nce

with

legi

slat

ion

Com

pany

Th

e W

orkp

lace

(Hea

lth, S

afet

y an

d W

elfa

re) R

egul

atio

ns 1

992

Eve

n an

d Su

itabl

e Tr

affic

rout

e H

andr

ails

Pe

dest

rians

Su

ffici

ent

Traf

fic

Suffi

cien

t W

orkp

lace

Pe

rcen

tage

un

slip

per

drai

nage

ke

pt fr

ee

on s

lope

s an

d ve

hicl

es

sepa

ratio

n ro

ute

num

ber o

f tra

ffic

equi

pmen

t co

mpl

iant

y flo

orin

g fr

om

and

able

to

betw

een

vehi

cles

su

itabl

y ro

utes

and

re

gula

rlyob

stru

ctio

ns s

tairc

ases

ci

rcul

ate

in a

an

d pe

dest

rians

in

dica

ted

suita

ble

size

m

aint

aine

d sa

fe m

anne

r an

d po

sitio

n fo

r an

d in

goo

dve

hicl

es u

sing

re

pair

them

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

Y N

Y Y Y N

N

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N

Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y N

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y N

Y Y Y N

N

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N

Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

N

N

N

Y N

Y N

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N

Y Y Y N

N

N

N Y N

N

N

N

Y N

Y Y N

N

Y N

N

Y Y N

N

N

Y Y Y N

N

N

Y N

Y Y N

Y Y N

Y Y Y N

N

N

Y N

Y N

Y N Y N

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N

N

Y Y Y Y Y N

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N

Y

55

55

77

88

55

44

22

100

66

100

100

77

88

100

66

88

100

100

22

55

103

Tabl

e A2

.9 (3

)

Sum

mar

y of

the

data

col

lect

ed fr

om e

ach

com

pany

vis

ited

rega

rdin

g co

mpl

ianc

e w

ith le

gisl

atio

n

Com

pany

Th

e Pe

rson

al P

rote

ctiv

e Eq

uipm

ent R

egul

atio

ns 1

992

PPE

prov

ided

As

sess

men

t mad

e U

se o

f PPE

enf

orce

d Pe

rcen

tage

com

plia

nt

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

Y Y Y Y N

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

N

Y Y Y Y N

N

Y N

Y Y Y Y N

Y Y Y Y N

N

N

N

Y Y N

N

N

Y N

Y Y N

Y N

Y Y Y Y N

Y

33

66

100

100

33

33

33

100

33

100

100

66

100

33

100

100

100

100

33

66

104

Tabl

e A2

.9 (4

)

Sum

mar

y of

the

data

col

lect

ed fr

om e

ach

com

pany

vis

ited

rega

rdin

g co

mpl

ianc

e w

ith le

gisl

atio

n

Com

pany

Th

e H

ealth

and

Sa

fety

at W

ork

Act

1974

The

Rep

ortin

g of

In

jurie

s, D

isea

ses

and

Dan

gero

us O

ccur

renc

es

Reg

ulat

ions

199

5

Driv

ers

Hou

rs a

nd T

acho

grap

h R

ules

for G

oods

Ve

hicl

es in

UK

and

Eur

ope

(GV2

62)

The

Traf

fic S

igns

R

egul

atio

ns a

ndG

ener

al D

irect

ions

19

94

Ove

rall

Com

plia

nce

with

le

gisl

atio

n(p

erce

ntag

e)

Do

not c

harg

e em

ploy

ees

for

equi

pmen

t

Rec

ord

repo

rtab

le

info

rmat

ion

Mon

itor

driv

er h

ours

an

d ta

chog

raph

s

9 ho

ur d

aily

dr

ivin

g lim

it 45

min

ute

brea

k af

ter 4

.5 h

ours

of

driv

ing

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N

Y N

Y

Y Y Y Y Y N

N

Y Y Y Y Y Y N

Y Y Y Y N

N

Y Y

Y N

Y

N

N

Y N

Y

Y Y

N

Y N

N

Y

N

N

Y N

Y

Y Y

N

Y N

N

Y

N

N

Y N

Y

Y Y

N

Y N

N

Y

N

Y Y

Y Y

Y Y

Y Y

Y Y

Y Y

N

Y N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y N

Y N

N

N

Y N

N

Y N

N

N

52

62

62

76

43

33

24

100

43

90

71

66

81

62

81

81

90

95

19

38

105

106

APPENDIX THREE:

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF KEY ENGINEERED CONTROL MEASURES COMPARED BETWEEN COMPANIES

107

108

The

‘per

cent

age

effe

ctiv

e’ s

core

is b

ased

on

a su

bjec

tive

asse

ssm

ent o

f the

con

trol m

easu

res,

from

info

rmat

ion

gath

ered

whi

lst o

n si

te.

Indi

vidu

al fa

ctor

s th

at c

ontri

bute

to th

e ef

fect

iven

ess

scor

e ha

ve b

een

deta

iled

for e

ach

cont

rol m

easu

re a

t the

beg

inni

ng o

f the

app

ropr

iate

ta

ble.

Traf

fic m

ovem

ents

hav

e be

en d

ivid

ed in

to fo

ur m

ain

cate

gorie

s an

d th

e su

bdiv

ided

into

3 le

vels

as

follo

ws:

1.

Vehi

cles

driv

en b

y m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic

·

Less

than

10

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

·

Betw

een

10 a

nd 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

·

Ove

r 100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

2. V

ehic

les

driv

en b

y em

ploy

ees

·

Less

than

10

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

·

Betw

een

10 a

nd 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

·

Ove

r 100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

3.

Pede

stria

ns –

mem

bers

of t

he p

ublic

·

Less

than

10

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

·

Betw

een

10 a

nd 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

·

Ove

r 100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

4.

Pede

stria

ns -

empl

oyee

s

·

Less

than

10

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

·

Betw

een

10 a

nd 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

·

Ove

r 100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Whe

re p

ossi

ble

info

rmat

ion

has

been

incl

uded

on

the

cost

of t

he c

ontro

l mea

sure

s. A

s st

ated

in th

e re

sults

sec

tion,

idea

lly c

osts

wou

ld b

e su

pplie

d fo

r the

who

le li

fe c

ycle

of t

he p

rodu

ct b

ut th

e co

mpa

nies

vis

ited

wer

e no

t pre

pare

d to

rele

ase

this

info

rmat

ion.

109

Pede

stria

n C

ross

ings

The

effe

ctiv

enes

s of

ped

estri

an c

ross

ings

was

bas

ed o

n th

e fo

llow

ing

fact

ors:

1.

Whe

ther

ped

estri

ans

used

the

cros

sing

. 2.

W

heth

er d

river

s ga

ve w

ay to

ped

estri

ans

as a

ppro

pria

te.

3.

Whe

ther

the

mar

king

s on

the

cros

sing

wer

e vi

sibl

e.

4.

The

leve

l of i

mpl

emen

tatio

n on

the

site

. Fo

r exa

mpl

e, th

e ef

fect

iven

ess

scor

e w

ould

be

low

er if

the

com

pany

had

impl

emen

ted

one

cros

sing

w

hen

ther

e w

ere

six

plac

es w

here

a p

edes

trian

cro

ssin

g w

as re

quire

d.

Site

s Im

plem

ente

d Pe

rcen

tage

ef

fect

ive

Why

effe

ctiv

e or

inef

fect

ive?

Tr

affic

mov

emen

ts

Com

pany

3

Doc

k 10

%

The

pede

stria

n cr

ossi

ngs

wer

e no

t of s

tand

ard

high

way

des

ign

beca

use

pede

stria

ns w

ere

expe

cted

to g

ive

way

to v

ehic

les.

H

owev

er, d

ue to

the

larg

e nu

mbe

rs o

f mem

bers

of t

he p

ublic

us

ing

the

site

, the

mea

ning

of t

he n

on-s

tand

ard

desi

gn w

as n

ot

know

n an

d th

eref

ore,

the

effe

ctiv

enes

s of

the

cros

sing

s qu

estio

nabl

e. T

here

wer

e la

rge

num

bers

of p

edes

trian

s us

ing

the

site

and

few

des

igna

ted

cros

sing

are

as.

Ther

efor

e,

pede

stria

ns te

nded

to c

ross

the

road

whe

re it

was

mos

t co

nven

ient

for t

hem

.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– Be

twee

n 10

and

10

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

mem

bers

of t

he p

ublic

Ove

r 100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te

traffi

c ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– e

mpl

oyee

s –

less

than

10

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

ro

utes

C

ompa

ny 1

0 H

ospi

tal

50%

Pe

dest

rian

cros

sing

s w

ere

situ

ated

in th

e ca

r par

k an

d at

sev

eral

lo

catio

ns a

roun

d th

e si

te.

In th

e ca

r par

k pe

dest

rian

cros

sing

s ha

d be

en im

plem

ente

d le

adin

g to

and

from

all

acce

ss a

nd e

gres

s po

ints

to a

nd fr

om th

e ca

r par

k an

d fro

m th

e ce

ntra

l ped

estri

an

wal

kway

. Th

e cr

ossi

ngs

wer

e ef

fect

ive

beca

use

they

allo

wed

pe

dest

rians

to c

ross

at c

onve

nien

t, ap

prop

riate

loca

tions

. Th

e pe

dest

rian

cros

sing

s si

tuat

ed a

roun

d th

e si

te w

ere

less

effe

ctiv

e.

This

is b

ecau

se th

ey d

id n

ot fo

llow

ped

estri

an d

esire

line

s an

d w

ere

not s

ituat

ed a

t the

loca

tions

whe

re th

ere

wer

e th

e m

ost

frequ

ent p

edes

trian

mov

emen

ts.

How

ever

, ped

estri

an m

ovem

ent

asse

ssm

ents

hav

e be

en c

ondu

cted

and

the

cros

sing

s w

ill be

re

loca

ted

to re

flect

ped

estri

an m

ovem

ents

and

des

ire li

nes.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

tra

ffic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– O

ver 1

00

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

ro

utes

110

Com

pany

11

Man

ufac

ture

r and

di

strib

utor

of d

rink

25%

Th

e pe

dest

rian

cros

sing

s ar

e no

t sta

ndar

d de

sign

(yel

low

and

bl

ack

strip

es) b

ut c

ontra

ctor

s an

d vi

sito

rs a

re m

ade

awar

e of

thei

r m

eani

ng.

Pede

stria

ns u

sing

the

pede

stria

n w

alkw

ays

are

auto

mat

ical

ly le

d on

to th

e pe

dest

rian

cros

sing

s w

here

ap

prop

riate

. H

owev

er, a

larg

e nu

mbe

r of p

edes

trian

s do

not

use

th

e pe

dest

rian

wal

kway

s an

d ch

oose

not

to c

ross

the

traffi

c ro

ute

at d

esig

nate

d ar

eas.

Thi

s in

dica

tes

that

the

pede

stria

n fo

otw

ays

and

cros

sing

s do

not

refle

ct th

e pa

ths

pede

stria

ns c

hoos

e to

use

, th

eref

ore

redu

cing

the

effe

ctiv

enes

s.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic

rout

es

Com

pany

veh

icle

s –

Ove

r 100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

mem

bers

of t

he p

ublic

less

than

10

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– O

ver 1

00

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

ro

utes

C

ompa

ny 1

4 Sh

oppi

ng M

all

25%

Th

e pe

dest

rian

cros

sing

inst

alle

d w

as o

f sta

ndar

d hi

ghw

ay

desi

gn in

clud

ing

flash

ing

beac

ons.

The

cro

ssin

g w

as in

stal

led

to

aid

pede

stria

ns c

ross

ing

the

road

from

the

car p

ark

to th

e sh

oppi

ng m

all.

For

this

pur

pose

the

cros

sing

can

be

deem

ed a

s 10

0% e

ffect

ive.

How

ever

, the

re a

re a

reas

of t

he s

ite w

hich

wer

e co

nsid

ered

to b

e hi

gher

risk

with

rega

rds

to p

edes

trian

and

ve

hicl

e co

nflic

ts w

here

ped

estri

an c

ross

ings

had

not

bee

n in

stal

led.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

mem

bers

of t

he p

ublic

Ove

r 100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te

traffi

c ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– e

mpl

oyee

s –

less

than

10

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

ro

utes

C

ompa

ny 1

6 M

anuf

actu

rer a

nd

dist

ribut

or o

f foo

d

80%

Th

e pe

dest

rian

cros

sing

s in

stal

led

at th

is s

ite a

re p

ositi

oned

at a

ll ar

eas

whe

re a

ped

estri

an m

ay n

eed

to c

ross

the

traffi

c ro

ute.

Th

e co

mpa

ny d

isci

plin

ed e

mpl

oyee

s se

en c

ross

ing

the

road

w

ithou

t the

aid

of t

he p

edes

trian

cro

ssin

g. T

his

enfo

rcem

ent

syst

em in

crea

sed

the

effe

ctiv

enes

s of

the

pede

stria

n cr

ossi

ng b

ut

empl

oyee

s te

nded

to e

ither

cro

ss a

djac

ent t

o th

e cr

ossi

ng o

r de

part

from

the

cros

sing

whi

lst c

ross

ing

the

road

. Th

e co

mpa

ny

is g

oing

to re

loca

te th

e m

arke

d cr

ossi

ngs

at a

45-

degr

ee a

ngle

on

the

traffi

c ro

ute

to re

flect

ped

estri

an d

esire

line

s.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic

rout

es

Com

pany

veh

icle

s –

Ove

r 100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

mem

bers

of t

he p

ublic

less

than

10

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– O

ver 1

00

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

ro

utes

111

Com

pany

17

Food

sto

rage

and

di

strib

utio

n

25%

Th

e si

te h

ad o

ne e

ffect

ive

pede

stria

n cr

ossi

ng, w

hich

allo

wed

pe

dest

rians

to c

ross

the

road

from

the

entra

nce

gate

to th

e m

ain

build

ing.

Oth

er p

edes

trian

cro

ssin

gs o

n th

e si

te w

ere

not

cons

ider

ed to

be

effe

ctiv

e be

caus

e th

ey w

ere

poor

ly m

aint

aine

d an

d th

eref

ore

bare

ly v

isib

le, t

hey

did

not f

ollo

w p

edes

trian

des

ire

lines

and

in fa

ct le

d pe

dest

rians

to h

ighe

r ris

k ar

eas,

for e

xam

ple

to th

e ce

ntre

of a

load

ing

bay.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic

rout

es

Com

pany

veh

icle

s –

Ove

r 100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

mem

bers

of t

he p

ublic

less

than

10

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– O

ver 1

00

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

ro

utes

C

ompa

ny 1

8 M

anuf

actu

rer a

nd

dist

ribut

or o

f drin

k.

100%

Tw

o st

yles

of p

edes

trian

cro

ssin

gs h

ad b

een

inst

alle

d on

the

site

: st

anda

rd d

esig

n an

d no

n-st

anda

rd d

esig

n. T

he n

on-s

tand

ard

desi

gn c

ross

ings

wer

e in

stal

led

beca

use

pede

stria

ns w

ere

requ

ired

to g

ive

way

to v

ehic

les

at th

ese

loca

tions

. Th

is fa

ct w

as

rein

forc

ed th

roug

h th

e pr

esen

ce o

f war

ning

sig

ns.

All p

edes

trian

cr

ossi

ngs

follo

wed

des

ire li

nes

and

led

pede

stria

ns fr

om o

ne s

afe

area

to a

noth

er.

Whe

re a

ped

estri

an m

ay w

ish

to g

o in

one

of

two

dire

ctio

ns, t

wo

cros

sing

s w

ere

inst

alle

d to

ens

ure

that

all

desi

rabl

e de

stin

atio

ns c

ould

be

reac

hed

safe

ly. T

he p

edes

trian

cr

ossi

ngs

wer

e co

nsid

ered

to b

e 10

0% e

ffect

ive.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic

rout

es

Com

pany

veh

icle

s –

Ove

r 100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

mem

bers

of t

he p

ublic

Betw

een

10 a

nd 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– e

mpl

oyee

s –

Ove

r 100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic

rout

es

CO

ST =

·

Pede

stria

n cr

ossi

ng w

ith fl

ashi

ng b

eaco

ns, a

nd ro

ad m

arki

ngs

cons

iste

nt w

ith th

ose

foun

d on

the

publ

ic h

ighw

ay =

£7,

000

(incl

udin

g la

bour

5 lit

res

of tr

affic

pai

nt to

mar

k a

pede

stria

n cr

ossi

ng =

£65

·

Dis

posa

ble

pain

t app

licat

or =

£38

112

Rev

ersi

ng g

uide

hum

ps

The

effe

ctiv

enes

s of

the

reve

rsin

g gu

ide

hum

ps w

as b

ased

on

whe

ther

the

guid

e hu

mps

wer

e fit

for p

urpo

se.

Site

s Im

plem

ente

d M

ater

ial u

sed

Perc

enta

ge

effe

ctiv

e W

hy e

ffect

ive

or in

effe

ctiv

e?

Traf

fic m

ovem

ents

Com

pany

1

Laun

dry

Serv

ice

Spee

d hu

mp

40%

Ve

hicl

es w

ere

requ

ired

to re

vers

e up

to th

e gu

ide

hum

ps a

nd s

top

whe

n th

eir r

ear

whe

els

touc

hed

the

hum

ps.

How

ever

, sp

eed

hum

ps a

re d

esig

ned

to b

e dr

iven

ov

er ra

ther

than

to s

top

a ve

hicl

e, re

sulti

ng

in v

ehic

les

driv

ing

over

the

spee

d hu

mps

ra

ther

than

sto

ppin

g. T

he e

xten

sive

da

mag

e to

the

barri

er p

ositi

oned

beh

ind

the

reve

rsin

g gu

ide

hum

p re

veal

ed th

at th

e m

easu

res

wer

e no

t ver

y ef

fect

ive.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

pe

r day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

pe

r day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

less

th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– Be

twee

n 10

and

10

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Com

pany

5

Car

reta

iler

Hal

f log

s 10

0%

Hal

f log

s ha

d be

en a

ttach

ed to

the

grou

nd

to a

ct a

s ve

hicl

e st

ops

whe

n dr

iven

up

to.

The

logs

wer

e co

nsid

ered

to b

e fit

for

purp

ose

as th

ey w

ere

only

inte

nded

to s

top

slow

mov

ing

cars

, as

oppo

sed

to la

rger

ve

hicl

es.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– Be

twee

n 10

and

100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

Ove

r 10

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– e

mpl

oyee

s –

Betw

een

10 a

nd

100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Com

pany

12

Man

ufac

ture

r and

di

strib

utor

of f

ood

Rid

ge in

flo

orin

g 5%

Th

is c

ompa

ny u

sed

a na

tura

lly fo

rmed

rid

ge in

the

traffi

c ro

ute

surfa

ce a

s a

reve

rsin

g gu

ide

hum

p. I

t was

not

co

nsid

ered

to b

e ef

fect

ive

as d

river

s w

ere

not a

war

e of

its

pres

ence

or p

urpo

se.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– Be

twee

n 10

and

100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– Be

twee

n 10

and

100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

Be

twee

n 10

and

100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– Be

twee

n 10

and

10

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

113

Com

pany

18

Man

ufac

ture

r and

di

strib

utor

of

drin

k

Spee

d hu

mp

90%

Ve

hicl

es w

ere

requ

ired

to re

vers

e un

til

thei

r rea

r whe

els

had

trave

lled

over

the

spee

d hu

mp.

Thi

s us

e of

spe

ed h

umps

as

reve

rsin

g gu

ides

was

con

side

red

to b

e ef

fect

ive.

How

ever

, the

rear

ove

rhan

g of

ve

hicl

es v

arie

s co

nsid

erab

ly a

nd m

ust b

e co

nsid

ered

whe

n po

sitio

ning

the

hum

ps.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

pe

r day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

pe

r day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

Be

twee

n 10

and

100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– O

ver 1

00

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

CO

ST:

·

Spee

d hu

mp

= £5

0 - £

65 d

epen

ding

on

the

heig

ht.

·

Bolts

to s

ecur

e th

e hu

mp

= £8

114

Mirr

ors

to a

id v

isib

ility

at b

lind

junc

tions

The

effe

ctiv

enes

s of

mirr

ors

inst

alle

d at

blin

d ju

nctio

ns w

as b

ased

on

the

follo

win

g fa

ctor

s:

1.

Whe

ther

the

mirr

ors

wer

e in

a u

sabl

e po

sitio

n.

2.

Whe

ther

the

driv

ers/

ped

estri

ans

used

the

mirr

ors

to a

id v

isio

n.

3.

Whe

ther

the

mirr

ors

wer

e ad

equa

tely

mai

ntai

ned.

Site

s Im

plem

ente

d Pe

rcen

tage

ef

fect

ive

Why

effe

ctiv

e or

inef

fect

ive?

Tr

affic

mov

emen

ts

Com

pany

10

Hos

pita

l 70

%

Mirr

ors

had

been

inst

alle

d in

tern

ally

at c

orrid

or ju

nctio

ns.

The

mirr

ors

wer

e to

be

used

by

porte

rs w

heel

ing

trolle

ys,

slow

mov

ing

vehi

cles

and

ped

estri

ans.

The

mirr

ors

wer

e po

sitio

ned

suita

bly

and

wer

e w

ell m

aint

aine

d. T

he

mirr

ors

wer

e us

ed re

gula

rly b

y th

e tu

g dr

iver

s an

d by

the

porte

rs b

ut n

ot b

y th

e pe

dest

rians

.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

Ove

r 100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– e

mpl

oyee

s –

Ove

r 100

mov

emen

ts

per d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Com

pany

11

Man

ufac

ture

r and

di

strib

utor

of

drin

k.

20%

Th

e m

irror

s in

stal

led

wer

e do

me

mirr

ors

whi

ch c

ould

be

used

from

the

four

rout

es le

adin

g to

the

cros

s ro

ad.

The

effe

ctiv

enes

s of

the

mirr

ors

was

que

stio

nabl

e be

caus

e th

e fo

rks

of th

e fo

rk li

ft tru

cks

wer

e al

mos

t dire

ctly

be

neat

h th

e m

irror

bef

ore

the

driv

er w

as a

ble

to s

ee

onco

min

g ve

hicl

es.

If fo

ur v

ehic

les

wer

e to

app

roac

h si

mul

tane

ousl

y th

e ve

hicl

e w

ould

col

lide.

The

mirr

ors

wer

e m

ount

ed o

n ch

ains

from

the

ceilin

g re

sulti

ng in

the

mirr

ors

mov

ing

in th

e ai

r flo

w o

f the

war

ehou

se.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

less

than

10

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

pe

r day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Com

pany

18

Man

ufac

ture

r an

d di

strib

utor

of

drin

k.

25%

Th

e m

irror

s w

ere

clea

n an

d po

sitio

ned

in s

uita

ble

posi

tions

for u

se b

y dr

iver

s. H

owev

er, t

hrou

gh

obse

rvat

ion

and

disc

ussi

ons

with

driv

ers

it w

as a

ppar

ent

that

the

mirr

ors

wer

e no

t use

d to

aid

vis

ibilit

y. T

his

is

beca

use

the

mirr

ors

had

rece

ntly

bee

n in

stal

led

and

driv

ers

wer

e no

t use

d to

usi

ng th

em.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

Bet

wee

n 10

and

100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– e

mpl

oyee

s –

Ove

r 100

mov

emen

ts

per d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

CO

ST

: ·

1000

mm

dom

e sh

aped

mirr

or =

£25

0 11

5

Rou

ndab

out

The

effe

ctiv

enes

s of

roun

dabo

uts

was

bas

ed o

n th

e fo

llow

ing

fact

ors:

1.

Whe

ther

the

roun

dabo

ut w

as a

dequ

atel

y m

arke

d an

d si

gned

2.

W

heth

er th

e ve

hicl

e us

ed th

e ro

unda

bout

in a

sui

tabl

e m

anne

r.

Site

s Im

plem

ente

d Pe

rcen

tage

ef

fect

ive

Why

effe

ctiv

e or

inef

fect

ive?

Tr

affic

mov

emen

ts

Com

pany

8

Hos

pita

l 10

0%

Rou

ndab

outs

had

bee

n in

stal

led

at id

entif

ied

high

­ris

k ju

nctio

ns.

The

roun

dabo

uts

wer

e of

sta

ndar

d hi

ghw

ay d

esig

n an

d w

ere

suita

bly

mar

ked

and

sign

ed ta

king

into

con

side

ratio

n m

otor

ists

’ sig

ht

lines

. M

otor

ists

wer

e ob

serv

ed u

sing

the

roun

dabo

ut a

ppro

pria

tely

.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

tra

ffic

rout

es

Com

pany

veh

icle

s –

Ove

r 100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

mem

bers

of t

he p

ublic

– O

ver 1

00

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny 9

M

anuf

actu

rer

5%

One

roun

dabo

ut h

ad b

een

inst

alle

d on

a fo

rklif

t tru

ck ro

ute.

The

roun

dabo

ut w

as n

ot o

f sta

ndar

d hi

ghw

ay d

esig

n, th

e ro

ad m

arki

ngs

wer

e ba

rely

vi

sibl

e an

d it

was

not

sig

ned.

Due

to th

e un

stab

le

natu

re o

f for

klift

truc

ks, d

river

s of

thes

e ve

hicl

es

did

not h

ave

to c

ompl

y w

ith th

e ro

unda

bout

. H

owev

er, i

t was

cle

ar th

roug

h ob

serv

atio

n, th

at

mot

oris

ts la

rgel

y ig

nore

d th

e pr

esen

ce o

f the

ro

unda

bout

.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– Le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– Le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

Les

s th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– e

mpl

oyee

s –

Betw

een

10 a

nd 1

00

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Com

pany

10

Hos

pita

l 90

%

The

roun

dabo

ut in

stal

led

was

of s

tand

ard

high

way

de

sign

with

vis

ible

road

mar

king

s an

d si

gnag

e.

Mot

oris

ts u

sed

the

roun

dabo

ut, b

ut th

e tu

rnin

g ci

rcle

was

not

larg

e en

ough

for h

eavy

veh

icle

s,

ther

eby

redu

cing

the

effe

ctiv

enes

s.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

tra

ffic

rout

es

Com

pany

veh

icle

s –

Ove

r 100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

mem

bers

of t

he p

ublic

– O

ver 1

00

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

116

Spee

d H

umps

The

effe

ctiv

enes

s of

spe

ed h

umps

was

bas

ed o

n th

e fo

llow

ing

fact

ors:

·

Visi

bilit

y of

the

spee

d hu

mp.

·

Suita

bilit

y of

the

heig

ht o

f the

spe

ed h

ump

for t

he v

ehic

les

usin

g it.

·

The

spee

d of

veh

icle

s cr

ossi

ng th

e sp

eed

hum

p.

Site

s Im

plem

ente

d Pe

rcen

tage

ef

fect

ive

Why

effe

ctiv

e or

inef

fect

ive?

Tr

affic

mov

emen

ts

Com

pany

3

Doc

k 10

0%

The

spee

d hu

mp

inst

alle

d w

as v

isib

le to

mot

oris

ts a

nd

was

of a

sui

tabl

e he

ight

for t

he v

ehic

les

usin

g it.

The

ve

hicl

es c

ross

ing

the

spee

d hu

mps

wer

e tra

vellin

g at

re

duce

d sp

eed,

ther

efor

e sh

owin

g th

e ef

fect

iven

ess

of

the

spee

d hu

mp.

Onl

y on

e sp

eed

hum

p ha

d be

en

inst

alle

d th

roug

hout

the

site

and

it w

as lo

cate

d at

the

entra

nce

of th

e si

te to

slo

w v

ehic

les

dow

n. A

dditi

onal

sp

eed

hum

ps w

ere

requ

ired

beca

use

vehi

cles

wer

e ob

serv

ed in

crea

sing

thei

r spe

ed o

nce

the

spee

d hu

mp

had

been

cro

ssed

.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– Be

twee

n 10

and

100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

Ove

r 100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– e

mpl

oyee

s –

less

than

10

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Com

pany

8

Hos

pita

l 10

0%

The

spee

d hu

mps

wer

e vi

sibl

e to

mot

oris

ts a

nd w

ere

of a

sui

tabl

e he

ight

. Th

e sp

eed

hum

ps re

duce

d th

e sp

eed

of v

ehic

les

suita

bly.

No

spee

d hu

mps

had

be

en in

stal

led

on a

mbu

lanc

e ro

utes

or a

djac

ent t

o th

e ca

rdia

c un

it. H

owev

er, a

dditi

onal

spe

ed h

umps

wer

e re

quire

d on

one

stre

tch

of ro

ad w

ere

non

emer

genc

y ve

hicl

es w

ere

witn

esse

d tra

vellin

g at

exc

ess

spee

d.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

Ove

r 100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– e

mpl

oyee

s –

Ove

r 100

mov

emen

ts

per d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Com

pany

10

Hos

pita

l 10

0%

The

spee

d hu

mp

had

been

impl

emen

ted

to re

duce

th

e sp

eed

of c

ars

ente

ring

the

car p

ark.

The

spe

ed

hum

p w

as v

isib

le to

mot

oris

ts a

nd re

duce

d th

e sp

eed

of v

ehic

les

nota

bly.

The

spe

ed h

ump

was

fit f

or

purp

ose.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

Ove

r 100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– e

mpl

oyee

s –

Ove

r 100

mov

emen

ts

per d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

117

Com

pany

12

Man

ufac

ture

r and

di

strib

utor

of f

ood

50%

Th

e sp

eed

hum

p at

bee

n in

stal

led

to re

duce

the

spee

d of

veh

icle

s en

terin

g th

e si

te.

The

spee

d hu

mp

was

of a

sui

tabl

e he

ight

but

was

not

vis

ible

to

mot

oris

ts a

ppro

achi

ng th

e hu

mp.

The

spe

ed o

f ve

hicl

es w

as re

duce

d af

ter c

ross

ing

the

hum

p.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– Be

twee

n 10

and

100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– Be

twee

n 10

and

100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

Bet

wee

n 10

and

100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– e

mpl

oyee

s –

Betw

een

10 a

nd 1

00

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Com

pany

14

Shop

ping

mal

l 10

0%

The

spee

d hu

mp

was

inst

alle

d as

par

t of t

he z

ebra

cr

ossi

ng to

slo

w v

ehic

les

dow

n ov

er th

e cr

ossi

ng.

The

spee

d hu

mp

was

vis

ible

to m

otor

ists

and

the

spee

d of

veh

icle

s w

as re

duce

d w

hen

cros

sing

the

spee

d hu

mp.

The

hum

p w

as n

ot v

ery

high

bec

ause

fo

rklif

t tru

cks

wer

e re

quire

d to

cro

ss it

. Th

e re

duce

d he

ight

did

not

app

ear t

o re

duce

the

effe

ctiv

enes

s of

th

e hu

mp.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

Ove

r 100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– e

mpl

oyee

s –

less

than

10

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Com

pany

16

Man

ufac

ture

r and

di

strib

utor

of f

ood

100%

Sp

eed

hum

ps w

ere

visi

ble

to m

otor

ists

and

wer

e of

a

suita

ble

heig

ht.

The

spee

d hu

mps

ext

ende

d in

to th

e pe

dest

rian

wal

kway

to d

isco

urag

e ve

hicl

es fr

om

driv

ing

in th

e pe

dest

rian

wal

kway

to a

void

the

spee

d hu

mps

. Th

e sp

eed

hum

ps h

ad g

aps

in th

em to

allo

w

fork

lift t

ruck

s to

use

the

traffi

c ro

ute.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

less

than

10

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

pe

r day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

CO

ST:

·

Spee

d hu

mp

= £5

0 - £

65 d

epen

ding

on

the

heig

ht.

·

Bolts

to s

ecur

e th

e hu

mp

= £8

118

Roa

d M

arki

ngs

The

effe

ctiv

enes

s of

road

mar

king

s w

as b

ased

on

the

follo

win

g fa

ctor

s:

·

Whe

ther

they

wer

e co

nsis

tent

with

thos

e fo

und

on th

e pu

blic

hig

hway

Whe

ther

they

wer

e vi

sibl

e to

the

mot

oris

Whe

ther

the

road

mar

king

s w

ere

follo

wed

by

the

driv

ers.

·

Whe

ther

the

road

mar

king

s in

crea

sed

the

safe

ty o

f the

site

.

Site

s Im

plem

ente

d Pe

rcen

tage

ef

fect

ive

Why

effe

ctiv

e or

inef

fect

ive?

Tr

affic

mov

emen

ts

Com

pany

3

Doc

k 80

%

Roa

d m

arki

ngs

incl

uded

dou

ble

yello

w li

nes,

mar

ked

park

ing

bays

, tra

ffic

rout

e m

arki

ngs,

yel

low

hat

chin

gs,

give

way

mar

king

s an

d st

op m

arki

ngs.

The

mar

king

s w

ere

cons

iste

nt w

ith h

ighw

ay d

esig

n, w

ere

visi

ble

and

wer

e fo

llow

ed b

y m

otor

ists

. Th

e ro

ad m

arki

ngs

wer

e co

nsid

ered

to e

ssen

tial t

o th

e sa

fety

of t

he s

ite.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– Be

twee

n 10

and

100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

Ove

r 10

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– e

mpl

oyee

s –

less

than

10

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Com

pany

5

Car

reta

iler

50%

R

oad

mar

king

s in

clud

ed m

arke

d pa

rkin

g ba

ys, y

ello

w

hatc

hing

and

dire

ctio

nal a

rrow

s. A

ppro

xim

atel

y 50

% o

f th

e ro

ad m

arki

ngs

wer

e no

t cle

arly

vis

ible

to m

otor

ists

an

d w

ere

gene

rally

igno

red.

For

exa

mpl

e ve

hicl

es w

ere

obse

rved

par

ked

over

yel

low

hat

chin

gs a

nd tr

avel

ling

agai

nst t

he o

ne w

ay d

irect

iona

l arro

ws.

How

ever

, the

m

arke

d pa

rkin

g ba

ys e

nsur

ed th

at p

arki

ng w

as

orga

nise

d an

d th

ese

mar

king

s w

ere

clea

rly v

isib

le.

The

road

mar

king

s en

sure

d sa

fer p

arki

ng o

n si

te b

ut n

ot th

e sa

fer m

ovem

ent o

f veh

icle

s.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– Be

twee

n 10

and

100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

Ove

r 10

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– e

mpl

oyee

s –

Betw

een

10 a

nd

100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Com

pany

8

Hos

pita

l 10

0%

Roa

d m

arki

ngs

wer

e im

plem

ente

d to

ens

ure

clea

r ac

cess

and

egr

ess

from

the

site

, seg

rega

ted

vehi

cles

, or

gani

sed

park

ing

and

safe

mov

emen

t of v

ehic

les.

The

ro

ad m

arki

ngs

obse

rved

incl

ude

give

way

mar

king

s,

mar

ked

park

ing

bays

, dou

ble

yello

w li

nes

and

lines

se

greg

atin

g ve

hicl

es.

The

lines

wer

e w

ell m

aint

aine

d an

d cl

early

vis

ible

to m

otor

ists

. Th

e lin

es w

ere

cons

ider

ed to

be

effe

ctiv

e an

d fit

for p

urpo

se.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

Ove

r 10

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– e

mpl

oyee

s –

Ove

r 100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

119

Com

pany

10

Hos

pita

l 50

%

The

road

mar

king

s cu

rrent

ly on

site

wer

e fa

ded

and

seve

ral w

ere

no lo

nger

vis

ible

. In

one

of t

he p

arki

ng

area

s ne

w p

arki

ng b

ays

had

been

pai

nted

ove

r the

old

er

ones

. Th

is ha

d re

sulte

d in

dou

ble

mar

king

and

veh

icle

s pa

rked

inco

rrect

ly. H

owev

er, t

he m

arki

ngs

did

com

ply

with

thos

e fo

und

on th

e pu

blic

high

way

and

thos

e th

at

wer

e vis

ible

wer

e de

emed

effe

ctive

. The

hos

pita

l was

cu

rrent

ly u

nder

goin

g ex

tens

ive

impr

ovem

ent a

nd th

e ro

ad

mar

king

s w

ere

due

to b

e re

new

ed.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

Ove

r 10

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– e

mpl

oyee

s –

Ove

r 100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Com

pany

11

Man

ufac

ture

r and

di

strib

utor

of d

rink

90%

R

oad

mar

king

s ha

d on

ly b

een

inst

alle

d in

side

the

war

ehou

se.

The

road

mar

king

s w

ere

used

to s

how

pe

dest

rian

rout

es a

nd c

ross

ings

, not

to c

ontro

l veh

icle

m

ovem

ents

. Th

e ro

ad m

arki

ngs

wer

e co

nsid

ered

to b

e fit

for t

his

purp

ose.

Add

ition

al ro

ad m

arki

ngs

wou

ld

have

bee

n us

eful

to c

ontro

l ext

erna

l veh

icle

mov

emen

ts

and

park

ing.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

less

th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– O

ver 1

00

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Com

pany

14

Shop

ping

mal

l 10

0%

Roa

d m

arki

ngs

incl

uded

dire

ctio

nal a

rrow

s, g

ive

way

m

arki

ngs,

dou

ble

yello

w li

nes,

cen

tral l

ine

to s

egre

gate

ve

hicl

es, m

arke

d pa

rkin

g ba

ys a

nd th

e w

ord

‘slo

w’ o

n th

e ap

proa

ch to

the

pede

stria

n cr

ossi

ng.

The

mar

king

s w

ere

clea

r to

mot

oris

ts, c

ompl

ied

with

hig

hway

des

ign

and

effe

ctiv

ely

orga

nise

d an

d se

greg

ated

traf

fic.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

pe

r day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

Ove

r 10

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– e

mpl

oyee

s –

less

than

10

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Com

pany

16

Man

ufac

ture

r and

di

strib

utor

of f

ood

100%

R

oad

mar

king

s in

clud

ed v

ehic

le s

egre

gatio

n lin

es,

mar

ked

pede

stria

n w

alkw

ays,

mar

ked

park

ing

bays

, m

arke

d lo

adin

g ba

ys, g

ive w

ay m

arki

ngs

and

stop

line

s.

The

purp

ose

of th

e m

arki

ngs

was

to c

ontro

l the

mov

emen

t of

veh

icle

s an

d pe

dest

rians

aro

und

site

. Th

e m

arki

ngs

wer

e cl

early

vis

ible

and

con

sist

ent w

ith m

arki

ngs

foun

d on

pu

blic

hig

hway

s. T

he m

arki

ngs

wer

e co

mpl

ied

with

bot

h by

mot

orist

s an

d pe

dest

rians

. C

ompl

ianc

e w

ith th

e ro

ad

mar

king

s w

as e

nfor

ced

by th

e co

mpa

ny th

roug

h is

suin

g di

scip

linar

y ac

tion

to v

iola

tors

.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

less

th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– O

ver 1

00

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

120

Com

pany

17

Food

sto

rage

and

ou

tlet

100%

R

oad

mar

king

s in

clud

ed g

ive

way

mar

king

s, d

oubl

e ye

llow

line

s an

d ye

llow

hat

chin

gs to

sho

w n

o pa

rkin

g ar

eas.

The

mot

oris

ts c

ompl

ied

with

the

road

mar

king

s.

All m

arki

ngs

wer

e co

nsis

tent

with

sta

ndar

d hi

ghw

ay

desi

gn.

The

road

mar

king

s w

ere

larg

ely

inst

alle

d to

or

gani

se th

e pa

rkin

g of

veh

icle

s ra

ther

than

the

segr

egat

ion

of v

ehic

les

on th

e tra

ffic

rout

es.

The

road

m

arki

ngs

wer

e co

nsid

ered

to b

e fit

for p

urpo

se.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

less

th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– O

ver 1

00

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Com

pany

18

Man

ufac

ture

r and

di

strib

utor

of d

rink

100%

R

oad

mar

king

s w

ere

cons

iste

nt w

ith th

ose

foun

d on

the

publ

ic h

ighw

ay a

nd in

clud

ed c

entra

l tra

ffic

rout

e m

arki

ngs,

dou

ble

yello

w li

nes,

sto

p lin

es a

nd g

ive

way

m

arki

ngs.

The

road

mar

king

s w

ere

suita

bly

mai

ntai

ned

and

visi

ble

to m

otor

ists

. Al

l mot

oris

ts o

bser

ved

com

plie

d w

ith th

e ro

ad m

arki

ngs.

The

road

mar

king

s co

ntrib

uted

sig

nific

antly

to e

nsur

ing

trans

port

safe

ty o

n th

e si

te.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

Be

twee

n 10

and

100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– O

ver 1

00

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

CO

ST:

·

5 Li

tres

traffi

c pa

int =

£65

·

Dis

posa

ble

pain

t app

licat

or =

£38

121

Safe

ty F

enci

ng

The

effe

ctiv

enes

s of

the

safe

ty fe

ncin

g w

as b

ased

on

whe

ther

it w

as c

onsi

dere

d to

be

fit fo

r pur

pose

.

Site

s Im

plem

ente

d Pu

rpos

e Pe

rcen

tage

ef

fect

ive

Why

effe

ctiv

e or

inef

fect

ive?

Tr

affic

mov

emen

ts

Com

pany

1

Laun

dry

serv

ice

Prot

ect

infra

stru

ctur

e 10

%

The

leng

th o

f saf

ety

fenc

e w

as

posi

tione

d be

low

the

unde

r run

bar

on

the

rear

of t

he g

oods

veh

icle

s.

Ther

efor

e th

e sa

fety

fenc

e w

as o

nly

effe

ctiv

e fo

r sm

alle

r veh

icle

s w

hich

w

ere

not f

requ

ently

use

d on

the

site

.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

tra

ffic

rout

es

Com

pany

veh

icle

s –

Ove

r 100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te

traffi

c ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

less

than

10

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– Be

twee

n 10

and

100

mov

emen

ts

per d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Com

pany

2

Was

te re

cycl

ing

yard

Prev

ent v

ehic

le

egre

ssin

g fro

m

traffi

c ro

ute

dow

n gr

ass

cutti

ng.

100%

A

leng

th o

f saf

ety

fenc

e ha

d be

en

inst

alle

d pa

ralle

l to

the

traffi

c ro

ute

to p

reve

nt ‘r

un o

ff’ a

ccid

ents

on

the

near

sid

e of

the

traffi

c ro

ute.

The

sa

fety

fenc

e w

as c

onsi

dere

d to

be

fit fo

r pur

pose

but

wou

ld n

ot b

e ef

fect

ive

on v

ehic

les

trave

lling

at

grea

ter s

peed

s.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

tra

ffic

rout

es

Com

pany

veh

icle

s –

Betw

een

10 a

nd 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

less

than

10

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– Be

twee

n 10

and

100

mov

emen

ts

per d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Com

pany

3

Doc

k Pr

otec

t in

frast

ruct

ure

100%

Th

e sa

fety

fenc

e w

as p

ositi

oned

ad

jace

nt to

a b

uild

ing

a w

as

cons

ider

ed to

be

effe

ctiv

e at

pr

otec

ting

the

build

ing.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic

rout

es

Com

pany

veh

icle

s –

Betw

een

10 a

nd 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

Ove

r 100

mov

emen

ts

per d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– Le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny 8

H

ospi

tal

Prot

ect

infra

stru

ctur

e 10

0%

The

safe

ty fe

nce

was

pos

ition

ed

adja

cent

to a

bui

ldin

g a

was

co

nsid

ered

to b

e ef

fect

ive

at

prot

ectin

g th

e bu

ildin

g.

Publ

ic ve

hicl

es –

Mor

e th

an 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

tra

ffic

rout

es

Com

pany

veh

icle

s –

Ove

r 100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n sit

e tra

ffic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

mem

bers

of t

he p

ublic

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

pe

r day

on

site

traffi

c ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– e

mpl

oyee

s –

Ove

r 100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

122

Com

pany

10

Hos

pita

l Pr

otec

t in

frast

ruct

ure

100%

Th

e sa

fety

fenc

e w

as p

ositi

oned

ad

jace

nt to

a b

uild

ing

and

was

co

nsid

ered

to b

e ef

fect

ive

at

prot

ectin

g th

e bu

ildin

g.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– M

ore

than

100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te

traffi

c ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

tra

ffic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

mem

bers

of t

he p

ublic

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

pe

r day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– e

mpl

oyee

s –

Ove

r 100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Com

pany

11

Man

ufac

ture

r an

d di

strib

utor

of

drin

k

Prot

ect

pede

stria

ns a

t a

pede

stria

n ac

cess

poi

nt.

100%

Th

e sa

fety

fenc

e w

as p

ositi

oned

in

betw

een

a pe

dest

rian

acce

ss p

oint

an

d ve

hicl

e ro

ute.

The

veh

icle

s us

ing

the

traffi

c ro

utes

wer

e fo

rk li

ft tru

cks.

The

refo

re th

e co

rruga

ted

safe

ty fe

nce

was

con

side

red

to b

e fit

for p

urpo

se.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

tra

ffic

rout

es

Com

pany

veh

icle

s –

Ove

r 100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te

traffi

c ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

less

than

10

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny 1

4 Sh

oppi

ng m

all

Prot

ect

infra

stru

ctur

e 10

0%

The

safe

ty fe

nce

was

pos

ition

ed

adja

cent

to a

bui

ldin

g an

d w

as

cons

ider

ed to

be

effe

ctiv

e at

pr

otec

ting

the

build

ing.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic

rout

es

Com

pany

veh

icle

s –

Less

than

10

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

mem

bers

of t

he p

ublic

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

pe

r day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– e

mpl

oyee

s –

Less

than

10

mov

emen

ts p

er

day

on s

ite tr

affic

rout

es

Com

pany

16

Man

ufac

ture

r an

d di

strib

utor

of

food

Prot

ect

infra

stru

ctur

e 10

0%

The

safe

ty fe

nce

was

pos

ition

ed

adja

cent

to a

bui

ldin

g an

d w

as

cons

ider

ed to

be

effe

ctiv

e at

pr

otec

ting

the

build

ing.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

tra

ffic

rout

es

Com

pany

veh

icle

s –

Ove

r 100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te

traffi

c ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

less

than

10

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny 1

7 Fo

od s

tora

ge

and

outle

t

Prot

ect

infra

stru

ctur

e 10

0%

The

safe

ty fe

nce

was

pos

ition

ed

adja

cent

to a

bui

ldin

g an

d w

as

cons

ider

ed to

be

effe

ctiv

e at

pr

otec

ting

the

build

ing.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

tra

ffic

rout

es

Com

pany

veh

icle

s –

Ove

r 100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te

traffi

c ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

less

than

10

123

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny 1

8 M

anuf

actu

rer

and

dist

ribut

or o

f dr

ink

Prev

ent v

ehic

les

egre

ssin

g fro

m

traffi

c ro

ute

into

th

e di

tch.

60%

Th

e le

ngth

of s

afet

y fe

nce

was

po

sitio

ned

para

llel t

o th

e tra

ffic

rout

e to

pre

vent

an

egre

ssed

ve

hicl

e en

terin

g th

e di

tch.

The

fe

ncin

g w

as c

onsi

dere

d to

be

effe

ctiv

e fo

r sm

alle

r veh

icle

s. T

he

leve

l of c

onta

inm

ent o

f the

saf

ety

fenc

ing

was

unk

now

n bu

t it d

id n

ot

appe

ar to

be

of a

robu

st e

noug

h m

ater

ial o

r stru

ctur

e to

con

tain

a

larg

e go

ods

vehi

cle.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

tra

ffic

rout

es

Com

pany

veh

icle

s –

Ove

r 100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te

traffi

c ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

Bet

wee

n 10

and

100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– e

mpl

oyee

s –

Ove

r 100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Com

pany

19

Bake

ry

Prot

ect

infra

stru

ctur

e 10

0%

The

safe

ty fe

nce

was

pos

ition

ed

adja

cent

to a

bui

ldin

g an

d w

as

cons

ider

ed to

be

effe

ctiv

e at

pr

otec

ting

the

build

ing.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

tra

ffic

rout

es

Com

pany

veh

icle

s –

less

than

10

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te

traffi

c ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– e

mpl

oyee

s –

less

than

10

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay

on s

ite tr

affic

rout

es

Com

pany

20

Stor

age

and

who

lesa

le

Prot

ect

infra

stru

ctur

e 10

0%

The

safe

ty fe

nce

was

pos

ition

ed

adja

cent

to a

bui

ldin

g an

d w

as

cons

ider

ed to

be

effe

ctiv

e at

pr

otec

ting

the

build

ing.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic

rout

es

Com

pany

veh

icle

s –

Betw

een

10 a

nd 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

Ove

r 100

mov

emen

ts

per d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

CO

ST:

·

Anti-

ram

bol

lard

s =

£390

·

Hea

vy w

eigh

t bar

rier =

£20

0 (fo

r 112

0 m

m)

124

Ove

rhea

d St

orag

e

The

effe

ctiv

enes

s of

ove

r hea

d st

orag

e w

as b

ased

on

the

follo

win

g fa

ctor

s:

·

Safe

ty o

f ped

estri

ans

wor

king

at h

eigh

ts in

the

stor

age

area

(if a

pplic

able

Stab

ility

of g

oods

bei

ng s

tore

d.

·

Safe

ty o

f acc

essi

ng th

e ite

ms

stor

ed.

Site

s Im

plem

ente

d Pe

rcen

tage

ef

fect

ive

Why

effe

ctiv

e or

inef

fect

ive?

Tr

affic

mov

emen

ts

Com

pany

6

Man

ufac

ture

r 0%

Pe

dest

rians

cou

ld n

ot a

cces

s th

e ov

er h

ead

stor

age

faci

lity.

Goo

ds w

ere

not s

tore

d in

a s

tabl

e m

anne

r and

fo

rk li

fts n

eede

d to

ope

rate

in c

ram

ped

cond

ition

s to

re

triev

e th

e go

ods.

Em

ploy

ees

wer

e no

t exp

ecte

d to

w

ear s

afet

y he

lmet

s w

hen

oper

atin

g in

this

are

a.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– Be

twee

n 10

and

100

mov

emen

ts

per d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Com

pany

veh

icle

s –

Less

than

10

mov

emen

ts p

er

day

on s

ite tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

mem

bers

of t

he p

ublic

– B

etw

een

10

and

100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– Le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny 9

M

anuf

actu

rer

50%

Th

e co

mpa

ny h

ad o

verh

ead

stor

age

that

ped

estri

ans

coul

d ac

cess

via

a s

tairc

ase.

A re

mov

able

gua

rd h

ad

been

inst

alle

d to

redu

ce th

e ris

k of

ped

estri

ans

fallin

g fro

m h

eigh

ts.

How

ever

, em

ploy

ees

tend

ed to

rem

ove

the

guar

d at

the

begi

nnin

g of

the

shift

and

repl

ace

it at

th

e en

d of

the

shift

, the

reby

sig

nific

antly

redu

cing

the

effe

ctiv

enes

s of

the

mea

sure

. G

oods

cou

ld b

e ac

cess

ed fr

om th

e st

orag

e fa

cilit

y sa

fely

usi

ng a

pum

p tru

ck.

Goo

ds w

ere

stac

ked

in a

sta

ble

man

ner.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– Le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

less

than

10

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– Be

twee

n 10

and

100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Com

pany

12

Man

ufac

ture

r and

di

strib

utor

of f

ood

100%

Th

e co

mpa

ny h

ad o

verh

ead

stor

age

that

ped

estri

ans

coul

d ac

cess

via

a s

tairc

ase.

A o

ne w

ay g

ate

had

been

inst

alle

d to

redu

ce th

e ris

k of

ped

estri

ans

from

fa

lling

from

hei

ghts

. Th

e ga

tes

only

ope

n in

war

ds to

th

e ov

erhe

ad s

tora

ge m

eani

ng th

at th

ey w

ould

not

op

en if

a p

edes

trian

wer

e to

fall

agai

nst t

hem

. G

oods

wer

e st

ored

in a

sta

ble

man

ner a

nd c

ould

be

acce

ssed

saf

ely

by a

fork

lift

truck

.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– Be

twee

n 10

and

100

mov

emen

ts

per d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Com

pany

veh

icle

s –

Betw

een

10 a

nd 1

00

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

mem

bers

of t

he p

ublic

– B

etw

een

10

and

100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– Be

twee

n 10

and

100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

125

Com

pany

17

Food

sto

rage

and

ou

tlet

100%

Pe

dest

rians

cou

ld n

ot a

cces

s th

e ov

erhe

ad s

tora

ge

faci

lity.

Goo

ds w

ere

stor

ed, i

n lin

e w

ith w

ritte

n sa

fety

pr

oced

ures

, and

app

eare

d st

able

. Fo

rklif

t tru

cks

acce

ssed

goo

ds in

a s

afe

man

ner.

Sta

ff w

ere

requ

ired

to w

ear s

afet

y he

lmet

s in

the

stor

age

area

.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

less

than

10

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

pe

r day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

126

One

way

sys

tem

s

The

effe

ctiv

enes

s of

one

way

sys

tem

s w

as b

ased

on

whe

ther

the

one

way

sys

tem

was

mad

e cl

ear t

o m

otor

ists

and

whe

ther

it w

as fo

llow

ed.

Site

s Im

plem

ente

d Pe

rcen

tage

ef

fect

ive

Why

effe

ctiv

e or

inef

fect

ive?

Tr

affic

mov

emen

ts

Com

pany

3

Doc

k 60

%

A on

e w

ay s

yste

m o

pera

ted

thro

ugh

part

of th

e si

te.

How

ever

, w

here

a tw

o w

ay s

yste

m o

pera

ted,

the

traffi

c ro

ute

was

not

su

ffici

ently

wid

e en

ough

for t

wo

vehi

cles

to p

ass

with

out

intru

ding

into

the

pede

stria

n w

alkw

ay.

The

one

way

sys

tem

was

sho

wn

with

arro

ws

on th

e ro

ad a

nd

was

follo

wed

by

the

mot

oris

ts.

How

ever

par

king

was

suc

h th

at

som

e ve

hicl

es (a

lbei

t ‘on

ly’ s

taff

cars

) wer

e re

quire

d to

trav

el

agai

nst t

he tr

affic

flow

on

part

of th

e on

e w

ay s

yste

m.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

pe

r day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– Be

twee

n 10

and

100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

tra

ffic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– Le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny 4

Am

bula

nce

stat

ion

50%

Th

e si

te c

onsi

sted

of a

n am

bula

nce

stat

ion,

a s

taff

car p

ark

and

a re

pair

gara

ge u

sed

by th

e am

bula

nces

and

priv

ate

vehi

cles

. Th

e am

bula

nces

follo

wed

a o

ne w

ay s

yste

m th

roug

h th

e si

te

and

thro

ugh

the

ambu

lanc

e st

atio

n. T

his

syst

em w

as fo

llow

ed

and

effe

ctiv

e (a

lthou

gh n

ot s

igne

d).

How

ever

, sta

ff ve

hicl

es

and

priv

ate

vehi

cles

wer

e no

t per

mitt

ed to

ent

er th

e am

bula

nce

stat

ion

mea

ning

that

they

cou

ld n

ot c

ompl

ete

the

full

circ

uit o

f th

e on

e w

ay s

yste

m.

Ther

efor

e ve

hicl

es w

ere

requ

ired

to tr

avel

ag

ains

t the

flow

of t

he a

mbu

lanc

es to

exi

t the

site

. Th

e tra

ffic

rout

es w

ere

suffi

cien

tly w

ide

enou

gh fo

r tw

o ve

hicl

es to

pas

s bu

t the

exi

sten

ce o

f a b

lind

corn

er o

n th

e ro

ute

led

to c

once

rn

abou

t the

risk

of v

ehic

le c

onfli

cts.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– Le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– Be

twee

n 10

and

100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

Le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

tra

ffic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– Le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Com

pany

5

Car

reta

iler

10%

A

one

way

sys

tem

has

bee

n im

plem

ente

d th

roug

h th

e ca

r yar

d to

var

ious

wor

ksho

ps.

The

dire

ctio

n of

the

syst

em is

sho

wn

by

arro

ws

on th

e ro

ad.

Ther

e ar

e al

so tw

o ga

tes

one

for

acce

ssin

g th

e ya

rd a

nd o

ne fo

r egr

essi

ng fr

om th

e ya

rd.

How

ever

, the

one

way

sys

tem

lead

s to

a d

ead

end

forc

ing

vehi

cles

to tr

avel

aga

inst

the

one

way

traf

fic fl

ow.

Due

to a

lack

of

turn

ing

spac

e, th

e m

ajor

ity o

f veh

icle

s re

vers

e ba

ck a

long

th

e tra

ffic

rout

e. T

here

are

no

sign

s w

arni

ng m

otor

ists

of

onco

min

g ve

hicl

e. T

he e

ntra

nce

gate

to th

e si

te is

not

wid

e en

ough

for d

eliv

ery

vehi

cles

, so

they

are

forc

ed to

use

the

exit

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

pe

r day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– Be

twee

n 10

and

100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

Be

twee

n 10

and

100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay

on s

ite tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– Be

twee

n 10

an

d 10

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic

rout

es

127

gate

. H

owev

er, t

here

are

no

sign

s st

atin

g w

hich

gat

e is

the

entra

nce

and

whi

ch is

the

exit.

The

com

pany

has

enq

uire

d in

to

crea

ting

an a

dditi

onal

poi

nt o

f egr

ess

onto

the

dual

car

riage

way

ad

jace

nt to

the

site

. Th

is w

ould

mea

n th

at th

e on

e w

ay s

yste

m

wou

ld b

e fu

nctio

nal.

How

ever

, thi

s re

ques

t has

bee

n de

clin

ed.

Com

pany

8

Hos

pita

l 10

0%

The

site

has

a c

ombi

natio

n of

one

way

and

two

way

traf

fic

rout

es.

The

rout

es a

re s

how

n w

ith s

igns

and

road

mar

king

s th

at a

re c

onsi

sten

t with

thos

e fo

und

on th

e pu

blic

hig

hway

. Th

e on

e w

ay s

yste

ms

wer

e pu

t in

if th

e ro

ute

was

too

narro

w

for t

wo

vehi

cles

to p

ass

safe

ly a

nd if

the

one

way

sys

tem

cou

ld

be im

plem

ente

d w

holly

and

func

tiona

lly.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

pe

r day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

mem

bers

of t

he p

ublic

Ove

r 100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te

traffi

c ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– e

mpl

oyee

s –

Ove

r 100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny 1

0 H

ospi

tal

50%

O

ne w

ay s

yste

ms

oper

ated

in a

nd a

roun

d th

e tw

o m

ain

car

park

s on

site

. O

ne o

f the

sys

tem

s w

as fo

llow

ed b

y m

otor

ists

an

d th

e ot

her w

as n

ot.

This

is b

ecau

se th

e fu

nctio

nal s

yste

m

follo

wed

the

obvi

ous

mot

oris

t des

ire li

nes

arou

nd th

e ca

r par

k,

it w

as c

lear

ly d

ispl

ayed

and

eas

y to

follo

w.

The

othe

r one

way

sy

stem

was

not

cle

arly

mar

ked

and

did

not f

ollo

w a

logi

cal

rout

e ar

ound

the

car p

ark.

The

com

pany

had

iden

tifie

d th

is a

s a

prob

lem

and

had

pla

ns to

re m

ark

the

rout

e.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

pe

r day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

mem

bers

of t

he p

ublic

Ove

r 100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te

traffi

c ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– e

mpl

oyee

s –

Ove

r 100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny 1

7 Fo

od s

tora

ge a

nd

outle

t

100%

A

one

way

sys

tem

ope

rate

d ar

ound

the

war

ehou

se.

The

syst

em w

as c

lear

ly s

igne

d an

d th

e dr

iver

s w

ere

awar

e of

the

syst

em.

The

one

way

sys

tem

was

enf

orce

d th

roug

h a

rada

r sy

stem

that

org

anis

ed th

e ve

hicl

e m

ovem

ents

with

in th

e w

areh

ouse

. Ea

ch d

river

was

inst

ruct

ed b

y th

e sy

stem

whe

re to

co

llect

goo

ds fr

om a

nd th

e ro

ute

the

vehi

cle

shou

ld ta

ke to

de

liver

the

good

s to

the

appr

opria

te p

lace

.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– Le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

mem

bers

of t

he p

ublic

Less

than

10

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te

traffi

c ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– e

mpl

oyee

s –

Ove

r 100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny 1

8 M

anuf

actu

rer a

nd

dist

ribut

or o

f dr

ink

100%

Th

e m

ajor

ity o

f the

site

traf

fic ro

utes

follo

wed

a o

ne w

ay

syst

em. T

here

was

one

rout

e th

roug

h th

e ce

ntre

of t

he s

ite th

at

was

two

way

and

this

was

app

ropr

iate

ly s

igne

d. T

he o

ne w

ay

syst

em w

as e

ffect

ive

beca

use

it w

as c

lear

ly m

arke

d, it

allo

wed

al

l are

as o

f the

site

to b

e ea

sily

acc

esse

d an

d al

l mot

oris

ts

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– Le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

mem

bers

of t

he p

ublic

128

wer

e aw

are

of th

e sy

stem

(no

untra

ined

con

tract

ors

or v

isito

rs

wer

e pe

rmitt

ed to

driv

e on

the

site

). Be

twee

n 10

and

100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay

on s

ite tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– O

ver 1

00

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Com

pany

20

Stor

age

and

who

lesa

le

60%

G

oods

wer

e st

ored

insi

de th

e w

areh

ouse

and

cus

tom

er

vehi

cles

wer

e re

quire

d to

driv

e in

thro

ugh

the

war

ehou

se to

co

llect

and

pay

for g

oods

and

exi

t the

war

ehou

se th

roug

h a

sepa

rate

exi

t. A

lthou

gh s

igni

ng d

id n

ot m

ake

the

one

way

sy

stem

cle

ar, c

usto

mer

s fo

llow

ed th

e ro

ute

as it

was

logi

cal.

Th

e de

liver

y ar

ea fo

r goo

ds w

as lo

cate

d be

hind

the

war

ehou

se

and

good

s ve

hicl

es w

ere

requ

ired

to d

rive

into

this

are

a.

How

ever

, the

are

a go

od o

nly

be a

cces

sed

by d

rivin

g ag

ains

t th

e flo

w o

f cus

tom

ers

vehi

cles

exi

ting

the

war

ehou

se.

This

, th

eref

ore

pose

d th

e ris

k of

veh

icle

con

flict

s.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

pe

r day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– Be

twee

n 10

and

100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic –

O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

tra

ffic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– O

ver 1

00

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

129

Pede

stria

n ro

utes

The

effe

ctiv

enes

s of

ped

estri

an ro

utes

was

bas

ed o

n th

e fo

llow

ing

fact

ors:

1.

W

heth

er p

edes

trian

s fo

llow

ed th

e ro

ute.

2.

W

heth

er p

edes

trian

rout

es w

ere

cons

ider

ed to

impr

ove

the

pede

stria

n sa

fety

on

that

site

.

Site

s Im

plem

ente

d Pe

rcen

tage

ef

fect

ive

Pede

stria

n ro

ute

prot

ecte

d fr

om

vehi

cles

?

Why

effe

ctiv

e or

inef

fect

ive?

Tr

affic

mov

emen

ts

Com

pany

3

Doc

k 40

%

Yes

Two

site

s w

ere

view

ed, o

ne s

ite fo

r a p

asse

nger

ferry

an

d on

e si

te fo

r a v

ehic

le fe

rry.

The

prov

isio

ns fo

r pe

dest

rians

wer

e m

ore

adeq

uate

on

the

car f

erry

site

th

an o

n th

e pa

ssen

ger f

erry

site

alth

ough

veh

icle

m

ovem

ents

wer

e si

mila

r. A

t the

car

ferry

site

ther

e w

ere

pede

stria

n w

alkw

ays

with

bar

riers

in h

igh-

risk

area

s,

whi

ch w

ere

used

by

the

maj

ority

of p

edes

trian

s. I

n le

ss

high

-risk

are

as, p

edes

trian

s w

ere

prov

ided

with

rais

ed

wal

kway

s as

on

the

publ

ic h

ighw

ay.

At th

e pa

ssen

ger

ferry

ped

estri

ans

wer

e pr

ovid

ed w

ith a

mar

ked

wal

kway

on

the

vehi

cle

traffi

c ro

ute.

The

traf

fic ro

ute

was

two

way

bu

t veh

icle

s w

ere

unab

le to

pas

s ea

sily

. Th

eref

ore

vehi

cles

wer

e w

itnes

sed

ente

ring

the

wal

kway

whe

n pa

ssin

g on

com

ing

vehi

cles

. Th

e w

alkw

ay w

as a

lso

woo

den

whi

ch w

ould

bec

ome

slip

pery

whe

n w

et.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te

traffi

c ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– Be

twee

n 10

and

100

mov

emen

ts p

er

day

on s

ite tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

mem

bers

of

the

publ

ic –

Ove

r 100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

tra

ffic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Com

pany

4

Ambu

lanc

e st

atio

n

5%

No

Ther

e ar

e tw

o pe

dest

rian

wal

kway

s ru

nnin

g do

wn

eith

er

side

of t

he a

mbu

lanc

e st

atio

n. T

he p

edes

trian

wal

kway

s di

d no

t fol

low

ped

estri

an d

esire

line

s an

d in

fact

did

not

al

low

eas

y ac

cess

to a

nyth

ing.

Th

e w

alkw

ays

wer

e al

so

clut

tere

d m

eani

ng th

at a

cces

s w

as d

iffic

ult.

The

wal

kway

s w

ere

posi

tione

d to

the

rear

of t

he p

arki

ng b

ays

and

wer

e m

arke

d w

ith y

ello

w p

aint

. A

rais

ed k

erb

mar

ked

the

edge

of t

he w

alkw

ay.

It w

as n

oted

that

a

reve

rsin

g ve

hicl

e m

ay re

vers

e un

til th

e ve

hicl

e w

heel

s m

ake

cont

act w

ith th

e ke

rb c

ausi

ng th

e ve

hicl

e ov

erha

ng

to p

rotru

de in

to th

e w

alkw

ay.

Due

to th

e si

ze o

f the

ve

hicl

e ov

erha

ng a

nd th

e w

idth

of t

he w

alkw

ay th

is w

ould

ca

use

a si

gnifi

cant

cru

shin

g ha

zard

.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– Le

ss th

an

10 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– Be

twee

n 10

and

100

mov

emen

ts p

er

day

on s

ite tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

mem

bers

of

the

publ

ic –

Les

s th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

tra

ffic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– Le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

130

Com

pany

8

Hos

pita

l 80

%

Yes

The

maj

ority

of t

he p

edes

trian

wal

kway

s ar

e se

t bac

k fro

m th

e tra

ffic

rout

e be

caus

e of

the

orig

inal

des

ign

of th

e si

te.

How

ever

add

ition

al p

edes

trian

wal

kway

s ha

ve b

een

impl

emen

ted

and

in id

entif

ied

high

risk

are

as b

arrie

rs

have

bee

n in

stal

led

to p

rote

ct th

e pe

dest

rian.

The

pe

dest

rian

rout

es w

ere

not c

onsi

dere

d to

be

100%

ef

fect

ive

thou

gh b

ecau

se m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic w

ere

seen

usi

ng th

e tra

ffic

rout

e as

a w

alkw

ay a

s op

pose

d to

th

e pe

dest

rian

rout

e. T

he re

ason

for t

his

is u

nkno

wn

as

the

wal

kway

s ra

n pa

ralle

l to

the

traffi

c ro

utes

.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te

traffi

c ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– O

ver

100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

mem

bers

of

the

publ

ic –

Ove

r 100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

tra

ffic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny 1

0 H

ospi

tal

75%

Ye

s At

the

time

of th

e vi

sit,

the

site

was

und

ergo

ing

maj

or

refu

rbis

hmen

t with

the

focu

s be

ing

on im

prov

ing

trans

port

safe

ty.

In th

e ar

eas

that

had

alre

ady

been

refu

rbis

hed,

th

e pe

dest

rian

wal

kway

s w

ere

100%

effe

ctiv

e, b

ut in

ot

her a

reas

, the

ped

estri

an w

alkw

ays

wer

e no

t as

effe

ctiv

e. I

n th

e re

furb

ishe

d ar

eas

pede

stria

n w

alkw

ays

follo

wed

ped

estri

an d

esire

line

s an

d w

ere

prot

ecte

d fro

m

vehi

cles

with

bol

lard

s. O

ne o

f the

wal

kway

s w

as ra

ised

ab

ove

the

leve

l of t

he tr

affic

rout

e, s

o ve

hicl

es a

nd

pede

stria

ns c

ould

be

who

lly s

egre

gate

d. In

are

as w

hich

ha

d no

t und

ergo

ne re

furb

ishm

ent t

he p

edes

trian

w

alkw

ays

tend

ed to

be

uncl

ear t

o th

e pe

dest

rian

and

did

not f

ollo

w o

bvio

us d

esire

line

s. P

edes

trian

s w

ere

obse

rved

dis

rega

rdin

g th

e w

alkw

ays.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te

traffi

c ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– O

ver

100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

mem

bers

of

the

publ

ic –

Ove

r 100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

tra

ffic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Com

pany

11

Man

ufac

ture

r an

d di

strib

utor

of

drin

k

70%

Ye

s Pe

dest

rian

wal

kway

s w

ere

situ

ated

thro

ugho

ut th

e si

te

and

wer

e pa

inte

d re

d. P

edes

trian

gan

tries

rais

ed a

bove

th

e sh

op fl

oor w

ere

inst

alle

d in

all

war

ehou

ses

so

proc

esse

s co

uld

be o

bser

ved

safe

ly.

The

gant

ries

had

a gu

ard

rail

surro

undi

ng th

em.

The

maj

ority

of t

he

wal

kway

s on

the

shop

floo

r wer

e pr

otec

ted

from

veh

icle

s w

ith b

arrie

rs.

Pede

stria

ns w

ere

penn

ed in

to th

e w

alkw

ays

from

the

acce

ss p

oint

of t

he b

uild

ing.

The

re

wer

e st

rate

gic

poin

ts w

here

the

pede

stria

n w

alkw

ay c

an

be le

ft bu

t thi

s w

as m

et w

ith a

ped

estri

an c

ross

ing

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

tra

ffic

rout

es

Com

pany

veh

icle

s –

Ove

r 10

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f th

e pu

blic

– le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

tra

ffic

rout

es

131

lead

ing

to a

noth

er p

edes

trian

wal

kway

. Th

eref

ore

it w

as

mad

e di

fficu

lt fo

r the

ped

estri

an to

wal

k on

the

traffi

c ro

utes

. H

owev

er, p

edes

trian

s w

ere

obse

rved

leav

ing

the

wal

kway

s at

the

pede

stria

n cr

ossi

ng p

oint

and

taki

ng th

e m

ost d

irect

rout

e ac

ross

the

traffi

c ro

ute

to th

eir d

esire

d de

stin

atio

n. I

t was

app

aren

t tha

t ped

estri

ans

disr

egar

ded

the

pede

stria

n w

alkw

ays

beca

use

they

did

not

follo

w

desi

re li

nes.

The

wal

kway

s w

ere

not m

ade

wid

e en

ough

to

be

used

by

trolle

ys th

at w

ere

frequ

ently

use

d in

the

com

pany

.

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Com

pany

14

Shop

ping

mal

l 10

0%

Yes

A ra

ised

ped

estri

an ro

ute

with

a b

arrie

r sur

roun

ded

the

mai

n ca

r par

k. T

he p

edes

trian

rout

e w

as c

onsi

dere

d to

be

effe

ctiv

e be

caus

e pe

dest

rians

cou

ld n

ot a

cces

s th

e sh

ops

with

out u

sing

the

wal

kway

. Th

ere

was

no

reas

on

for a

ped

estri

an to

ent

er th

e tra

ffic

rout

e un

til th

e re

quire

d ac

cess

to th

eir p

arke

d ve

hicl

e.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– O

ver 1

00

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te

traffi

c ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– Le

ss

than

10

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay

on s

ite tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

mem

bers

of

the

publ

ic –

Ove

r 100

m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

tra

ffic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– Le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

da

y on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny 1

6 M

anuf

actu

rer

and

dist

ribut

or

of fo

od

90%

N

o Al

l are

as o

f the

site

can

be

acce

ssed

via

the

pede

stria

n w

alkw

ay.

The

wal

kway

is m

arke

d by

a s

ingl

e w

hite

line

ru

nnin

g pa

ralle

l alo

ng th

e tra

ffic

rout

e. A

ped

estri

an

sym

bol i

s al

so m

arke

d on

the

wal

kway

. Th

e sp

eed

hum

ps e

xten

d in

to th

e w

alkw

ay to

dis

cour

age

mot

oris

ts

from

ent

erin

g th

e w

alkw

ay to

avo

id th

e hu

mps

. Pe

dest

rians

are

dis

cipl

ined

if th

ey a

re o

bser

ved

not

follo

win

g th

e pe

dest

rian

wal

kway

. Th

e pe

dest

rian

wal

kway

and

the

disc

iplin

ary

syst

em re

gard

ing

the

use

of

the

wal

kway

was

con

side

red

to b

e ef

fect

ive.

Alth

ough

th

ere

wer

e no

bar

riers

pro

tect

ing

the

pede

stria

n th

e sp

eed

of v

ehic

les

and

the

wid

th o

f tra

ffic

rout

es m

eant

th

at th

e ris

k of

ped

estri

an a

nd v

ehic

le c

onfli

cts

was

low

.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

tra

ffic

rout

es

Com

pany

veh

icle

s –

Ove

r 10

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– m

embe

rs o

f th

e pu

blic

– le

ss th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

tra

ffic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

132

Com

pany

17

Food

sto

rage

an

d ou

tlet

100%

Ye

s Th

ere

is m

arke

d pe

dest

rian

rout

e le

adin

g fro

m th

e en

tranc

e to

all

area

s of

the

site

that

ped

estri

ans

need

to

acce

ss.

Hig

h-ris

k ar

eas

of th

e pe

dest

rian

rout

e ar

e pr

otec

ted

from

veh

icle

s w

ith c

oncr

ete

barri

ers.

Oth

er

area

s of

the

wal

kway

are

mar

ked

with

bol

lard

s.

Pede

stria

ns w

ere

not o

bser

ved

stra

ying

from

the

pede

stria

n w

alkw

ay.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– Le

ss th

an

10 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– O

ver

100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

mem

bers

of

the

publ

ic –

Les

s th

an 1

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

tra

ffic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

em

ploy

ees

– O

ver 1

00 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny 1

8 M

anuf

actu

rer

and

dist

ribut

or

of d

rink

100%

Ye

s Sa

fe p

edes

trian

rout

es a

re m

arke

d th

roug

hout

the

site

by

a br

oken

yel

low

line

. Bl

ack

and

yello

w c

hain

fenc

ing

is

used

to p

reve

nt p

edes

trian

s fro

m e

gres

sing

from

the

rout

e. T

his

is s

ituat

ed a

ppro

xim

atel

y 0.

5 m

etre

s aw

ay

from

the

kerb

, to

prev

ent v

ehic

les

driv

ing

too

clos

e to

the

pede

stria

n w

alkw

ay.

In s

ome

area

s of

the

site

an

addi

tiona

l ker

b ha

s be

en im

plem

ente

d fo

r the

sam

e pu

rpos

e.

Publ

ic v

ehic

les

– Le

ss th

an

10 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

C

ompa

ny v

ehic

les

– O

ver

100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay o

n si

te tr

affic

rout

es

Pede

stria

ns –

mem

bers

of

the

publ

ic –

Bet

wee

n 10

and

10

0 m

ovem

ents

per

day

on

site

traf

fic ro

utes

Pe

dest

rians

– e

mpl

oyee

s –

Ove

r 100

mov

emen

ts p

er d

ay

on s

ite tr

affic

rout

es

CO

ST:

·

Traf

fic p

aint

(5 li

tres)

= £

65

·

Dis

posa

ble

pain

t app

licat

or =

£38

·

Free

sta

ndin

g pe

dest

rian

barri

er (6

x 1

x 1

m) =

£20

0 ·

2 m

etre

hur

dle

barri

er =

£56

.15

·

Cha

in b

arrie

r = £

360

133

Printed and published by the Health and Safety ExecutiveC30 1/98

Printed and published by the Health and Safety Executive C1.25 11/02

ISBN 0-7176-2581-8

RR 038

780717625819£25.00 9