Semi- Experienced & Non Experienced Operators
This type of lift truck is normally overlooked when it comes to training in the work place. It does not look dangerous or powerful but in fact it is a major course of accidents. If a motorised type is in operation at your premises then a licence is required by the operator. Most motorised versions have a capability of 1 Tonne and some 2 Tonne to a height of 3* or 4* meters. Training is done to the ITSSAR standards and the relevant licences and certificates are issued upon successful completion of the course. The style of the Powered pallet truck is important when deciding the required level of training. In principal it is usually a day course but. However if a candidate has no experience of the powered pallet truck, and because it lifts more than 5"  with its use involving an element of Reach/Counterbalance operation the candidate may need additional training.*

Powered Pallet Truck  (Rider)                                                    Operators Course  ( This is a strong guide)

    Period 7

Period 8

Day 
1

Handling of loads
General Supervised Practice

Basic 
Handling

The Skill Test 

Powered Pallet Truck  (Lifting into racking)                            Operators Course  ( This is a strong guide)

Period 1

    Period 4

    Period 7

Period 8

Day 
1

Course Reg

Statutory
HASAWA
Safety Video

   Intro to the truckOperators safety code

Intro to the truck
Pre-shift checks

Simple Practice 90°

Simple
 Hydraulics

Basic 
Handling

Battery 
charging

Day
 2

Pre-shift checks

Engineering principal
Load Stacking

Basic load handling

Basic load handling
at  height

Untrained agency worker injured by a Powered Pallet Truck
Agency worker, 18 year old Daniel Collier arrived at the wholesaler paper merchant based in Hull for his third day of work as a warehouseman and was asked to operate the electric powered pallet truck.
The task resulted in the pallet truck running over his foot, fracturing three of his toes, causing crush injuries to three bones and tearing tissue in his right foot.

G F Smith pleaded guilty to breaching s3(1) of HSWA 1974 by failing to ensure safety of non-employees. The court heard that novice operators should be provided with a full days training on a pallet truck and that all full-time employees wore safety shoes.

In mitigation G F Smith said that Collier had been given some training on his first day and that he had been informed that he was to provide his own safety shoes. David Duxbury, Hull City Council’s head of public protection, commented “This case highlights the dangers of allowing untrained staff to use work equipment. Many people consider pallet trucks to be everyday items, which anyone can use, but in untrained hands there is the potential for serious injury.”

The wholesale paper merchant was fined £6000 and ordered to pay the Council’s full costs of £1750.
As published in the AITT News December 2006 using the (Source:/ Safety and Health Practitioner June 2006)
www.aitt.co.uk

Don't let this happen to you  ( For more like this click on HSE Logo)
A Midland Company Hyperama, incurred an fine of £12,000 after a worker had his leg broken when he was in collision with a fork-lift truck being driven by a workmate who had not received adequate training on the vehicle. The truck in question was of the ride-on pallet truck type.
No Responsibility accepted for the accuracy of this article

A Nottingham cleaning products manufacturer has been fined after an employee was seriously injured when a powered industrial truck used to lift and transport materials toppled and fell on him.
The worker, who has asked not to be named, suffered a fractured cheekbone, multiple skull injuries and long term impaired vision after the incident, which happened when he was helping load a lorry using a semi-electric stacker truck. The truck was pulled over a kerb and fell onto the employee.
His employer, Revelholme Marketing Ltd (trading as Unic International), was prosecuted by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) after an investigation.
The company, of Colwick Road, Nottingham, which makes solvent degreasers and cleaning products, was found guilty of breaching Regulation 4(3) of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 at a three day trial which completed yesterday. They were fined £5,000 and ordered to pay costs of £18,000.
No Responsibility accepted for the accuracy of this article