ODA ban semi automatic hitches

I noted in this week's Contract Journal that semi-automatic quick hitches are now banned from ODA sites. When you look at the ODA decision makers, "environmental leadership team" and "tier one contractors" there is no doubting the lack of a viable consultative process. Mr Lawrence Waterman's claim that "this is a good example of how contractors on the 2012 project are working together, to make the industry safer", is complete nonsense, more knee jerk, risk aversion. The problem is not the semi automatic quick hitch product, it is, behavioural, lack of training, and a woefully inadequate system of site management. Mr Waterman and his tier one contractors would be better placed looking at the real areas of concern on UK sites, regarding 360 excavators such as: excavator operators that have never been trained in lifting operations, excavator operators that cannot read a lifting duties chart, excavator operators that deliberately switch off the RCI, excavator operators that cannot explain the basic function of the hitch they are using, quick hitch documentation missing, national 360 hirers whose proprietary hitch is of sub standard construction and does not have an integral lifting point, 360 operators who have to lift from a point on the dipper/bucket, trip link, and subsequently foul the lifting accessories against the load, wheeled excavators that carry loads rested between crowded bucket and dozer blade, CFA pile croppers mounted on 360 excavators that flout manufacturer's instructions by overloading when cutting off large pile sections and creating instability, 360 operators who never undertake pre-start checks on the working end of the equipment, site management that encourage bad practice in the use of 360s as cranes, PUWER requirements on selection of correct equipment for the job, often ignored, lifting accessories not checked before/after lifts, banksmen not trained, CPCS blue card holders that have achieved their competence by the NVQ route with little or no evidence highlighting excavators used as cranes or with quick hitches, 360 operators with CPCS blue card competence though unable to speak English or understand any written instructions on the equipments operational safety features, as recommended by the manufacturers, comprehensive lift planning, non existent, 360 lifting attachments misused to such an extent, (e.g. pile croppers), that dee links are distorted/damaged beyond repair, inside one working day, Whilst the ODA are perfectly within their rights to unilaterally make changes it would appear to diminish the credibility of, The Strategic Forum for Construction" and it's Plant Safety Group, which is seeking to represent the whole of the construction community. .

 I think you make an excellent point but I think this runs even deeper.  In addition to the semi-automatic quick hitch, contractors and plant hirers on the Olympics site have also been forced to fit equipment with diesel particulate filters and anti-theft devices/systems.  It strikes me that the promise of much-needed workload from the Olympics is being used as to persuade contractors and hirers into unusual and expensive practices.   This might be OK, if the hirers and contractors had some hope of recouping some of this additional cost through a raised profile and enhanced PR of being an ODA-approved supplier.   Unfurtunately, the ODA has even managed to quosh this, threatening to kick companies off site if they're seen to be using a link with the Olympics in any form of advertising.  From what I understand, they have even gone as far as demanding that all hired equipment has the name of the hirer removed before it's allowed on site.

Yes, the Olympics is proviing some much needed, ongoing work.   But if it's costing hirers several thousand pounds for particulate filters, new couplers and anti-theft equipment, are they still making a profit?

Intheno, Thanks for the feedback. Based on your comments regarding the ODA there would appear to be little gained by seeking "approved supplier" status. I have just had some digital photography received from an ODA site that depicts an item of engineering plant breaking all the rules regarding best practice and safety. The old adage of, "people in glass houses" comes to mind !! Onward and upward.

 I see this from a different angle!

The conspiracy of false positives like the ones in internet security where they invent a problem so they can charge you to fix it fills my mind when i hear these stories!

We are all human and sometimes we make mistakes!

Which makes me question is it lack of knowledge that makes the plant industry dangerous or just the fact that we play with very big toys and the law of averages says we have more chance of a fatality than someone who works for a fluffy pillow company!

Then you have to ask are the people who tell us its dangerous earning a living out of telling us its dangerous!

If you want my honest opinion!

20 years ago the men in this industry knew what they were doing, were trained better, more skilled and made a good living out of it where-as now you have every Tom, Dick and Harry clinging onto everyone of our pubic hairs because they know we generate money and they want a peice of it!

We have as an industry moved forward on some important issues but i fear people with friends in high places are still using us as a cash cow,!

So as much as we need a safe working envirement we need to identify and dispose of the leaches who target our fears to earn a living!

Every industry takes it up the bum but we are getting to the point where we need two bums and i'm sure some fecker will charge us for planning permission too!

Sustainer - Just read your post and whole-heartedly agree with all your points. Residing in the South-East I have two of the largest ongoing engineering projects (being the Olympic sites and M25 widening scheme) in this country occurring nearby. It is apparent to me that bad practice with regards to excavators remains endemic.

A simple drive through the M25 widening scheme being undertaken by Skanska allows anyone to witness the breaches of health and safety with regard to excavations that can be seen on an almost daily basis.

The ODA and Skanska’s decision on quick-hitches and the belief that switching over to fully automatics makes the problem go away is nonsense when men are still working within the drop zone of buckets under excavators and remain at risk of being hit by the moving arm or bucket. This simply should not be occurring on well-managed sites. There is no excuse for it. It is ironic that Skanska’s were the first to announce a ban on semi -automatics yet numerous examples of bad practice can be seen on a daily basis on the M25.

As an engineer working on and around heavy plant common sense tells me to stay away from the danger areas when machines are working. However common sense would not appear to be very common. I know that daily inspections are not taking place (and in some cases the drivers are not even sure what they should be checking). Even simple tasks such as checking the oil levels on their machines seems to be too much trouble for some of them. Surprisingly, despite all the attention it has received I still see semi-automatic hitches being operated without the pin in place as I go round sites.

It is easy publicity to issue these press releases with a big fanfare saying how they take safety seriously. However, like you say it is a knee jerk reaction of risk aversion. It would have been better to concentrate on establishing a safe pattern of work and getting men on site to operate safely rather than relying on new designs to supposedly eliminate risk. This approach is breeding complacency with both machine operators and those working around the machines thinking there is little they need to think about as a culture of arse-covering takes hold.

It is a shame that the ODA didn’t wait for the considered view of the Strategic Forum before going ahead with their unilateral decision. These are both highly visible sites and both showcases for the Premier League of health and safety conscious companies. Yet both seem to believe that by banning semi automatic hitches they have solved the problem - they sure as hell haven’t!

• Filed under: quick hitch safety skanska

My opinion on this subect is that any kind of quick hitch on an excavator, be it semi automatic or fully automatic, should be a cause for some concern.

Mechanical locking pins, hydraulically activated, at the end of a dipper arm, controlled by an electric switch in the cab, supporting a bucket that weighs a tonne - controlled by an operator who cant even be arsed to check the oil ! yeah right thats going to have a smooth outcome.

I have often wondered how often these devices are actually used for changing the bucket on the majority of machines? Is it really the time saving device that we cant do without?

The initial promotion of the devices was from the machine manufacturers who obviously have a higher profit per machine motivation. A quick hitch costs considerably more than a couple of chrome plated bucket pins with split pins or R clips.

Then the plant hire industry got on board and that started the demands from contractors that it must be a QH machine .. that arrives on site with more buckets than you can shake a stick at that mostly sit in the yard rusting away quietly, until they get knicked. I mean why would a 35t 360 machine hired in to load dumptrucks from a spoil heap using its standard size bucket even need a QH or the several other buckets including 12" ditching bucket sent with it?

In a lot of countries the construction industry has no conception of the QH and why it would be needed for an excavator.

I would suggest that a total ban on any excavator with a QH that is working a trench with men in it or being used as a crane might be more sensible than a ban on semi auto hitches.

steam boss

 

 

 

 

 Steam"O"

I don't agree with you at all.

Talk about the bad workman blaming the tool?

I have used quick hitches since day 1 and i remember what its like changing the bucket pins on a 350 when its minus 14 outside!

I have never had a problem using  a QH but then i try to do the job i'm payed to do correctly!

Another point to chew on is how the operator sets out his stall.

On your first day working on a new site if the operator makes it clear that he is not going to swing the bucket over anyones head at any time so it can never fall off and hit them regardless of safety pins I will bet you the guys your working with will respect you more for thinking about their safety and they will work around you!

It normally takes me about two days of being firm but gentle to get a complete deep drainage gang tuned onto my wavelength so they know i wont swing over them and they walk around to save time!

Everyone is happier about the situation and if extreme circumstances require you to swing over a head you can bet everyones awareness of the danger is exagerated and they are all ready for the worst!

An Old Boy once told me a good machine driver will make or break you.

I would add that a good machine driver also sets the atmosphere of the site workforce!

If everyone on site sees a good machine driver who drives responsibly they all step up a gear!

Its contagious

So getting rid of QHs is just going to dumb us down!

Get rid of the bum drivers and we can all evolve to a better workplace!