16.01.2013
Who trained him??
A man walked away with minor injuries after overturning a boom lift while trimming trees in Warren, Michigan yesterday.
The man, Todd Weissman, 38, of Camelot Tree and Shrub Company was working at a height of around six to seven metres in a Niftylift SD model. However he had not set the outriggers and was not wearing a harness.
He apparently lost consciousness but was resuscitated and taken to hospital before being released. Thankfully there were no other injuries in this incident.
Please register to see all images
The overturned lift, which shows that the machine's outriggers were not set
A company employee said that Weissman was warned to wear a harness while using the boom lift as is company policy, but had failed to comply. However no mention was made of the fact that the lift was being used without outriggers.
Vertikal Comment
This incident should be made an example of, either the company and its employee were knowingly overriding the safety systems on this machine in order to drive the machine at height - something that it is not designed for. Or it had been modified before and the people on site had received no training whatsoever in how to use this machine.
Either way it is hard to see how the employer and employee are not guilty of breaking safety rules, if it was rented the rental supplier will also be under investigation as to whether the machine was tampered or faulty prior to delivery- and a hand over familiarisation was carried out.
In this incident it was lucky that there were no other injuries and the only damage was done to the lift, and even that looks to be relatively minor. The fact is that this sort of cavalier use of aerial lifts is highly dangerous and not just to those who are prepared to take the risk and operate machines in such a way.
treecare1950
I know Camelot Tree & Shrub and their owner very well for over 15 years. They are a very safe oriented company and would not put any of their workers into danger. I highly doubt the employee was told to not put the outriggers down. Its obvious Cheryl is just protecting her husband. Camelot is the 7th accredited company through TCIA and are for a specific reason. They hold safey meetings every Monday. I know the manager on that job that day and he never told that employee to do so, nor would they fire someone who couldn't meet quota. Weissman has been there for 4 years, he knew better and knew exactly what he was doing wrong on that job, he just never thought that something like that would happen. Companies can only enforce safety so much, in hopes they stress the importance enough. They cant watch their employees like children. Glad the employee was able to walk off the scene. I'm sure Camelot and that employee learned a valuable lesson that day. He should be fired after a move like that.
Sherm
Cheryl Weissman is to be commended for responding to the forum about this incident. A quota, required , desired or anticipated for people working at height is absurd thinking. I would not contract to those terms and maybe that is why I keep my business small and in control. I want to always be steps ahead of the work, not behind. Life is too short to get in a hurry and have a fatal mistake. I fell 20' in 1999 and almost lost my life. Recuperation took four months and recovery back to work two months more, recovery back to tree work took fifteen months more. In the TCIA magazine the monthly accident and death statistics post the incidents for professionals and civilian. A word to the wise should be sufficient.
vertikal editor
Received via contact form today:
Your story about my husband Todd Weissman is missing a couple of things.
First, my husband was told to not set the outriggers (by the same company employee who claims he repeatedly warned my husband to wear his harness) The contract they were working on was a City of Warren contract requiring daily quotas which break down to about 7 minutes per tree and the foreman felt the outriggers were too time consuming. The override of this safety feature was instructed to my husband (who was also told "if you cannot meet the daily quotas, we will find someone who can)
Everything reported in the article is 'damage control' by Camelot (and the very reason the outriggers are not mentioned)
As you are aware, the harness on or off, would not have prevented this from tipping. Oh, and additionally, this particular nifty has a post production modification over the pulleys, per Camelot's request, that added a couple hundred pounds to extension bar increasing its' potential for tipping without the outriggers set.
Regards Cheryl Wiessman
Sherm
I have owned a 2003 NiftyLift TM40 since 2008 and worked in lifts for eleven years. The renter must have modified the controls to raise the lift because it has several fail-safe systems that keep the booms from raising unless the outrigger pads are tightly on the ground and the lift frame balanced. The 38 year old man is lucky he was not killed. He ought to be banned from lift work for being so ignorant. If his employer directed him to operate the equipment in this manner, the employer deserves a fine they will remember for a long time to come.