ATVs, commonly called 4-wheelers, have been around for decades. Most people recognize the risks associated with these machines outside of the workplace. The accident/injury statistics can be alarming. But when management claims those accident statistics are not work-related and that somehow the risks these machines pose are less in the workplace may be a very misguided approach to managing their risks. It is true, the workplace should provide more safety structure around the use of these machines versus what is provided by personal usage outside of the workplace. However, what we typically find in the workplaces where these machines are used is a severe lack of safety controls around their use. Everything from training, operational rules, maintenance on the machines to ensure safe operation, and PPE worn by the users of these machines is often found to be non-existent or badly managed.
A client recently suffered a severe/life-altering accident involving the use of these machines. The safety group made the company aware of the risks associated with these machines at the time they were introduced to the business, as well, the business was made aware of these risks from previous S&H audit findings and, most notably, many minor accidents with less severe consequences. Yet, the safety effort/structure around these risks was virtually non-existent. Then the accident happened. The investigation determined the worker had never received the required training, the machine was 2-years past due for its annual maintenance, the daily inspection log showed the machine had not been inspected on the day of the accident, in fact, the machine had not been inspected daily for over 20 months, and the user was not wearing his/her helmet. Special note, the severity of the injury stemmed from a severe head injury.
And yet, this organization was ready to lay 100% of the blame at the feet of this 27-year employee for not wearing their helmet. Special note, the investigators (both internal and OSHA) were unable to find helmets in the workplace. The company was able to find the PO and Invoice for the original purchase of helmets six years earlier; however, at the time of the acciodent not one of those helmets was available on-site.