Run away lorry and why im getting dismissed

[Kapitan]

Well today i finaly find out that im up for dismissal heres the facts.

While going up a steep hill we parked the dust cart / trash truck in the road as per normal, now the weather was very bad snow and ice every where.
the driver put the hand brake on but not long after we left the truck it started slidding down the hill. (uhoh not good and dead right it isnt)

So now we have a 26 tonne run away truck that we are chasing after like a couple of lemons, going down hill getting faster and faster (you might as well had put ski's on it) but eventualy it hit a ford fiesta and mangled it up (not surprising) it then went on to hit a much larger car a ford mondeo and again smashed it up pretty good.

Finaly it hit a S type Jaguar again doing alot of damage, before it went up a small ramp through a wooden fence and sliding up a small garden hitting the washing line, (which we later found wrapped around the back axle).

What we didnt see was the fact that the bin lift had smashed a window on a double glazed door (oh dear indeed), so far all 3 cars are confirmed write off's all the electrics and sensors for the bin lift the hydraulics and the bin lift itself is mangled and will cost to repair.

Estimated damage cost £120,000

Damage to the truck:

One new bin lift with automated sensors presure pads and rams £50,000
To have the hopper re aligned and if possible panel beated out £11,200 failure of that a whole new hopper at £13,600
new back axle £4,300
Fine for being 2.420 tonnes over wieght £950

(the truck is licenced to take upto 26 tonnes on the wiegh bridge it was 28.420 tonnes a whole 2.42 tonnes over wieght!)

Now the argument we have is the road itself should have been gritted, brakes should have been checked on the service it had 8 months before hand, and the fact there was no one in the lorry while it was in motion.

There side is: we caused the damage through what can be seen as negligence, and negligent acts that could harm members of the public, the fact we dissmissed our right to refuse to clear a road because of possible dangers and unforseen hazards, the fact the viachle was over wieght at the time of the incident, and that some one must stay with the viachle to at least control the viachle if something like this occurs.

All 3 of us have been suspended without pay and its looking likely that we are loosing our jobs over this, we just have to wait and see what the unions say.

[bradclark1]

Honest opinion! Driver should have should have known better and is responsible. Lucky it wasn't involuntary manslaughter.

[CCIP]

Honest opinion! Driver should have should have known better and is responsible. Lucky it wasn't involuntary manslaughter.

Yea, my question there is... why did the driver leave a 28t truck parked on what you describe as a 'steep hill' in less-than-ideal conditions and exit the vehicle?

[fatty]

This sounds pretty awesome, did it make the news? I admit I winced when I read about the Jag :down:

But yes, I have to agree that it is difficult to imagine leaving a 28 tonne truck parked on an icy hill as being a sensible idea.

PS: congrats to self on becoming a seaman, yesssssssssssss

[SUBMAN1]

Wow. The driver is responsible. However, that doesn't make you responsible. Not sure why you are involved in this over that, unless you were the driver of course.

-S

[fatty]

Kap mentioned negligence, so I guess it would depend on if he or his buddy neglected to take preventive action or at least point out the danger of the situation to the driver.

[jumpy]

Driver should know this and not be the responsibility of co-workers to point out fault.

As far as being over weight... how are you to know unless the vehicle has some kind of onbord sensor?

But really the council is remiss in gritting the road propperly if it was icey.


I can well imagine their respone to you refusing to collect from a road you considered dangerous because of ice and snow... bet they'd try and dismiss you or make your life difficult for refusing to work... ok maybe there'd be no damage to property but you can bet your ass that as soon as a member of the public complains their rubbish was not collected, the shift who's round it ought to be are gonna get it in the neck from their manager for not doing the job.

[TteFAboB]

:o :huh: :dead:
Sounds like the Lorry of Doom, Death and Destruction! :rotfl:
I'd like to have seen it, I like Demolition Derbies.:up: :arrgh!:

Anyway, it's not only the driver's and city council's fault. You don't park a Type S Jaguar outside and you definitely don't leave it out in the rain. :)

Wish you the best Kaptain.

[Iceman]

Sounds like what we call "An Act Of God"...**** happens...this is what insurance is for...and good point about the county/state not having gravel on the road etc...if they can admit they're fault it should simply be dismissed as an unforseeable accident..again this is what insurance is for...go after the state...I hope your union hangs tough with you....but there is one butt...if you the "Responsible" driver should/could have seen a potential hazzard then you I say "are" at fault..but again...insurance....not a firable offense just an accident....damn hope you come out all right.

[Kapitan]

All we were doing was collectiong bags of green waste, the driver was helping us as he normaly does its not an uncommon thing, we just wanted to get to the tip early as does every one and we were quite far ahead untill this.

We didnt refuse the road as we would have been sent back to to it later the same day to go and collect so we couldnt win and we would get a bollacking for not doing it, in reality we dont have the right to refuse to do a road.

The brake itself should have been adequate to stop the viechle, and it was.

The reason the council probably didnt grit that road is because its not a major road, and only 46 houses on the road.

Also im negligent for allowing the lorry to enter the road as i should have said it is too dangerous to stop the viechle.
But again if i had said no to doing the road we would have been sent back and forced to do it later in the day so the same thing may have happend.

As to making the press yes it made the metro on friday and also the london lite (i think it made london lite not sure though).

[The Avon Lady]

Well, it's either the merchant marine or the foreign legion for you now, Kap! :hmm:

[The Avon Lady]

Kap, are you sure your garbage truck didn't slide all the way to Minnesota (http://hotair.com/archives/2007/01/29/norm-coleman-tragically-injured-while-ferreting-garbage-out-of-dumpster/)? :hmm:

[Kapitan_Phillips]

This sounds pretty awesome, did it make the news? I admit I winced when I read about the Jag :down:


I didnt. I laughed. It means some rich duffer needs to pay another £20,000 for a new one :up:


Nice one Kapitan, at least it was done with style :rock:

[mog]

Nice one Kapitan, at least it was done with style :rock:

I agree. If you're going to get fired from a job, it might as well be for a spectacular 120 000 quid disaster.

[STEED]

I'm not sure of the rules and regulations here as each council have slightly different rules, personally Kap I would not gone up that hill and the council should had grit the road. If it goes all legal in to the courts you should fight the council all the way, as we all know councils are scum of the earth and don't give a toss about the council tax payer.

[danlisa]

brakes should have been checked on the service it had 8 months before hand

Correct me if I'm wrong. This dust cart / trash truck should be classed as a HGV and as such is subject to 6 weekly maintenance/service checks as part of the vehicles classification. These 6 wkly checks are on top of/in addition to a yearly service/VOSA Certified MOT inspection.

As STEED says, fight them on the grounds that the vehicle was not maintained correctly. Just make sure that inspection documents have not been falsefied by the council's maintence dept after the accident (this does happen). The member of your company/council who holds the Transport Certificate is ultimatley responsible for the upkeep of all vehicles. He should be in court not you.

[August]

If I read the op right, the brakes were set but the truck slid down the hill. Not much anyone could do about that maintenance wise...

[TteFAboB]

If I read the op right, the brakes were set but the truck slid down the hill. Not much anyone could do about that maintenance wise...

Chuck Norris could. He would run after the truck, jump inside the cabin, turn the truck 180 degrees, loose the brakes and put it back under control, stopping 3 inches away from the Jaguar.

Well, if Chuck Norris was a dustmen, we wouldn't need anybody else to collect the waste anyway. We wouldn't even need a truck, he'd just crush the trash with his own hands into tiny little balls and eat them, since his stomach can digest anything.
:88)

[badhat17]

Also im negligent for allowing the lorry to enter the road as i should have said it is too dangerous to stop the viechle.
But again if i had said no to doing the road we would have been sent back and forced to do it later in the day so the same thing may have happend.


Are you qualified to drive this vehicle Kap ? If you are not then you should not be expected to make that safety call, it would be your drivers decision.

Your driver left the vehicle unattended, he was helping with the collection you say. Is that his job ? I would imagine it is not. Was he doing this at your bequest ? Are you the team leader ?

Unless you asked the driver to help with the collection task then you ought not take any blame over this. It depends on what authority you have over the driver. Check you employment contract and your employees handbook for terms and conditions. If you were in charge of this vehicle team then you will share some responsibility, if not you shouldn't.

A driver is responsible for the vehicle no matter what though, he left the cab and is at fault.

Suspended without pay, that is unusual. They should keep paying you until you are actualy dismissed.

[Kapitan]

The veichle is classified as HGV class 2 and im not qualified to drive it but as i am chief loader as the other two guys were agency i have to make the decision.

The driver is required to help the loading of the lorry as and when he can, the brakes were fine only 30% worn but when the driver went through the paper work it appeared they hadnt been checked he told the supervisior and manager about this (after the crash) but they took it into the work shops and had it all off and found the brakes were only 12% worn.

And if the 6 weekly checks were ever done they would have rectified alot of the current faults such as the ones with the sliding doors that like to decapitate the loaders.

http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/2019/mercfaungv2.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

This is similar to the one i work on but this one is smaller and is 17 tonnes, the one i work on is bigger has another axle and carrys 26 tonnes, and has sliding doors.

[badhat17]

The veichle is classified as HGV class 2 and im not qualified to drive it but as i am chief loader as the other two guys were agency i have to make the decision.

The driver is required to help the loading of the lorry as and when he can, the brakes were fine only 30% worn but when the driver went through the paper work it appeared they hadnt been checked he told the supervisior and manager about this (after the crash) but they took it into the work shops and had it all off and found the brakes were only 12% worn.

And if the 6 weekly checks were ever done they would have rectified alot of the current faults such as the ones with the sliding doors that like to decapitate the loaders.

http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/2019/mercfaungv2.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

This is similar to the one i work on but this one is smaller and is 17 tonnes, the one i work on is bigger has another axle and carrys 26 tonnes, and has sliding doors.

Forget about the brakes issue, it is unlikely to get you anywhere.

Did the driver refuse or question your decision to take that route or did he just get on with it? This is important, no matter what your employers may say about it being your decision. If you are not qualified to drive the vehicle then you can not make such a decision, you would ask your driver if he thought it was safe. I'm presuming he said yes. Or nothing was said at all and the driver just took the route and you went along with this. Being un-qualified to drive the vehicle you can not be expected to question the driver here, it is his call.
As long as you haven't over ruled your driver and told him to take the route when he said it was not safe then you are in the clear.

The driver is required to help with the loading as and when he can

Is that really company policy? Your union should be able to make a lot out of this. Had the driver been in the cab then the incident was avoidable, if he was within company rules to leave the cab and help with the loading then the company policy is badly at fault. Was the engine running on the vehicle when he left it ? Unless the law has changed then he has broken the law if he left the cab whilst the engine was running. As loading was in progress I would guess the engine was left running.

How long have you been with this company ?

[Kapitan]

For a start 90% of refuse lorry drivers sign contracts that say DRIVER / LOADER and in that contract there is a statement that says "you will be required to help with the loading when ever possible"

2ndly yes the engine was running standard proceadure as its a rotodrum which means if your engine is off the drum on the rear will not turn and will not crush and compact the refuse, also the same for the other lorries.

3rdly safety mesure means that you cant move the viechle when the blade is running it will automaticaly stop and the bin lifts will raise to travelling position same goes if its in gear regardless if the hand brake is on or not.

When we left the 2nd part of friday hill i said "next left to the top we will clear this one then tip", thats all i said, the driver took the next left and went up the hill was struggling a little but nothing to worry about.

Its not a company policy its more of a nation wide policy about drivers loading the fact is some roads your going to need 3 pairs of hands other wise it can take forever.

Its not that im not qualified this is my route the guy was an agency driver the other guy was agency loader niether of them knew the route there fore i was chief loader directing the driver as to where he goes but ultimatly the driver does still have the right to refuse to travel up the road he also has the final say as to what goes on the lorry, he didnt use that.

[Kapitan_Phillips]

Another example of someone who works their arse off to get by getting screwed by the bloody system.


Tell them exactly where they can place their bin lorry, Kap.

[badhat17]

For a start 90% of refuse lorry drivers sign contracts that say DRIVER / LOADER and in that contract there is a statement that says "you will be required to help with the loading when ever possible"

2ndly yes the engine was running standard proceadure as its a rotodrum which means if your engine is off the drum on the rear will not turn and will not crush and compact the refuse, also the same for the other lorries.

3rdly safety mesure means that you cant move the viechle when the blade is running it will automaticaly stop and the bin lifts will raise to travelling position same goes if its in gear regardless if the hand brake is on or not.

When we left the 2nd part of friday hill i said "next left to the top we will clear this one then tip", thats all i said, the driver took the next left and went up the hill was struggling a little but nothing to worry about.

Its not a company policy its more of a nation wide policy about drivers loading the fact is some roads your going to need 3 pairs of hands other wise it can take forever.

Its not that im not qualified this is my route the guy was an agency driver the other guy was agency loader niether of them knew the route there fore i was chief loader directing the driver as to where he goes but ultimatly the driver does still have the right to refuse to travel up the road he also has the final say as to what goes on the lorry, he didnt use that.

It seems to me that you are not at fault here but you seem to be accepting that you are responsible, do you want to get sacked ?

Who cares what it says in the drivers contract, you are not the driver. It is what it says in your contract that matters to you.

This is clearly a profit before safety issue. If the company dismiss you over this incident then you would have a case for wrongful/unfair at a tribunal. However the company can terminate you very easily if you have not been with them for one year which is why I asked about that.

What you may think as standard procedure or a nationwide policy does not make it law. Everything is pointing towards the driver as far as this goes, why would or should you carry the can for any of this ?

Have you made contact with your union over this yet? I would seek professional advice at the earliest if I were you.

What union are you with, TGWU ?

[Kapitan]

I am a contractor to a contractor i havnt been with a union since i left basildon maybe the might still support me il have to find out.

But yeah your right i shouldnt take the crap so i will seek legal advice.

[The Munster]

Here it's down to the Driver. Even if a member of the public approaches a Loader with something they want to dispose of outwith the wheelie-bin, the Loader points 'Joe Bloggs' in the direction of the Driver and he makes the decision then it's usually what mood the Driver is in; different in this case when you're doing a special 'green waste' uplift.
I know what you mean about wanting to get the run finished then tip as quickly as possible, been there, done that.
Newer vehicles have 'weight display' in the Cab so when you reach the max point then it's leave everything that's left and tip = having to return later.
If it's any consolation to you, here, the Loaders wouldn't have ended up 'on the mat' but the Driver would have been hammered !

[Kapitan]

In our lorries we have no wieght display at all its all done by guessing, theres only one lorry that ive ever worked on and ive worked on alot of them, that have a cut out when they hit max wieght.

The driver may loose his class 2 for this one.

[The Munster]

I know, we don't have them either; Councils with money will have them.
Had the demonstraters but that's as far as it's gone.

[Kapitan]

The council i used to work for would rather spend the money on wages and new veichles rather than wieght display machine and what have you, they get good rates of pay too.

[XabbaRus]

Even if you are not a member of the union I think you could probably get them to help you.

Interesting as the refuse vehicles I see here the driver stays at the wheel at all times. Mind you we have wheelie bins so he just drives up to the side as we leave them out the night before and up they go.

Sorry Kap but check with your union rep and don't shoot your mouth off. Oh and I know this sounds ****, but you have to look after yourself, if it looks like the driver is going to carry the can, let him. Might not be to moral but that's the way it is.

[lesrae]

Hey mate, sorry to hear about your troubles. Nothing to offer in the way of advice, over the good stuff the others have given, but stick with it.

[ASWnut101]

Estimated damage cost £120,000

Damage to the truck:

One new bin lift with automated sensors presure pads and rams £50,000
To have the hopper re aligned and if possible panel beated out £11,200 failure of that a whole new hopper at £13,600
new back axle £4,300
Fine for being 2.420 tonnes over wieght £950

loosing your job in a one in a lifetime comedy event: priceless.:arrgh!:


sorry about the job, though.

[Kapitan]

Well il let him carry the can.