Is The Right-of-Way Wrong? By Rob Vetter
Trainers are often tasked with keeping a training session interesting by encouraging group discussion. To do this, some popular advice is to bring up 'hot button' topics that people feel strongly toward and react accordingly.
On of my favorite hot buttons is the right-of-way issue, it can be an entertaining and occasionally frightening topic to broach. Metaphorically - it's like pulling the pin on a grenade and tossing it into the center of the room; reactions are guaranteed and virtually instant!
Most people relate to both sides of the issue here because most of us have been a vehicle (like a car) operator and a pedestrian. When we drive our cars, or forklifts as the case may be, we cannot understand how those darn pedestrians can be so careless as to not understand the issues we are dealing with as operators and of course when we are pedestrians, we cannot fathom the incompetence of an operator who is not mindful of us.
Many industrial operations I have been to come down on the equipment "side" of things in that they award the right-of way to the equipment using the rationale that operators have visibility, load handling and braking issues to deal with, and the last thing they need is to be worried about where a pedestrian will appear or what they may do. However on the legal/liability side of things, the law courts typically come down on the pedestrians' side of things in their precedent setting belief that life should always have the right-of-way over machinery.
Personally, I don't like the idea of either operators or pedestrians believing that they have the uncontestable right-of-way and as such, attempt to instill a more cooperative frame of mind in both. Many operators who believe they have the right of way tend to operate with a certain degree of devil-may-care attitude, not necessarily careless, but dangerous nonetheless. Likewise, pedestrians with the recognized right of way often behave around mobile equipment like, well pedestrians; at times careless and/or oblivious but always unpredictable.
To operators I say that as operators, they are required to be in control of the equipment at all times and operate in such a way that offers maximum visibility (load trailing wherever possible) and a safe stop under all conditions, conditions that include pedestrian heavy areas. If push comes to shove, even though company policy may favor operators, the law courts usually don't and if they hit someone, the law will be there, usually in the form of lawyers.
To pedestrians I say that although the law is usually on their side in many cases, if a collision occurs your family may win a lawsuit and be able to afford to plant you in a nice oak box instead of the standard pine one - congratulations. Sometimes I have found it useful to sit a pedestrian behind the wheel of a loaded forklift in hopes of giving them some glimpse of an operator's perspective, it's usually quite effective.
The fact of the matter is that we all need to look out for each other and try to respect what the other is dealing with. Toward that end, pedestrians and operators alike may benefit from adopting a 'neither has the right of way' philosophy or better still, safety has the right of way.
Of course, communication between operators and pedestrians is vital. When the two approach each other both should slow to a crawl or stop, make eye contact and acknowledge one another, then offer some sort of signal ( a wave, nod, horn, gesture, etc), preferably the operator waving the pedestrian through in most cases. Hi-visibility clothing, clearly marked walkways, signage, mirrors all have their place and contribute to managing risk.
Finally, winning the hearts and minds of the people involved in such away that attitude and behavior are favorably influenced is paramount because policy and procedure can do nothing without people to make them work.