Safety warnings: How many are enough?
May 7, 2010 by Fred HosierPosted in: Employee responsibility, Fatality, In this week's e-newsletter, Latest News & Views, Safety training, Transportation safety
PDF When a new stretch of the Bay Bridge opened in San Francisco last year, the California Department of Transportation posted signs warning drivers about an upcoming sharp curve and announcing a 10 m.p.h. drop in the speed limit. Now the family of a deceased truck driver is suing, claiming the signs weren’t enough.
On Nov. 9, 2009, Tahir Fakhar was driving a tractor trailer along the bridge’s new S-curve when he lost control of the truck. It rolled over a 3-foot guardrail and fell about 200 feet to an island below. Fakhar was killed.
Now, an attorney for the truck driver’s family has filed a claim with the California Victim Compensation and Government Claims Board, a precursor to a wrongful death lawsuit.
The claim alleges the S-curve was “negligently designed and regulated.”
After the truck crash, Caltrans added additional speed warnings, flashing signs, a higher roadside barrier, rumble strips and clearer lane striping.
The lawyer for Fakhar’s family says that work should have been done previously.
Caltrans officials say the speed of Fakhar’s truck, 10 m.p.h. over the legal limit, was the problem, not the design or markings of the roadway.
While it may be difficult to assign fault in this case without more information, the story does raise a general safety question.
After you make safety rules (like a speed limit), train workers (such as preparing and licensing them to drive a tractor trailer), and post warning reminders (like speed limit signs), at what point does the responsibility for a worker’s safety shift from the company to the worker? Let us know what you think in the Comments Box below.
SafetyNewsAlert.com delivers the latest Safety news once a week to the inboxes of over 270,000 Safety professionals.
Click here to sign up and start your FREE subscription to SafetyNewsAlert!
Tags: Bay Bridge, Caltrans, safety warnings, truck crash, wrongful death lawsuit
Loading ...
May 6th, 2010 at 8:12 am
[...] more from the original source: Safety warnings: How many are enough? | SafetyNewsAlert.com … Posted in industrial safety | Tags: bridge, california, francisco, industrial safety, [...]
May 6th, 2010 at 11:21 am
[...] Safety warnings: How many are enough? | SafetyNewsAlert.com … [...]
May 11th, 2010 at 9:06 am
If there was a warning sign, then people should be responsible if they choose to ignore it.
May 11th, 2010 at 9:20 am
Too many warning signs become a problem because after a while, they all just fade into the background and people don’t pay attention.
May 11th, 2010 at 9:35 am
If reasonable rules are in place (speed limit) If we are aware of the rule (speed limit sign posted) We understand the equipment we are operating (CDL training for a heavy vehicle) and we choose not to obey the rule… then shame on us. It’s sad that we have got to a point that everyone must find someone else to blame, and this is leading quite swiftly to another problem… holding hands with the government. We make ourselves look so stupid making up these frivolous law suits that now our politicians think that we now need someone to hold our hands from sun up to sun down. Amazingly enough I can go potty by myself, thanks.
May 11th, 2010 at 9:55 am
I agree with you Jon,
Too many people are so self involved in their own self interests that they have no clue what problems they cause not only to themselves but to everyone else as well.
Famous words from “Fantasy Island.”
“The plane! The plane! The plane!”
“The plane! The plane! The plane!”
May 11th, 2010 at 10:10 am
I believe that OSHA should start to assign blame where blame is due. If an employer trains you, educates you, provides engineering controls and PPE for you and you do not follow the rules and you get hurt, you should be held responsible. If OSHA sees you doing it, they should fine you and not the employer. They did what they were supplose to do and the employee chose not to do a task the right way. This should stay on your record just like traffic tickets. It would help to weed out “problem” risk taking employees from the work force.
May 11th, 2010 at 10:47 am
Do you think lawyers maybe impact these choices? you bet. rediculous!!!
May 11th, 2010 at 12:56 pm
It’s truly unfortunate that someone is dead. What’s also unfortunate, and quite frankly embarrassing, is that we live in a society that when faced with a negative outcome cries, “IT’S NOT MY FAULT!” and looks for someone else to blame. If the driver was qualified to be operating his equipment and there was a visible warning that was disregarded by the driver, who else could possibly be reasonably blamed? Let’s blame whoever made the bridge for not putting 10 signs up. Better yet, let’s put a stop light up and staff the area 24 hours a day with personnel who are there to let you know you need to slow down ahead. Why don’t we blame the manufacturer of the truck for not designing the truck to read all traffic signs and audibly warn us, because we can’t really be expected to read all those darn signs we just put up - right?
May 11th, 2010 at 1:13 pm
Showing your age with that one Robert.
May 11th, 2010 at 1:31 pm
How many signs do you need. Better yet, could he even read the signs. I know in California, if you don’t read or speak English, you can take the driver’s test verbally in your own language. Great, just what I want… to be on the road with someone who can’t read the signs. I’ve been over the Bay Bridge, it’s scary without the new S curve, trucks need to slow down for sure. I think this young man’s family will have to realize that he is responsible for his own demise because he was speeding.
May 11th, 2010 at 1:53 pm
The question was “at what point does the responsibility for a worker’s safety shift from the company to the worker?” The responsibility is and always has been with the worker. The worker here paid the price. Maybe the worker should have been going 10 mph slower. Maybe there should be more flashing lights and speed bumps. Responsibility begins to shift to the company if the company has the knowledge (or resources to research) safety risks that the worker does not have.
May 11th, 2010 at 3:00 pm
Just because someone does something stupid (not following the sign or signs), and is injured or killed because of it, does not mean it’s their lottery ticket so they can sue someone else, because in our society, no one is responsible for their own stupidity. Always someone else to blame. We are laughed at in other countries because we sue anything and everything. It was his repsonsibility to slow down, NO ONE ELSE!
May 11th, 2010 at 4:22 pm
I used to wonder why the speed limit changed to 50MPH on I5 in Portland, OR until I almost rearended someone because I was traveling 60 and my line of sight was so short I didn’t see them around the curve until I was almost on top of them. Even though a speed limit sign may not appear to make sense, I follow them now. If I had rearended them, it would have totally been my fault (there was only one sign stating reduced speeds ahead and another posting the new speed before the curve).
Do we know if Tahir Fahkar was only going 10 miles over the limit. I have been on the bay bridge and many people travel far faster than speed limit. I am sorry his error resulted in his death but I think his family needs to allow that if he was going over the posted speed limit and for that curve, it was his own error in judgement and the state is not liable.
May 12th, 2010 at 2:30 am
Nothing else matters except Caltrans put up more warnings AFTER his death! This, according to most courts, is an admission guilt. At the least, it shows the courts that you had “re-evaluated” the dangers and amended your program.
Doc
May 12th, 2010 at 12:59 pm
Amen to Jon. B’s comment.
May 18th, 2010 at 8:42 am
Id say he got the Darwin award. It makes perfect sense to give someone a license to drive an 80,000 pound vehicle when they cannot read english. Duh!!! We are so concerned with giving aliens citizenship that we overlook the impact not being able to read or write can have on their lives as well as their families and employeers. Whos fault you ask? Lets start with politicians for giving them the right to get a license in the first place. Then we can blame the employeer for hiring a person that cannot read and putting him in the position of handling a large piece of equipment he is not fully qualified to operate safely. Then we can blame the poor soul for trying to make a living with only half the needed information to preform his job safely. Its a little late to play the blame game as this fellow has already paid the price for our falure to enforce what my ancestors had to do to become a citizen!!! Learn the language, learn the laws, learn the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and swear allegance to this country.
May 18th, 2010 at 10:54 am
Paduke,
Don’t be silly, what we really need to do is make the government put up the signs in every language people speak, except of those our government is going to discriminate against. You see if we put up a stop sign at each corner written in Kenyan, Spanish, French, Arabic, Chinese, Portuguese, Russian and maybe English if enough people complain. Then only discriminate against the Germans, Japanese, Swiss and the American Redneck, then everything will be swell.
Anyway, how are we going to fill all of those jobs the aliens occupy with a mere 17 percent of our citizens that are currently unemployed? The outlook of filling these jobs even looks bleaker if you look at the numbers from the Prez. He is now saying that we are only at 9.9 percent because he has stopped taking into account those who have stopped looking for a job because they have figured out that congress is going to give out unemployment benefits indefinitely… So again I ask, how are we going to fill those jobs? We must have the aliens.
Last, why do you want us all to know about the laws, Constitution, and the Bill of Rights. Haven’t you heard our president tell us that our system is fundamentally flawed and that it needs to be changed? You’re starting to sound like one of those crack pots that think it is okay to make a living and not support those who like to look at cars go by from their government funded porch on their dilapidated government high rise. What’s the deal?
May 18th, 2010 at 1:01 pm
I live in the bay area, I saw the warning signs and slowed down. unfortunately the driver most likely drove over the posted speed limit routinely. A tractor trailker combination certainly does not take turns like a car. Even with the additional post accident warning signs drivers still got cited for exceeding the posted speed
June 1st, 2010 at 9:30 am
KEn, subsequent remedial action isn’t an admission of guilt, it’s an endeavor to improve a situation. In this case if the speed signs were up but were ignored, I would think the fault is obvious. But that’s just me.
October 19th, 2010 at 9:43 am
“Stupid is as stupid does”. We all know we can’t fix stupid, but surely we can figure out a way to keep it from taking us all down.
January 25th, 2011 at 2:07 pm
I hope that you folks are not working in safety. True, the driver has ultimate responsibility for his vehicle.
However, I have seen numerous examples where highway engineers have designed roads and interchanges with short-term cost savings in mind and not injury prevention or long term costs in mind.
Poor safety design is as much to blame as driver error. Further, driver error can be predicted (
dependent upon), so there is no excuse for anticipating such errors and designing to minimize their consequences.
Also, as safety professionals know, meeting basic minimum requirements, such as those spelled out in the MUTCD, does not cut it when conditions are not normal or typical.
January 25th, 2011 at 4:37 pm
John M,
If he had done what the signs had said, he would have been okay. It wasn’t mis- engineered. The accident was caused by a driver driving recklessly which is in no way a problem with safety design… and yes I do work in safety.
Example: If someone blows through a stop light who is at fault, the goverment or the driver?
If someone drives around the railroad crossing arms in front of a train, who is at fault?
The driver of the truck that died was going 10 mph over the speed limit on a sharp curve with a large top heavy vehicle and had formal training on how to operate that vehicle. Honnestly, who is to blame?