Coal delivery and elfin safety

We had a coal delivery today - our normal 3 x 50kg sacks.

As usual, it arrived on a flatbed truck, driven by one guy, who lugged each bag on his back round to the back of our house and deposited it in the bunker.

Poor bugger looked absolutely knackered; I was wondering - isn't that sort of lifting way outside the current elfin safety guidelines? It's a well- known, long established firm,so I'd be surprised if they just brazenly flouted the rules, but...?

Reply to
Lobster
Loading thread data ...

If he was taking them onto his shoulder and the floor of the lorry was level with his shoulder then maybe technically he wasn't lifting them, but simply allowing them to drop onto his shoulder and then carrying them.

michael adams

...

Reply to
michael adams

There's a video somewhere (1930's?) showing an American worker taking 2 cwt sacks of flour or grain off a conveyor belt at shoulder height, and walking them to a truck or some such. It was a big, fit-looking bloke, but he was shifting one every five seconds or so. I've often wondered how many he moved in a shift, or what breaks he took.

ISTR that cement came in 1 cwt bags when I was a lad, not 25 kg.

In France, the largest permitted beer-barrel size is the metric equivalent of 5 gallons; in the UK the smallest normally used commercially is 9.

Reply to
newshound

ISTR there is a recognised industrial injury that comes from repeatedly carrying coal sacks on the shoulder. Coalman's hump or coalman's shoulder, or something like that.

It doesn't really sound as though they have carried out a proper risk assessment of the job. I would have thought that they should, at a minimum, have provided him with a sack truck. A small crane or tail lift, to get the sacks off the lorry, as well would be even better.

Reply to
Nightjar

Dunno. It's how we always got our coal when I was a kid. And they were 1 cwt bags - which were slightly heavier than 50 Kg!

Reply to
Roger Mills

Without knowing for certain I'd imagine that could be alleviated to some extent by alternating shoulders. Carrying a heavy weight on the same shoulder all the time can't be doing your spine much good. Its possible to feel the effect of that with just a loaded rucksack slung from the one shoulder for a bit too long.

The problem with that would be if he had to tip the sacks down a coal hole or over the edge of a coal bin. He'd then have to lift the bottom of the sack which unless he bent his knees in exactly the right way could cause back injuries.

michael adams

...

Reply to
michael adams

I'll bet he saves a fortune on gym memberships though.

michael adams

...

Reply to
michael adams

I did say, at a minimum. A risk assessment might show a need for a sack truck with a lifting platform, to avoid that problem.

Reply to
Nightjar

And the coalman will probably start gaining a 1b in weight per week, as it's unlikely he's going to change his eating habits. Almost

4 stones weight gain per year, plus a reduction in cardiovascular exercise as its unlikely he's going to sign up for a gym.

michael adams

...

Reply to
michael adams

On 01/04/2015 20:54, Nightjar It doesn't really sound as though they have carried out a proper risk

But the sack would then be near ground level when he got to the bunker and would need to be lifted up by hand before it could be tipped into it.

Reply to
Mike Clarke

OK for a coal hole though.

Reply to
Bob Eager

In fact the bags uses - 1 cwt - are around 50kg and the max weight you are allowed to lift is now 35kg IIRC so yes, 1 cwt is now against H & S rules.

I can just about lift that weight.

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

On 02/04/2015 00:26, The Natural Philosopher wrote: ...

It depends upon the height of the lift and extension of your arms. The maximum is 25kgs at knuckle height and close to the body, reducing to

5kgs at shoulder height with arms outstretched. That is for men. For women it is 16kgs - 3kgs.
Reply to
Nightjar

By hand operated winch, if he had a lifting sack truck.

Reply to
Nightjar

Our coal man does the same - bag starts on pickup, moved to man's back without a drop, then deposited - so no lifting. Probably a case of "that's the way it's always been done".

Reply to
Clive George

But he isn't lifting it, just carrying it.

Reply to
john james

In message , Lobster writes

That is exactly as ours is delivered. We normally have four sacks at a time, and the guy just takes them from his flatbed to shoulder, through the garden and into the bunker. He normally has a full load in the morning, so presumably carries sacks like that all day. He cannot be younger than late 50s. Perhaps he is 25 and just looks older :-)

Currently paying £18 a sack for grade A coal (inc VAT).

Reply to
News

Back in the '50's big excitement on the farm when the threshing drum arrived. Sacks were hired from the local railway which weighed 2.25 cwt. when filled with Wheat.

A *sack lifter* was used to get them up to shoulder height so it was only carrying/lowering which caused problems. As a young teenager it was hard to resist the challenge and I have Schmorl's nodes as a possible consequence.

Reply to
Tim Lamb

On 02/04/2015 04:48, john james wrote: ...

The same guidelines apply to handling as well as to lifting. Once you start moving weights like that around manually, there is a high risk of injury.

Reply to
Nightjar

Yes, and I remember 20 of them (i.e 1 ton) being delivered and shoulder carried from lorry to coal hole. As a kid my job was to be seen to be counting them.

1 cwt is indeed slightly heavier than 50kg, but only by a tiny bit. A (long) ton is 20 cwt =2240 lbs; a metric tonne is 1000kg ~= 2204 lbs.

Robert

Reply to
RobertL

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.