Forklift and Pedestrian Traffic in a Distribution Center
A 120,000-square-foot distribution center runs 14 forklifts and about 60 pickers per shift. Pedestrians and forklifts share main aisles, and four blind corners were created six months ago by new high racking. In the last three months, workers reported eight near-misses involving forklifts and pedestrians, but no injuries; supervisors dismissed most as close calls. Floor markings are faded, there are no mirrors at the corners, and the posted speed limit is 8 mph. Forklift operators receive annual classroom training. Picker turnover is high, and temporary workers receive a 15-minute orientation. The safety committee wants a plan before the busy season.
1. How should the safety committee assess and rank the forklift-pedestrian hazards?
Read the worked answer
Start with exposure, not injury history. Walk the floor at shift change and peak picking times and map where pedestrians and forklifts actually intersect - not where the layout says they should. Review the eight near-misses for location, time, load, and speed; cluster them by corner and task. Interview operators and pickers separately, because each group sees different blind spots.
Rank using a simple risk matrix of likelihood and severity. A blind corner with repeated near-misses and no physical separation is high risk even with zero injuries, because the potential consequence is crushing or striking. The faded markings and 8 mph speed limit are evidence that administrative controls have degraded. Temporary workers with a 15-minute orientation are a separate high-risk group because they may not know traffic rules. Prioritize the four blind corners and any crossing where pedestrians must enter a forklift aisle.
2. Recommend a control strategy and explain why the current approach is insufficient.
Read the worked answer
Apply the hierarchy of controls. Eliminate or separate exposure first: dedicated pedestrian walkways, physical barriers or guardrails at blind corners, and controlled crossing points with gates. Engineer the remaining risk: convex mirrors or sensors at the four corners, speed governors or telematics, improved lighting, and racking layout changes where feasible. Administrative controls come next: lower speed limits, right-of-way rules, pedestrian-only zones, and scheduling that reduces simultaneous traffic. PPE - high-visibility vests - is the last layer, not the solution.
Annual classroom training plus a 15-minute orientation is insufficient because it depends on memory and compliance in a changing traffic pattern. Training does not fix a blind corner or faded markings. Supervisors dismissing near-misses as close calls also suppresses the reporting that would reveal where controls are failing. The plan should combine physical separation, engineering at the corners, and reinforced rules for temporary workers.
3. How will you know the controls are working?
Read the worked answer
Use leading indicators tied to the specific exposure. Track near-miss reports by location to see whether the blind corners stop generating events; audit pedestrian walkway compliance and barrier integrity weekly; review speed data if telematics are installed; and observe crossing behavior at shift change. A short post-control inspection should verify mirrors are adjusted, markings are visible, and gates operate.
Do not use the absence of injuries as proof. A drop in near-misses at the four corners, combined with stable or rising reporting overall, is a better signal. Also check temporary workers specifically, since they are the least familiar with traffic rules. If reports shift to a new area, the controls may have displaced the risk rather than removed it.