News

THE BENEFITS OF USING ELECTRONIC FLARES

LED BASED PRODUCTS NOW PROVIDE A SAFE, HIGHLY EFFECTIVE ALTERNATIVE TO TRADITIONAL INCENDIARY FLARES. IF YOU’VE EVER BEEN STUCK ON THE SIDE OF THE HIGHWAY FIXING A FLAT, ESPECIALLY AT NIGHT, YOU KNOW WHAT A DANGEROUS SITUATION THAT CAN BE. USING A CHEMICAL BASED FLARE ALSO POSES GREAT RISK TO USERS, BURNING AT HIGH TEMPERATURES FOR 15 TO 30 MINUTES. IN ADDITION, TRADITIONAL FLARES CAN ONLY BE USED ON THE GROUND, GREATLY REDUCING VISIBILITY TO ONCOMING MOTORISTS.According to a technical memorandum by the Canadian Police Research Centre, alternatives to highway flares were examined due to their inherent problems which include: 1. They are not environmentally safe. 2. They pose an extreme hazard at oil gas spills. 3. They can damage/burn uniforms and equipment. 4. The spike remnants must be picked up after every burn. 5. The striker and cap must be disposed of after use. 6. They are difficult to extinguish after each burn. 7. The fumes are offensive and noxious. 8. A case of flares is heavy to handle and hard to store. 9. The brilliance at night is a hazard to passing motorists often distracting on-coming drivers.LED FLARE ALTERNATES ON THE OTHER HAND, ARE COMPLETELY SAFE, NON-POLLUTING AND REUSABLE. MANY TRAFFIC STUDIES TAKEN HAVE PROVEN LED SAFETY LIGHTS USED AT AN ELEVATED HEIGHT OF 3FT OR MORE, ARE INFINITELY MORE EFFECTIVE AT ATTRACTING MOTORIST’S ATTENTION VS FLARES MOUNTED AT GROUND LEVEL. ELEVATING A WARNING SIGNAL BY AS LITTLE AS 3 FEET CAN INCREASE MOTORIST VISIBILITY FROM ¼ MILE TO UP TO 1 MILE. For more information: VISIT http://www.lumastrobe.ca/products-1/by-application/roadside-emergency-collection/

USING VISUAL WARNING AIDS TO REDUCE FORKLIFT ACCIDENTS AND WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION CLAIMS

According to OSHA forklift safety, on average over 100,000 workers are injured every year in forklift accidents. 35% of all forklift accidents involve unsuspecting workers in warehouse aisles who were either run over or pinned against another object. In most of these cases, there was no warning system in place to possibly prevent the accident from occurring.Under the OSHA Act, 29 u.s.c. § 654 (a)(1), also known as the general duty clause, to furnish employment and a place of employment, free from recognized hazards that are causing or are likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees, where employees are exposed to hazards, including but not limited to, struck by, caught-in-between and crushing by the forklift. B56.1-2009 shows that industry recognizes this hazard and that equipping trucks with sound-producing and visual devices are feasible means to abate this hazard. An employer whose workplace presents this hazard and has not taken feasible steps to mitigate this hazard may be in violation of the general duty clause.A good safety policy stipulates the use of warning lights on all lift vehicles and in warehouse aisles as a warning to forklift operators that a worker is in the area.More useful information is available atwww.oshasafetymanagement.com/blog/forklift-safetywww.lumastrobe.ca/warehouse-safety