Posted by
A Photo of The Houston Crane Incident
An article published by the associated press recently cited that an elderly couple was watching a steeple being placed on top of a church when the crane fell. An 80 year old man died while a 78 year old woman was transported to the hospital. Referencing the recent incidents in Las Vegas, New York, and Houston, I have a question.
Is the recent spike in crane accidents normal variation in incidents or a true spike in crane failures? What do you think?
Category: Accidents, Current Events, Pictures
6 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Perhaps you can use the BLS data below to get to an answer:
72 Deaths Associated With Cranes in 2006;
BLS Finds Average of 78 From 2003 to 2005
Crane-related worker deaths totaled 72 in 2006, down from an average of 78 fatalities per year from 2003 to 2005, the Bureau of Labor Statistics said July 30.
No multiple fatality incidents involving cranes occurred in 2006, the most recent year for which data is available, BLS said in a fact sheet. Six fatalities in 2005 and eight in 2004 were from multiple fatality crane incidents.
Thirty of the crane-related fatalities in 2006 involved being struck by falling objects, and of those, only nine involved being struck by the crane, BLS said. The other fatalities occurred when an object being moved by the crane fell onto the worker.
Mobile, truck, and rail mounted cranes and overhead cranes were involved in the majority of fatalities in 2006 when the types of cranes were specified, BLS said. In that year 26 deaths involved mobile, truck, or rail mounted cranes, while 19 involved overhead cranes.
No explanation for the decline in 2006 deaths was given.
Workers most likely to be killed in crane accidents in 2006 included construction workers (10 deaths); electricians (eight deaths); and welders, cutters, solderers, and brazers (six deaths). Crane and tower operators accounted for only three fatalities in 2006, BLS said.
From 2003 to 2006, the largest number of fatal crane-related injuries occurred in Texas, with a total of 42. Florida had 27 fatalities, California 25, and Louisiana 27, BLS said.
An Occupational Safety and Health Administration draft rule to strengthen crane and derrick safety is under review by the White House Office of Management and Budget. Once in place, OSHA estimates the crane rule will prevent between 27 and 37 deaths a year.
Comment by Mark Kaszniak — August 7, 2008 @ 7:29 am
I go with crane failure. Inattention to inspection, load charts and company pressure to perform creates short cuts. It is economically driven reoccureence and getting worse.
Comment by Russ Mixon — August 7, 2008 @ 9:42 am
Mark and Russ,
Thank you both for your comments. Looking at Mark’s comments and reported numbers it appears that crane failures are definitely not a new subject nor in an upward trend but multiple fatalities could be on the rise… compared to 2006.
Looking at Russ’ comments in isolation from the numbers above about crane failures related to inspection, load charts and company pressure, you might make the case that this issue is getting worse…. at this point, I don’t know.
Fatalities and mass property destruction make the news but everyday work failures involving cranes usually do not make the news. Large incidents and fatalities usually get investigated as thoroughly as possible but everyday failures usually do not get this type of investigation. So the question is if a crane fails (mechanically or by human performance) and no one gets hurt or dies is it okay not to dig deeper to prevent it before someone does die? From Mark’s report it seems to indicate that maybe we should have gotten involved earlier.
Comment by Chris Vallee — August 7, 2008 @ 1:38 pm
Would you have to normalize the data for the amount of crane work being done?
2006 was a terrible year for the construction industry and maybe a decline in crane accidents could be related to a decline in crane work?
Also, 2007 may be much worse than average if there was much less work.
Hard to tell in you don’t know the denominator of your “rate” and just measure pure counts.
Comment by Mark Paradies — August 8, 2008 @ 12:04 pm
Mark,
At this point I would not normalize the data. I talked with Mark Kaszniak after his post and we both agreed that there was difficulty in finding common variables for the data and if they were from similar populations on cranes so that we could truly determine if this is nothing more than common variation. Some possible variables could include:
1. Crane operation time in hours … initial use, and after refurbishment. This would also pick up decline or increase in crane work.
2. Weight of Loads lifted in relation to rating
3. Crane near misses and accidents would be reported… this may be the missing variable
What other variables would you add?
Comment by Chris Vallee — August 8, 2008 @ 12:20 pm
Looks like it’s time to get a new crane!
Comment by Oklahoma Crane Rental — March 8, 2009 @ 2:39 pm