Any time a writer receives reader input, whether critical or complimentary, it’s a cause for celebration. First, it proves people are reading your stuff. Second, it gives you a topic for another column. Consultant and trainer Bill Smalley made my day when I received his recent e-mail. It was in response to my April column on fellow trainer Jim Shephard’s story about re-counterweighting lift trucks to handle heavier shipments at the dock. Here’s what Mr. Smalley wrote:

“If he is supposed to be an exponent of forklift safety, he should have at least removed the manufacturers’ specification plate, then sent the plate to the manufacturer and told the engineers what he did with their forklift. Rest assured they would be on the next plane to his office to correct the situation. In other words, this sounds like a lawsuit waiting to happen.”

Mr. Smalley cited OSHA’s General Requirements for powered industrial trucks, Section 1910.178(a)(4) which states:

“Modifications and additions which affect capacity and safe operation shall not be performed by the customer or user without manufacturer’s prior written approval. Capacity, operation, and maintenance instruction plates, tags, or decals shall be changed accordingly.”

Mr. Smalley predicted that in the next three or four months we will be contacted by people from all over the world on this issue.

Allow me to stem that tide and tell “the rest of the story” (for all you Paul Harvey fans).

The company in question had just been purchased. It changed its product line and a key component added several hundred pounds to its total weight. Unfortunately, the company’s lift trucks didn’t have the capacity to handle the heavier loads. Shephard advised this company that by adding extra counterweight to the existing chassis it could get bigger lift trucks out of the existing fleet and maybe a few more years of use out of them before having to buy new ones.

Shephard knew this would have to be a legal temporary fix and that the forklift OEM would have to approve the re-rating of the trucks.

“We got the factory involved and they gave us the amount of weight that could be added to the truck,” Shephard assured me. “They also re-data-plated the machines and gave us new capacities to match the capacity of the attachment.”

What made Shephard believe this to be a logical move for his client was that the capacity of said attachment was still well within the rated capacity this company needed. It was apparent this company was dealing with a bad marriage from the start. When the attachment was added to the vehicle it resulted in a net truck capacity that was less than the rated capacity of the attachment. Shephard and his client worked with the OEM’s dealer to re-counterweight the forklift so its net capacity equaled the attachment’s. All data plates were replaced with new ones detailing the updated capacity ratings.

This bought the company about eight more months to get into the financial shape to afford a new fleet. There was no loss of warranty, support, or backup from the OEM. In return, this company ended up buying a new fleet from this dealer because it helped them through this. Happy ending. You folks with the torches can go home now.