Forklift Strikes Pedestrian — Why Yellow Lines on the Floor Are Not Enough

Struck by a Reversing Forklift — When Training Alone Isn't a System

Let's talk about what happened at a National Logistics Services facility in Brampton on August 14, 2023. A worker was preparing to move a pallet of freight and entered the MHE Pathway — a shared area used by both workers on foot and forklifts and other material handling equipment, delineated by yellow lines painted on the floor. At the same time, a forklift operator — a worker from a temporary employment agency — was reversing a forklift out of a loading dock trailer. The operator did not look backward while reversing. The forklift struck the worker who had entered the pathway. The collision caused a critical injury. A Ministry investigation found that both workers had received training on the hazards associated with pedestrians working near forklifts. The company pointed to this training as part of its safety system. But the court found that training was not the failure — the failure was in the system itself. The MHE Pathway was a shared zone with no physical separation between pedestrians and operating equipment. Yellow lines on the floor are a marking. They are not a control. They do not stop a forklift from entering the pedestrian path. They do not stop a worker from stepping into the equipment path. National Logistics Services pleaded guilty in the Ontario Court of Justice in Brampton and was fined $70,000 plus a 25% victim fine surcharge.

What the Law Requires

Section 25(2)(h) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act requires employers to take every precaution reasonable in the circumstances for the protection of a worker. Basically, what this means is simple: in a facility where forklifts and pedestrians share the same floor space, adequate separation is a legal obligation. Marking the shared zone with floor paint and training workers on the hazard is not adequate separation. Separation means that forklifts and pedestrians cannot occupy the same space at the same time — through physical barriers, clearly defined and enforced exclusion zones, or timed access systems that prevent simultaneous use. The court found that National Logistics had created an MHE Pathway concept that, in practice, allowed forklifts and pedestrians to enter the same marked area at the same time. Both parties had training. That training was not sufficient to prevent a forklift operator from reversing without looking when a pedestrian was in the path. The system relied on two workers both performing correctly, in the same moment, every time. That is not a control — it is a hope. In the court's view, this was not an unavoidable collision — it was the predictable outcome of a pedestrian-forklift separation system that relied on painted lines and individual behaviour rather than physical or procedural controls. The $70,000 fine reflects the company's obligation to implement adequate separation, not just mark the floor and train the crew.

What Supervisors Must Do

• Conduct a pedestrian-forklift interaction audit of your facility; identify every location where workers on foot and operating forklifts can be in the same space at the same time
• At loading dock areas specifically, implement a positive control before any forklift reverses out of a trailer; this should include a visual check requirement that supervisors can verify and enforce
• Enforce a rule that forklifts reversing out of trailers must come to a complete stop and make a visual confirmation of the path before moving into the MHE Pathway
• If your facility uses temporary workers or agency staff for forklift operation, ensure they receive your facility-specific traffic management orientation before their first shift — not just a general forklift certification
• Keep asking: 'If a forklift operator made an error right now, and a pedestrian made a different error at the same moment, what physical control would prevent a collision?'

What Employers Must Do

• Transition from marked shared zones to physically separated pedestrian and equipment pathways wherever possible; physical separation is the highest-order control for pedestrian-forklift hazards
• Where shared zones cannot be eliminated, implement procedural controls beyond floor markings: pedestrian-activated warning lights, motion sensors, mandatory stop-and-look procedures at all intersection points
• Require that forklift operators reversing out of trailers or around blind corners use a spotter unless the area can be confirmed clear through a mirror or sensor system
• Review your agency and temporary worker onboarding process for mobile equipment operators; facility-specific traffic management must be part of orientation before first shift
• Include pedestrian-forklift separation effectiveness in your annual COR audit; if the control in place is floor markings only, it must be upgraded
• After any near-miss or collision involving pedestrians and mobile equipment, review whether the separation system — not the individual behaviour — was adequate; update accordingly

How to Use This Case in Your Workplace

This case is a valuable safety conversation starter. Use it during toolbox talks for all logistics and warehouse workers, monthly safety meetings with forklift operators and supervisors, and facility layout reviews when assessing pedestrian-equipment separation. Walk your team through the facility and ask: 'At every point where a forklift can reverse or turn, is there a physical control that prevents a pedestrian from being in that path — or are we relying only on training and attention?' 'What happens when a temporary worker who hasn't learned our traffic pattern enters the MHE Pathway at the same time as a reversing forklift?' 'If a forklift operator forgets to look backward for just one reverse cycle, what stops a collision?' This case reinforces a simple message: forklift-pedestrian separation is not a training problem — it is a system design problem. Training matters, but it cannot be the last line of defence when a collision is foreseeable.