This Trailer is Overkill?

[two_bit_score]

Of course it actually doesn't prove anything. Landscapers buy the kind of trailer they need for their job and/or what they can afford. But we don't know what the city needed that kind of trailer for, whether they needed it at all, or what else it might be used for.

And they are spending their own hard worked for money. The city is spending "tax money" which to some administrators is play money.

I've worked with governments at too many different levels not to know how the people who are spending tax money think about it. Too few of them are concerned about being frugal with it. Too many look for every excuse to get the highest upgraded item they can. They are experts at "justifying their decisions".

While there may be a "justifiable" dual purpose in having this type trailer the question behind the question is if the other item is really needed of if it was something bought to expend budget surplus at the end of a fiscal year.

In most cases waiting on more facts before jumping o a conclusion is a good idea but when it comes to government spending one can be assured of being correct about 99.9% of the time in assuming their was some self interest or fiduciary error in any government purchase that appears on it's surface to be excessive.

 

[Scooby074]

I always get a laugh at these threads talking about government waste. sure, government is wasteful.. dont get me started...

But look at it from the other side. IF this trailer prevents accidents. IF you can show your workers comp that your taking an interest in improving safety, the added cost is insignificant. Look at the big picture and the future savings.

How much do you think it costs when a guy goes out on comp? Why do companies spend thousands on ergonomic workstations that raise to prevent back strain? At the end of the day it pays. This is private industry... If it didnt pay, they wouldnt do it.

Plus it could be being used by the electricians the other 4 days a week that need it for a manlift. We dont know that.

 

[Don87]

This picture was NOT a government vehicle.:laughing:

And that pic was of the last stop on the trip, there were more than likely 2 more tractors on that triler before it left the dealership.

That trailer is justifiable.

 

[Don87]

I always get a laugh at these threads talking about government waste. sure, government is wasteful.. dont get me started...

But look at it from the other side. IF this trailer prevents accidents. IF you can show your workers comp that your taking an interest in improving safety, the added cost is insignificant. Look at the big picture and the future savings.

How much do you think it costs when a guy goes out on comp? Why do companies spend thousands on ergonomic workstations that raise to prevent back strain? At the end of the day it pays. This is private industry... If it didnt pay, they wouldnt do it.

Plus it could be being used by the electricians the other 4 days a week that need it for a manlift. We dont know that.

And this goes back to the point I made in my previous post.

If you are permitted to hire qualified workers, comp claims very rarely occur.

 

[Scooby074]

And this goes back to the point I made in my previous post.

If you are permitted to hire qualified workers, comp claims very rarely occur.

I agree, but it DOES happen. Everyday. Why not reduce the risk? In this case the difference would be approx. $5000 max (depending on where you get your prices) between this trailer and a traditional one.

Locally, the school board (yeah before anyone says more gov't waste) instituted a policy that no riding lawnmowers were to be used on slopes greater than 15*. These are experienced operators (no turnover.. guys have been there for years) yet they still made the policy....TO REDUCE RISK.

The reason to reduce risk? To save money on claims.

And, yes, there is no way to reduce ALL risk in life... but minimizing risk pays off.

 

[not2old]

My first thought was it must be new Workers Compensation Board regulations. With them, cost is not a factor. Then I considered that it would be hard for one of the workers to tell the foreman that it fell off the trailer. Don't forget that it's likely self-insured by the city.

 

[brokenot]

The proof is in the lack of landscapers who use them.

That proves nothing really. Around here, many landscapers' trailers don't have functioning lights and many aren't registered. The trailer is a "secondary' concern, and isn't nearly as important to them because it isn't the money-maker. The $$ they spend goes nto the equipment itself...not what it rides on.

While I'm not defending a municipality's decision for this trailer expense, I can tell you that I've been involved in the rental biz for about 25 years in a repair/maintenance capacity. At least as much damage is done to our equipment during loading/unloading as is done during the actual "working time" on the equipment. Lower-clearance equipment is especially susceptible. Wheels/rollers/jacks/brackets/etc. are damaged all the time by going up/down ramps. What happens when traction isn't optimal? The operator takes a run at it. What happens if they aren't totally in control during a ramp descent? Banging and bouncing when the equipment hits the ground.

If this trailer isn't used for anything other than mowing equipment, well then....maybe they're just tired of repairing or replacing wheels/rollers/decks that are constantly getting damaged when the mowers are being moved from one place to another.

 

[Grateful11]

Folks are making a lot of "assumptions" here that may . . . or may not . . . be close to right.:laughing: I know government organizations waste a lot of money, but then a lot of other companies do, too. I think it would be interesting if the OP asked the proper city department why they have that particular kind of trailer. Sure, they could use a cheaper trailer for the ZTR, but if they have to have that kind of trailer for some other piece of equipment, why not a dual use instead of also buying a cheaper trailer for the ZTR?

I agree!

 

[Iowachild]

Folks are making a lot of "assumptions" here that may . . . or may not . . . be close to right.:laughing: I know government organizations waste a lot of money, but then a lot of other companies do, too. I think it would be interesting if the OP asked the proper city department why they have that particular kind of trailer. Sure, they could use a cheaper trailer for the ZTR, but if they have to have that kind of trailer for some other piece of equipment, why not a dual use instead of also buying a cheaper trailer for the ZTR?

I agree government wastes other people's money, private companies waste their own money and that is their prerogative!:2cents:

 

[ray66v]

I am sure that landscapers get injured loading and unloading their equipment, they also get injured using their equipment, which is all stuff that can cause injury if not used properly. You can't make working with dangerous equipment totally safe.

Careless, stupid, and ignorant people always find a way to somehow cause an accident.

If the only way you can keep these workers from getting injured, is to buy them this type of trailer, you shouldn't be surprised when they just do some other stupid thing, because without the proper training and supervision, I guarantee they will.

 

[Diamondpilot]

Looks like overkill to me but like was stated if used for other purposes then good for them. Would be great for a small roller, ect.

Chris

 

[2manyrocks]

Looks like a complicated trailer. Wonder how long it will take the city workers to tear it up and then it'll be sold surplus.

 

[aczlan]

I would guess that it is a dual use trailer. I dont think that the difference in ease of use/risk would be enough to make it worth buying that style trailer, but if they have a forklift, manlift or roller that needs to be transprted, those are difficult to run on a normal trailer.

Aaron Z

 

[2458n]

Tennant ride on sweepers really like these trailers as well.

 

[Robert_in_NY]

adapting this style of trailer isnt a bad thing, it could very well be dual use. Yes most contractors dont use them... BUT thats because they are cheap.

These trailers are safer. Alot of large companies spare no expense when it comes to things like this that increase safety.... AND more importantly pay dividends when it comes time to renew their workers comp insurance.

Take companies that use ATVs as part of their work. Like Hydro and pipeline companies.

Where you and I might use a plank or even a trifold ramp, they have ones that are permanently attached to the truck and fold out. They are 4' wide and take the place of the tailgate.

Where a plank is free and a aluminum trifold is $300 these are $1000... But theyre safer. Ive kicked out a trifold (with safety ratchet straps no less) and ended up with a sit-on lawnmower on top of me and hurt my back pretty bad. If i did this on the job i probably would have been off. How much would that have cost the company, more than the $700 difference between the ramps for sure. A permanently attached ramp would have prevented this accident... but at a higher initial cost than the trifold. The same principal applies to the drop deck trailer. People have been killed and severely injured loading machines into the back of trucks and trailers due to ramp failure or slipping off a wet ramp.

The ramps that are attached to the trucks that the utilities use are more then a safety thing. Those guys load and unload their machines a lot and those ramps are not only safer but also faster to use. So the workers get the atvs off faster and back on quicker and head to the next spot with as little down time as possible. Just time saved is worth the price difference, the added safety is a bonus.

 

[Scooby074]

The ramps that are attached to the trucks that the utilities use are more then a safety thing. Those guys load and unload their machines a lot and those ramps are not only safer but also faster to use. So the workers get the atvs off faster and back on quicker and head to the next spot with as little down time as possible. Just time saved is worth the price difference, the added safety is a bonus.

Good point on the time savings, however i dont think ive ever seen these guys rush too much

 

[Robert_in_NY]

Good point on the time savings, however i dont think ive ever seen these guys rush too much

Around here its the gas well tenders who use those ramps the most. They don't rush but they still get more done with those ramps

 

[acme97]

I don't know about the particulars in the case mentioned, but I feel silly sometimes hauling my ZTR or an ATV on a 7k 18' tandem axle trailer-but that's the trailer I need for my tractor. It would nice to have a smaller trailer for those lighter uses, but not nice enough to spend the money for one-at least on my budget.

My brother hauls all sorts of things-like his Kubota L, lawn tractor, etc.- on a 22' 20 ton trailer-but that's what he needs for his excavating business, and he does not want to spend the money on a lighter trailer .

Will

I did the same thing this weekend. Had to rush my Z326 mower to the dealer before they closed. Loaded it on the 14K trailer. Got a few looks and stares going down the highway. Of course, then my Kubota dealer was trying to convince my wife to get that RTV 1140! She almost did, but decided to get the new Miata instead.

 

[Diamondpilot]

Good point on the time savings, however i dont think ive ever seen these guys rush too much

Now thats funny. True but funny. Only time I see our county employees rush is break time and quitting time. Oh ya, they rush to the coffee shop in the morning, lunch, and then to get a good seat in the crew truck to catch that afternoon nap.:laughing:

Chris

 

[TheTrailerGuy]

The next time I see the city maintenance manager I will ask him about the trailer and it's alternative uses.

What will they think of next? Look how you have to have TWO leaf springs for each spindle... i bet that keeps the wheel camber 'right where you need it' HA!