REPORT#: 19MA072 REPORT DATE: December 18, 2023 

Rigging Crew Leader Crushed by Light Tower 

Weight — Massachusetts 

SUMMARY 

On December 28, 2019, a male 34-year-old rigging crew leader was 

fatally injured while assisting in the construction of a stage light 

tower. He was helping to position a light tower ballast weight when 

it slid off the forks of an all-terrain telehandler and crushed him. 

READ THE FULL REPORT> (p.3) 

CONTRIBUTING FACTORS 

Key contributing factors identified in this investigation include: 

• Working within the fall zone of hoisted materials 

• Failure to conduct a job hazard analysis 

• Failure to provide required training to equipment operators 

• Lack of coordination of safety and health programs at a multiemployer worksite 

LEARN MORE> (p.9) 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

Massachusetts FACE investigators concluded that to help prevent 

similar occurrences, employers should: 

• Ensure that employees are not within the fall zone of material 

being transported. 

• Ensure employees routinely perform a job hazard analysis prior 

to the start of a job task. 

• Ensure that employees who operate equipment are properly 

trained. 

• Ensure that multi-employer worksite employers coordinate to 

develop, implement, and enforce safety and health programs at 

a shared site. 

LEARN MORE> (p.9) 

INCIDENT HIGHLIGHTS 

DATE: 

December 28, 2019 

TIME: 

9:00 a.m. 

VICTIM: 

34-year-old rigging 

assembly crew leader 

INDUSTRY/NAICS CODE: 

Staging and rigging 

equipment rental and 

construction/532490 

EMPLOYER: 

Commercial staging and 

rigging company 

SAFETY & TRAINING: 

Employer provided 

comprehensive training 

SCENE: 

Outdoor temporary 

entertainment venue 

LOCATION: 

Massachusetts 

EVENT TYPE: 

Struck by falling object 
Page 2 

Fatality Assessment and Control Evaluation (FACE) Program 

The Massachusetts Department of Public Health, in cooperation with the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), 

conducts investigations on the causes of work-related fatalities. The goal of this program, known as Massachusetts Fatality Assessment and 

Control Evaluation (Massachusetts FACE) is to prevent future fatal workplace injuries. Massachusetts FACE aims to achieve this goal by 

identifying and studying the risk factors that contribute to workplace fatalities, by recommending intervention strategies, and by disseminating 

prevention information to employers and employees. 

NIOSH funded state-based FACE Programs currently include: California, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, New York, Oregon, and 

Washington. 

Email | Website 
INTRODUCTION 

On December 28, 2019, a male 34-year-old White non-Hispanic rigging crew leader was killed while assisting in the 

construction of a stage light tower. The victim was guiding the positioning of a concrete and steel ballast (weight) that 

was the base for the light tower. He was reportedly looking underneath the ballast as it was being moved with an allterrain telehandler operated by an employee of another company. The ballast slid off the telehandler’s forks, striking 

and crushing the victim. Coworkers at the scene rolled the weight off the victim. A coworker placed a call for emergency 

medical services (EMS). The victim was pronounced dead at the scene. 

The Massachusetts FACE Program learned of the incident from local media on the day of the event and initiated steps to 

collect relevant documentation to research the event. Several records were reviewed in the course of the investigation. 

The records included: data from the electronic death registration system (death certificate), police and EMS records, 

additional news coverage, and records from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. The FACE investigator 

spoke with a representative from the company that employed the victim. 

EMPLOYER 

The direct employer of the victim was a commercial staging and rigging rental company that specialized in setting up 

staging and theater equipment for entertainment events. The business had been in operation for over 30 years, 

originally forming in a neighboring state in 1986. By 1999 the company had opened its first branch in Massachusetts. The 

current owner bought the company in 2015. The company’s main task is providing staging and rigging rentals, products,

and services to entertainment events for clientele primarily in the New England area. The company had 32 employees in 

total at the time of the incident, with approximately 15 workers in Massachusetts. The workforce consisted of sales and 

project management, on-site leads or installation site supervisors (which included the victim), warehouse staff, and a 

driver. 

In general, employees worked shifts based on event scheduling and using an on-call system. Work weeks could total 

between 70 and 80 hours per week. Most employees worked during the weekend. For the victim, 40-plus hour weeks 

and weekend shifts were common. 

An event planning company was the lead organization for an event scheduled to take place on December 31, 2019. The 

event planning company had contracted with a lighting company to have a temporary outdoor entertainment venue 

installed in a public park. The staging and rigging rental company that employed the victim was subcontracted by that 

lighting company to provide the stage. Another production company was also subcontracted by the lighting company to 

provide construction labor for the site, including stagehands from a local theater and stage crew union. That company 

employed the operator of the telehandler and other workers who helped assemble the stage and components under the 

supervision of the rental company. 

At the time of the incident, the victim’s employer had workers’ compensation insurance. As required by Massachusetts 

law, all employers operating in Massachusetts are required to carry workers’ compensation insurance for their

employees and for themselves if they are an employee of the company. The requirement applies no matter the number 

of hours worked or the number of employees. At the time of the incident, employees of the company were not 

represented by a union. 

REPORT#: 19MA072 Page 3 
WRITTEN SAFETY PROGRAMS and TRAINING 

At the time of the incident, the company that employed the victim had a comprehensive safety and health program. The 

program was comprised of a series of equipment and operations training. These trainings were specific to the 

employee’s job tasks. Non-supervisory workers were provided with OSHA 10-hour training, and supervisors were 

provided with OSHA 30-hour training. In addition to this training, some workers had the following equipment and 

operations training renewed yearly: forklift training; aerial lift training; fall prevention trainings, including rescue and 

recovery; rope access certification training; and training on the principles of overhead rigging. Training was also provided 

by the manufacturer of the rigging equipment. Some workers were also CPR certified and had training in first aid. 

The production company that employed the operator of the telehandler had a brief written safety and health program. 

The operator had been trained and certified to use certain formats of forklifts. However, he was not trained or certified 

to use the variable-reach-telehandler involved in the incident. 

As discussed in the recommendations below, a job hazard analysis (JHA) or safety assessment of the worksite, materials, 

and equipment was not conducted by either the victim and his company or by the production company whose worker 

was operating the telehandler. Conducting JHAs is an important process that was lacking from both companies’ safety 

programs and procedures. Health and safety activities at the site were not coordinated between the multiple employers 

that were present. 

WORKER INFORMATION 

The victim was a 34-year-old White non-Hispanic male. The victim was hired in 2012 and had been a full-time employee 

at this staging and rigging company since 2013. His title at the time of his death was Crew Chief, a supervisory role for 

which he oversaw the assembly and worked with the hired crew. His typical work week ranged from 70 to 80 hours per 

week. The victim often took weekend shifts. The victim’s previous work experience was in theater set construction. The 

victim had completed the OSHA 30-hour training. He had also completed job trainings on fall prevention and aerial lift 

training. He had certifications in rope access, CPR, and first aid. He also had previous training in forklift operation and 

had a hoisting license to operate forklifts himself which was roughly one month past expiration at the time of the event. 

EQUIPMENT 

Seven light-supporting towers and a stage were being set up at the site. The stage consisted of eight or ten modular 

platforms that were connected together. The light towers had heavy weighted bases or ballasts that were set up on the 

ground and eight-foot sections of aluminum truss that were assembled to make the towers and cross members. 

An image of the completed stage and rigging setup is shown in Figure 1. Additional light towers were set up around the 

venue. 

The ballast weight that was involved in the incident weighed 3,200 pounds (Figure 2). It was a 36” cube consisting of 

concrete with rebar reinforcement within a welded steel plate shell. The sides of the steel shell were 3/8” thick and the 

top was 5/8” thick. Holes and connections for anchoring the rigging components were built into the ballast. Various 

connection pieces are visible in Figure 3 which shows the ballast in storage at the company. While some weights used by 

the company had cutouts or holes that ran through the weight for use when lifting with a forklift, the weight involved in 

the incident had four feet and a gap between the feet for lifting, as seen in Figure 2. 

REPORT#: 19MA072 Page 4 
Figure 1 – Stage and rigging with lights (image from First Night Boston X/Twitter, @firstnight) 

 

Figure 2 – Ballast weight (FACE investigator photo) Figure 3 – Rigging components (FACE investigator photo) 

REPORT#: 19MA072 Page 5 
Also involved in the incident was a diesel-powered four-wheel steer/four-wheel drive all-terrain telehandler (Figure 4). 

This type of equipment is a class 7 rough terrain forklift with variable reach. It had a maximum lifting capacity of 5,500 

pounds with the boom retracted. It had a lifting height of 20 feet and a load capacity of 3,900 pounds for vertical lifts. 

With the boom extended to its full reach of 11.5 feet, the lifting capacity was 1,750 pounds. The vehicle was six feet and 

two inches tall and six feet wide at its widest point at the tires. The wheelbase was seven feet and ten inches from axle 

to axle, and the overall length of the base unit was 13 feet and one inch plus the length of any attachment. The 

telehandler was equipped with a fork attachment. 

The telehandler had three selectable steering modes: two-wheel steer; four-wheel steer that allowed for tighter turns; 

and crab steer that allowed for sideways movement. 

Figure 4 – Telehandler (manufacturer image) Figure 5 – Telehandler (manufacturer image) 

REPORT#: 19MA072 Page 6 
Figure 6 – Telehandler forks and backrest (scene footage) 

INCIDENT SCENE 

The incident occurred at a park in a city center (Figure 7). The open area public space was being converted into an 

entertainment venue (Figure 8). The paver stone space that held the entertainment rigging and staging was 

approximately 12,200 square feet of the outdoor space. The lawn space in front of the stage area was approximately 

16,500 square feet. The outdoor cobblestone and green space were mostly flat. 

Figure 7 – Park and paver stone area where the stage was erected (FACE investigator photo) 

REPORT#: 19MA072 Page 7 
Figure 8 – Stage and venue in use (image from First Night Boston X/Twitter, @firstnight) 

WEATHER 

The weather at the time of the incident was approximately 45 degrees Fahrenheit, 63% humidity, with a nine miles per 

hour west wind, and clear skies [Weather Underground]. The weather is not believed to have been a factor in this 

incident. 

INVESTIGATION 

On the day of the incident, the victim arrived at the construction site at approximately 7:00 a.m. The victim was 

scheduled to work for four hours. The light tower component involved in the fatality was one of seven planned for 

installation that day. Prior to arrival, a fellow coworker had disassembled the light tower and truss from the stage for 

repositioning. The components needed to be moved approximately four feet from their current position. Compared to 

the other six light tower ballasts used by the company at the site, this weight was larger and heavier. The design of the 

slots for lifting the weight was also different: it had four feet and an open bottom, not cutouts that ran through the body 

of the weight as was the design of the smaller weights. This ballast design was new to the employee operating the 

telehandler. 

A telehandler with a fork attachment was being used to reposition the ballast. An employee of the production company 

was operating the telehandler. The evidence suggests that the victim arrived after the light tower had been dismantled 

and the ballast was about to be moved. The equipment operator lifted the ballast approximately two feet off of the 

ground to move it. The victim crouched down and was looking between the ballast and the stage deck. While the exact 

position of the ballast relative to the stage deck at that time is not known, the evidence suggests the victim was trying to 

gauge the correct final placement of the light tower ballast and was in that space to guide the repositioning. 

The weight of the ballast and its position on the telehandler caused the ballast to slide or tip off of the tines. The ballast 

first struck the victim in the head and then fell on the victim’s torso. Multiple workers at the site were able to roll the 

REPORT#: 19MA072 Page 8 
ballast off of the victim. A coworker immediately placed a call for EMS. EMS staff arrived within minutes and 

subsequently pronounced the victim deceased. 

Figure 8 – Ballast weight on its side (scene footage) 

CAUSE OF DEATH 

The medical examiner listed the cause of death as blunt force injuries of the torso. 

CONTRIBUTING FACTORS 

Occupational injuries and fatalities are often the results of one or more contributing factors or key events in a larger 

sequence of events that ultimately result in the injury or fatality. Massachusetts FACE investigators identified the 

following unrecognized hazards as key contributing factors in this incident: 

• Working within the fall zone of hoisted materials 

• Failure to conduct a job hazard analysis 

• Failure to provide required training to equipment operators 

• Lack of coordination of safety and health programs at a multi-employer worksite 

RECOMMENDATIONS/DISCUSSION 

Recommendation #1: Employers should ensure that employees are not within the fall zone of material being 

transported. 

Discussion: The fall zone of an object is the potential path the object will take if it tips or falls uncontrollably. The higher 

an object is lifted, the larger the fall zone becomes. Falling object hazards are a common concern in several work 

settings, such as construction, tree care, and stone slab transport. These hazards can exist when materials are moved 

using equipment. In general industry, OSHA regulation 1910.178 (m)(2) Powered Industrial Trucks requires no employee 

to be permitted underneath or passing underneath components or loads held by a powered industrial truck, such as a 

telehandler. Several preventative measures can be implemented to ensure the safety of employees. Ensuring employees 

are not positioned within the fall zone of an object will help prevent employees from being struck or crushed by a 

dropped object. Keeping the load low to the ground and no higher than is necessary to safely operate the equipment is a 

REPORT#: 19MA072 Page 9 
way to reduce the fall zone and hazard. Additionally, employers should ensure that transported materials are properly 

secured and stable prior to transport. 

In this case, the telehandler operator was attempting to move the ballast approximately four feet from its initial 

position. The telehandler had lifted the ballast approximately two feet from the ground. The weight of the ballast and its 

position on the forks made it unstable, resulting in the ballast sliding off the forks. It is unknown if the span of the forks 

on the telehandler had been adjusted to optimize stability when moving the larger weight. It is also unknown if the forks 

had been appropriately tipped backward in order to stabilize the load against the backrest. In addition, the load could 

have been moved at a lower height, close to the ground. 

Recommendation #2: Employers should ensure employees routinely perform a job hazard analysis prior to the start of 

a job task. 

Discussion: A job hazard analysis (JHA) is a method for systematically analyzing a job task for potential hazards. A hazard 

is any situation that could result in injury or illness if left uncontrolled. When conducting a JHA, an employee considers 

the interconnected relationship between the worker, the task, the tools, and the work environment. The purpose of a 

JHA is to identify potential hazards prior to the start of a task to reduce or eliminate the hazard(s). 

The first phase in a JHA is determining each step within a job task, including the necessary equipment and tools. 

Following the identification of each step, workers should identify hazards or potential hazards and the appropriate 

equipment to be used to complete the task. When new equipment is introduced to workers, they should review the 

owner’s manual and warning labels provided by the manufacturer. In addition, employers should ensure that employees 

have completed all necessary trainings to use the new equipment prior to the start of the job task. 

A safety and health workplace plan based on a JHA should be developed by the employer and followed wherever 

workers are assigned tasks. Identification of on-the-job hazards allows for preventative measures to be taken to reduce 

or eliminate any potential job hazards facing workers. Preventative measures could include procedure modifications, 

additional training, or the use of personal protective equipment. JHAs are a proactive response to on-the-job hazards. 

Neither the victim nor the worker using the telehandler conducted a JHA or specifically assessed this job site for hazards. 

In this case, executing a JHA would have identified the use of new equipment, the larger and heavier ballast, and 

allowed for consideration of the procedures used to move the ballast. A JHA would also have detailed the type of forklift 

used at the site and identified that the all-terrain telehandler was a different class of forklift, requiring specific training 

for the operator. 

Recommendation #3: Employers should ensure that employees who operate equipment are properly trained. 

Discussion: OSHA requires that operators of equipment like the telehandler involved in this incident be properly trained. 

The operator must have demonstrated competent operation of the equipment after that training. The training is 

required to have several elements that are specific to the particular equipment. These elements include, but are not 

limited to, general equipment operation and the specific controls and instruments of the unit, steering and 

maneuvering, visibility and restrictions on visibility that may be caused by a load, and fork or attachment operation and 

limitations. Other required training elements include vehicle capacity, vehicle stability, surface conditions, load stability, 

REPORT#: 19MA072 Page 10 
and interactions with other workers on foot. The employer must certify and document when the worker has been 

trained. 

In addition, in Massachusetts, the operators of hoisting equipment, which includes the telehandler involved in this 

incident, are required to obtain a specific operator’s license issued by the Office of Public Safety and Inspections. 

Obtaining a license to operate hoisting machinery requires training and passing a written or practical examination. 

Similar to the OSHA training requirements, the state license is for specific classes and types of equipment. A telehandler 

with an extending boom is a different type of forklift that requires a different license. 

In this case, the equipment operator was appropriately trained to operate a different type of forklift and not the allterrain telehandler. The ground conditions at the site consisted of paved areas, pavers, and packed soil. It may have 

been appropriate to use a different forklift class, on which the operator was trained, at the site instead of the 

telehandler. The scope of the project and materials, as well as available equipment and trained operators, should be 

considered during project planning and implementation. Ensuring that equipment operator training is complete is a 

critical component of an employer’s safety and health program. 

Recommendation #4: Employers should ensure that multi-employer worksite employers coordinate to develop, 

implement, and enforce safety and health programs at a shared site. 

Discussion: Worksites with more than one employer require more oversight for the safety and health of all employees. 

When employees from multiple entities are performing job tasks within the same site, they are being exposed to all 

hazards on that site. It is each employer’s responsibility to implement safety precautions to protect all parties present on 

a site. Under OSHA’s Multi-Employer Citation Policy, employers have an obligation to identify, prevent, and control for 

hazards present on a multi-employer worksite. Each employer’s active prevention of hazardous worksites includes the 

discovery of hazardous conditions, the periodic inspection of the worksite, and the installation or maintenance of 

safety/health equipment or devices. 

Ensuring the health and safety of employees on multi-employer worksites requires diligent oversight on all supervisory 

levels. The employers should collectively develop, implement, and enforce safety programs. A collaborative, proactive 

approach to site safety will help ensure the health and safety of all employees. In this incident, having coordinated 

safety and health programs, which included the completion of JHAs, would have informed all employees of the 

equipment being used, both the larger ballast and the telehandler. 

Having a comprehensive safety and health program is essential to maintaining a safe workplace. A safety and health 

program should include the systematic identification, evaluation, and prevention or control of both general workplace 

hazards and the hazards of specific jobs and tasks. The core elements of an effective safety and health program are 

management leadership, worker participation, hazard identification and assessment, hazard prevention and control, 

education and training, and program evaluation and improvement. The program should outline safe work practices 

workers are expected to adhere to, specific safety protection for all tasks workers perform, how workers can identify 

and avoid hazards, and who workers should contact when safety and health issues or questions arise. The program 

should also include an explanation of the workers’ rights to protection in the workplace. 

REPORT#: 19MA072 Page 11 
When developing a safety and health program, employers should start by performing a general hazard analysis of tasks 

routinely performed by employees. Those findings should be incorporated into the comprehensive program. Employers 

should also use their employees’ expertise throughout the program development process, and eventually during the 

updating process, by seeking employee input. Once the program is developed, employers should ensure that they have 

fully and effectively implemented their safety and health program by routinely performing assessments of tasks and 

immediately addressing any observed unsafe conditions. The program should also be updated when safety concerns 

arise and when new equipment, tasks and chemicals are introduced into the workplace. 

Routine training should be provided to all employees on the program’s topics and procedures, and the training should 

also include hazard recognition and the avoidance of unsafe conditions. All training provided to employees should be 

documented. Training ensures that workers know how to safely perform required job tasks. Trainings should be 

performed by a competent person, which is defined by OSHA as “one who is capable of identifying existing and 

predictable hazards in the surroundings or working conditions which are unsanitary, hazardous, or dangerous to 

employees, and who has authorization to take prompt corrective measures to eliminate them.” Any training needs to be 

provided in the employee’s preferred language. This means the training must be provided in the language(s) and at the 

literacy level(s) of the employees. 

The Massachusetts Department of Labor Standards (DLS) offers free consultation services to help small employers 

improve their safety and health programs, identify hazards, and train employees. DLS can be contacted at 508-616-0461. 

More information about DLS can be found on their website at mass.gov/dos/consult. 

The Massachusetts Department of Industrial Accidents (DIA) has grants available for providing workplace health and 

safety training to employers and employees. Any company covered by the Massachusetts Workers’ Compensation

Insurance Law is eligible to apply for these grants. 

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES 

The Center for Construction Research and Training — CPWR and CDC-NIOSH infographic How Heavy is Deadly?. 

Equipment Safety: Forklifts Toolbox Talk. DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 2022-147. 

Occupational Safety and Health Administration Powered Industrial Trucks (Forklift) eTool. 

The Center for Construction Research and Training — CPWR Pre-Task Planning Assessment Checklist. 

Department of Labor Standards (DLS), On-site Consultation Program, mass.gov/on-site-consultation-program. 

Forklift Safety Guide, State of Washington, April 2001, depts.washington.edu/wineryhs/Content/Forklift Safety 

Guide.pdf. 

DISCLAIMER 

Mention of any company or product does not constitute endorsement by Massachusetts FACE and the National Institute 

for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). In addition, citations to websites external to Massachusetts FACE and 

NIOSH do not constitute Massachusetts FACE and NIOSH endorsement of the sponsoring organizations or their 

REPORT#: 19MA072 Page 12 
programs or products. Furthermore, Massachusetts FACE and NIOSH is not responsible for the content of these 

websites. All web addresses referenced in this document were accessible as of the publication date. 

REFERENCES 

Weather Underground. Weather History. Massachusetts: TWC Product and Technology LLC. 

OSHA Code of Federal Regulations. 1910.178 Powered Industrial Trucks and (l) Operator training. 

OSHA Job Hazard Analysis and sample form. 

OSHA Hazard Identification and Assessment. 

Code of Massachusetts Regulations, Office of Public Safety and Inspections: 520 CMR 6 Hoisting Machinery and License 

type class guide. 

OSHA Directive 02-00-124 Multi-Employer Citation Policy. 

OSHA Recommended Practices for Safety and Health Programs. 

REPORT#: 19MA072 Page 13