Thursday, 17 December 2009
RHSS would like to wish everyone a Merry Christmas!
Merry Christmas from all at RHSS Limited!
We are available throughout the Christmas Holidays and over the New
Year through our 24/7 on call service:
T: 0208 274 2926
E: info@rhssltd.co.uk
Monday, 7 December 2009
London fire demonstrates need for Fire Risk Assessment
About 310 people were forced to leave their homes after a fire broke out in south London in the early hours on 26 November.
More than 150 fire fighters tackled the fire which engulfed a construction site in Carisbrooke Gardens in Peckham at about 0430 GMT. It spread to two blocks of maisonettes and a destroyed a pub. Ten people, including two police officers, have received hospital treatment for minor injuries. Police said four of the injured were taken for treatment by ambulance, while four others arrived at hospital asking for assistance. The two police officers were treated for the effects of smoke inhalation.
A local resident, identified only as Elizabeth, was one of those who had to leave her home. She told BBC London 94.9FM: "We just woke up into this total blaze from the construction site across the road and we were told to leave.
"There was flying debris all over the place and there were cars ablaze and we were told to get out of the area."
John Osagie, 31, said he saw the fire when he came back from work in the early hours. He said: "I stood there and waited for the fire brigade to turn up. They tried to stop it but it was getting worse and worse. Then they evacuated everybody.
"I was scared and I had to take some of my stuff and come and stand out in the cold." He said he did not know whether his home had been damaged.
The fire, which began on a development where 39 flats were being built, has damaged property and buildings in Sumner Road and Rosemary Road.
Some 260 residents were being housed in temporary accommodation provided by Southwark Council and a rest centre has been opened at the Damilola Taylor Centre, East Surrey Grove.
It comes nearly five months after six people died when a fire destroyed the Lakanal House block of flats in nearby Camberwell.
These fires highlight that there is a greater need for improved fire risk assessment, not just within corporate companies, but residential properties as well. If you need need help with your fire risk assessments, call RHSS on 0208 274 2926.
More than 150 fire fighters tackled the fire which engulfed a construction site in Carisbrooke Gardens in Peckham at about 0430 GMT. It spread to two blocks of maisonettes and a destroyed a pub. Ten people, including two police officers, have received hospital treatment for minor injuries. Police said four of the injured were taken for treatment by ambulance, while four others arrived at hospital asking for assistance. The two police officers were treated for the effects of smoke inhalation.
A local resident, identified only as Elizabeth, was one of those who had to leave her home. She told BBC London 94.9FM: "We just woke up into this total blaze from the construction site across the road and we were told to leave.
"There was flying debris all over the place and there were cars ablaze and we were told to get out of the area."
John Osagie, 31, said he saw the fire when he came back from work in the early hours. He said: "I stood there and waited for the fire brigade to turn up. They tried to stop it but it was getting worse and worse. Then they evacuated everybody.
"I was scared and I had to take some of my stuff and come and stand out in the cold." He said he did not know whether his home had been damaged.
The fire, which began on a development where 39 flats were being built, has damaged property and buildings in Sumner Road and Rosemary Road.
Some 260 residents were being housed in temporary accommodation provided by Southwark Council and a rest centre has been opened at the Damilola Taylor Centre, East Surrey Grove.
It comes nearly five months after six people died when a fire destroyed the Lakanal House block of flats in nearby Camberwell.
These fires highlight that there is a greater need for improved fire risk assessment, not just within corporate companies, but residential properties as well. If you need need help with your fire risk assessments, call RHSS on 0208 274 2926.
Friday, 4 December 2009
RHSS Limited launches new website!
RHSS Limited have today launched a new website : www.rhssltd.co.uk
You can find a link to our on line safety shop for signage and basic safety equipment on our home page. (www.rhss-signs.co.uk)
You can also find information about us, our services and training.
We will soon be going live in our client area where you can find guidance, information and our newsletter as well as useful templates and discounts.
Please sign up to our blog www.rhssltd.blogspot.com so you can receive regular updates on legislation and prosecutions direct to your inbox.
You can find a link to our on line safety shop for signage and basic safety equipment on our home page. (www.rhss-signs.co.uk)
You can also find information about us, our services and training.
We will soon be going live in our client area where you can find guidance, information and our newsletter as well as useful templates and discounts.
Please sign up to our blog www.rhssltd.blogspot.com so you can receive regular updates on legislation and prosecutions direct to your inbox.
Wednesday, 2 December 2009
Engineers lacked half a century of records
A structural engineering firm that had no record of maintaining electrical equipment over a fifty year period has been fined after a worker suffered a shock when he connected a portable welder to an extension cable.
Stewart Baxter, 24, sustained burns to his fingers at DA Green & Sons factory in Whapload, Linccolnshire. Other employers of DA Green & Sons said they too had suffered minor shocks from equipment at the factory over the years.
An HSE investigation revealed much of the electrical installation was in a very poor state. Some of the electrical equipment had been installed 50 years earlier adnd DA Green had no record of it ever being tested or maintained.
"DA Green & Sons Ltd employs 50 staff whose health and safety has been at risk over many years," said HSE inspector Jo Anderson. The company admitted breaching Regulation 4(2) of the Electricity at Work Regualtions, by failing to maintain electrical systems. Spalding magistrated fined it £2750 plus £1950 costs.
Stewart Baxter, 24, sustained burns to his fingers at DA Green & Sons factory in Whapload, Linccolnshire. Other employers of DA Green & Sons said they too had suffered minor shocks from equipment at the factory over the years.
An HSE investigation revealed much of the electrical installation was in a very poor state. Some of the electrical equipment had been installed 50 years earlier adnd DA Green had no record of it ever being tested or maintained.
"DA Green & Sons Ltd employs 50 staff whose health and safety has been at risk over many years," said HSE inspector Jo Anderson. The company admitted breaching Regulation 4(2) of the Electricity at Work Regualtions, by failing to maintain electrical systems. Spalding magistrated fined it £2750 plus £1950 costs.
“Management shortcomings” to blame for fatality
A waste-transfer station must pay £105,000 in fines and costs following the death of a worker at its depot in Trowbridge, Wiltshire.
Swindon Crown Court heard that Bert Reeves, 62, was working as a totter for Shanley and Sons Ltd, when he was run over by a reversing skip lorry, on 21 June 2007.
Mr Reeves was standing in the depot’s tipping yard, operating an industrial shredding machine, which is used to process skip waste. At the same time a vehicle was delivering waste products, and the driver was attempting to park in the yard, in order to tip out the load. The driver could not see Mr Reeves as he was stood in the vehicle’s blindspot. He was struck by the rear of the vehicle, and fell underneath its wheels. Mr Reeves suffered serious head and chest injuries and died in hospital two hours later.
The HSE visited the site and issued an Improvement Notice in July 2007 for the failure to separate vehicles and pedestrians.
Inspector Liam Osbourne said: “This was a truly horrific case of a man killed doing his work in a needless and entirely preventable incident.
“Large moving vehicles on waste and recycling sites are a major risk to people who have to work on foot. Safety laws were introduced in 1992 that require managers of these sites to organise them to reduce the risk of people being killed or injured in this way.
Shanley and Sons appeared in court on 25 September and pleaded guilty to breaching s2(1) of the HSWA 1974, and reg.17 of the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992, for failing to segregate vehicles and pedestrians. It was fined £80,000 and ordered to pay costs of £25,000.
The firm mitigated that it had no previous convictions for health and safety offences, and had complied with the Improvement Notice. It has subsequently installed a one-way system, pedestrian-only areas, and signage to separate vehicles and pedestrians. It has also stationed a traffic coordinator in the yard to guide lorries into the tipping area.
After delivering his sentence Judge Hart revealed that it was his belief that Mr Reeves’ death was caused by “management shortcomings”. He said: “This case makes disturbing reading and there was a substantial gap between reasonable practice for risk management and what was actually in place.
“Failure to put in place pedestrian segregation was a direct cause of the accident. There was also a lack of management strategy and a blatant inadequacy of risk-assessment training and a safe system of work.”
Swindon Crown Court heard that Bert Reeves, 62, was working as a totter for Shanley and Sons Ltd, when he was run over by a reversing skip lorry, on 21 June 2007.
Mr Reeves was standing in the depot’s tipping yard, operating an industrial shredding machine, which is used to process skip waste. At the same time a vehicle was delivering waste products, and the driver was attempting to park in the yard, in order to tip out the load. The driver could not see Mr Reeves as he was stood in the vehicle’s blindspot. He was struck by the rear of the vehicle, and fell underneath its wheels. Mr Reeves suffered serious head and chest injuries and died in hospital two hours later.
The HSE visited the site and issued an Improvement Notice in July 2007 for the failure to separate vehicles and pedestrians.
Inspector Liam Osbourne said: “This was a truly horrific case of a man killed doing his work in a needless and entirely preventable incident.
“Large moving vehicles on waste and recycling sites are a major risk to people who have to work on foot. Safety laws were introduced in 1992 that require managers of these sites to organise them to reduce the risk of people being killed or injured in this way.
Shanley and Sons appeared in court on 25 September and pleaded guilty to breaching s2(1) of the HSWA 1974, and reg.17 of the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992, for failing to segregate vehicles and pedestrians. It was fined £80,000 and ordered to pay costs of £25,000.
The firm mitigated that it had no previous convictions for health and safety offences, and had complied with the Improvement Notice. It has subsequently installed a one-way system, pedestrian-only areas, and signage to separate vehicles and pedestrians. It has also stationed a traffic coordinator in the yard to guide lorries into the tipping area.
After delivering his sentence Judge Hart revealed that it was his belief that Mr Reeves’ death was caused by “management shortcomings”. He said: “This case makes disturbing reading and there was a substantial gap between reasonable practice for risk management and what was actually in place.
“Failure to put in place pedestrian segregation was a direct cause of the accident. There was also a lack of management strategy and a blatant inadequacy of risk-assessment training and a safe system of work.”
Will a tower crane register improve safety in the construction industry?
Question: Will a tower crane register improve safety in the construction industry?
72% = Yes
21% = No
7% = Don't know
More than two thirds believe it will.
In January this year, the HSE board that a national register of tower cranes should be established. the decision came in response to a number of high profile incidents involving tower cranes in recent years - which have resulted in eight deaths since 2000 - and a recommendation from the Work and Pension Select Committee that such a register is needed. The proposed Notification of Conventional Tower Cranes Regulations would require employers who use conventional tower cranes (those assembled on site) to give certain information to the HSE, which the executive would then make publicly available. The creation of a statutory tower crane registration scheme to improve tower crane safety and public confidence in their safety is likely to be in place by April 2010.
72% = Yes
21% = No
7% = Don't know
More than two thirds believe it will.
In January this year, the HSE board that a national register of tower cranes should be established. the decision came in response to a number of high profile incidents involving tower cranes in recent years - which have resulted in eight deaths since 2000 - and a recommendation from the Work and Pension Select Committee that such a register is needed. The proposed Notification of Conventional Tower Cranes Regulations would require employers who use conventional tower cranes (those assembled on site) to give certain information to the HSE, which the executive would then make publicly available. The creation of a statutory tower crane registration scheme to improve tower crane safety and public confidence in their safety is likely to be in place by April 2010.
Report reveals true cost of muscle and back pain
Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) account for almost half of all sick leave, both in the UK and across Europe, a study has found. No less than 49 per cent of all sickness absence is caused by MSDs, said the Fit for Work Europe report by the Work Foundation business consultancy group.
It estimates that this costs the UK economy £7 billion each year, rising to 240 billion euros across Europe.
Responding to the report, Brendon Barber, General Secretary for the Trades Union Congress (TUC), said it highlights what trade unions have been demanding for many years - access to early rehabilitation for those with muscle and back problems.
"In the UK, just 2% of workers have access to comprehensive occupational health services through their employer and most people have to rely on a referal from their GP", he said. "This can take many months, by which time the problem may be chronic".
Barber added that Britain needs a national occupational health service which identifies and treats these conditions at the earliest oppurtunity. "Workers with muscle and back conditions also need more help to return to work once they feel able to". He called for new and clear regulations, backed up by strong enforcement against those employers that are causing many of these injuries.
It estimates that this costs the UK economy £7 billion each year, rising to 240 billion euros across Europe.
Responding to the report, Brendon Barber, General Secretary for the Trades Union Congress (TUC), said it highlights what trade unions have been demanding for many years - access to early rehabilitation for those with muscle and back problems.
"In the UK, just 2% of workers have access to comprehensive occupational health services through their employer and most people have to rely on a referal from their GP", he said. "This can take many months, by which time the problem may be chronic".
Barber added that Britain needs a national occupational health service which identifies and treats these conditions at the earliest oppurtunity. "Workers with muscle and back conditions also need more help to return to work once they feel able to". He called for new and clear regulations, backed up by strong enforcement against those employers that are causing many of these injuries.
Ladder Accidents
On average 12 people a year die at work falling from ladders and over 1200 suffer major injuries. Ladders remain the most common agent involved and account for more than a quarter of all falls from height.
HSE’s key message is that that ladders should only be used for low-risk, short-duration work.
BLOW TO HEAD KILLS WORKER
A maintenance fitter lost his footing on the second rung of a ladder. His feet slipped through the rungs and he was killed when his head hit the floor as he fell backwards.
LADDER NOT SUITABLE FOR JOB
A farm worker sustained serious leg injuries when he fell from a ladder. Under supervision, the 16 -year-old trainee was trying to fix a door runner about 4.5 m from the ground. A risk assessment had shown that a fork-lift cage or a tower scaffold should be used. However, the supervisor decided to use the ladder for the short job. The young worker overreached, slipped and fell.
SUPERVISOR SETS BAD EXAMPLE
The supervisor of a team of shop fitters was concerned that the target date for completion of a project would be missed. On arriving on site to assess progress he became involved in helping to finish the job on time. He fell 2 m from an unsecured ladder after overreaching while trying to pull cabling through ductwork. He broke an ankle and a wrist in four places. The project was not completed to deadline.
CONTRACTOR FRACTURES SKULL
During refurbishment of a warehouse a contractor placed a ladder between two stands of a pallet racking so that the bottom of the ladder was resting against one rack - so that it would not slip - and the top was leaning on the other. The ladder, which was wooden, was at an angle of about 45 degrees. It broke under his weight and he fractured his skull.
INSTALLER NOW UNEMPLOYED AND NEEDING CRUTCHES
A self-employed installer fitting cavity wall insulation was working off a ladder using a heavy diamond tube drill. The ladder was not tied and was in poor condition with loose and bent rungs. He overreached and the ladder fell causing the installer to fall 3 m on to the concrete floor below. He broke his right heel and various other bones in that foot. He has subsequently undergone several bouts of major surgery but is still unable to walk without crutches and he has not worked since the accident.
LADDER SLIPPED ON WET, SLOPING GRASS
An employee of a construction and building services company was replacing house windows. He was carrying some silicon sealant up the ladder for a new window and had reached a height of about 3 m when the bottom of the ladder slipped out and the employee fell, badly fracturing his leg. The accident investigation found that the ladder had been resting on grass that sloped gently away from the building. It had been raining. The ladder was not footed as the injured man's colleague had been inside the building at the time and the ladder was not tied or secured by any other means.
HSE’s key message is that that ladders should only be used for low-risk, short-duration work.
BLOW TO HEAD KILLS WORKER
A maintenance fitter lost his footing on the second rung of a ladder. His feet slipped through the rungs and he was killed when his head hit the floor as he fell backwards.
LADDER NOT SUITABLE FOR JOB
A farm worker sustained serious leg injuries when he fell from a ladder. Under supervision, the 16 -year-old trainee was trying to fix a door runner about 4.5 m from the ground. A risk assessment had shown that a fork-lift cage or a tower scaffold should be used. However, the supervisor decided to use the ladder for the short job. The young worker overreached, slipped and fell.
SUPERVISOR SETS BAD EXAMPLE
The supervisor of a team of shop fitters was concerned that the target date for completion of a project would be missed. On arriving on site to assess progress he became involved in helping to finish the job on time. He fell 2 m from an unsecured ladder after overreaching while trying to pull cabling through ductwork. He broke an ankle and a wrist in four places. The project was not completed to deadline.
CONTRACTOR FRACTURES SKULL
During refurbishment of a warehouse a contractor placed a ladder between two stands of a pallet racking so that the bottom of the ladder was resting against one rack - so that it would not slip - and the top was leaning on the other. The ladder, which was wooden, was at an angle of about 45 degrees. It broke under his weight and he fractured his skull.
INSTALLER NOW UNEMPLOYED AND NEEDING CRUTCHES
A self-employed installer fitting cavity wall insulation was working off a ladder using a heavy diamond tube drill. The ladder was not tied and was in poor condition with loose and bent rungs. He overreached and the ladder fell causing the installer to fall 3 m on to the concrete floor below. He broke his right heel and various other bones in that foot. He has subsequently undergone several bouts of major surgery but is still unable to walk without crutches and he has not worked since the accident.
LADDER SLIPPED ON WET, SLOPING GRASS
An employee of a construction and building services company was replacing house windows. He was carrying some silicon sealant up the ladder for a new window and had reached a height of about 3 m when the bottom of the ladder slipped out and the employee fell, badly fracturing his leg. The accident investigation found that the ladder had been resting on grass that sloped gently away from the building. It had been raining. The ladder was not footed as the injured man's colleague had been inside the building at the time and the ladder was not tied or secured by any other means.
Construction firms warned not to put lives in danger after builder is left paralysed
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) is reminding construction companies of their duties to employees after a worker was paralysed in a fall.
Harold Roach fell ten feet through roof joists at a refurbishment site on Gertrude Street in Birkenhead while he was working for Property People (NW) Ltd.
The company, which is based at Stanhope House, Mark Rake, Bromborough, Wirral, was fined £92,000 and ordered to pay full costs of £11,404 at Liverpool Crown Court on Monday 20 July after pleading guilty to two health and safety offences.
Property People admitted contravening Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 by failing to ensure the safety of its employees. It also pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 3(1) of the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1995 by failing to report the injury to HSE.
The court heard that the incident happened on 23 April 2005 while joists were being removed from the ceiling of an archway, and that Property People had failed to provide a safe platform for its employees to use. Mr Roach suffered serious injuries to his back from the fall, resulting in permanent paralysis.
HSE Inspector Ian Betley said:
“The injuries Mr Roach sustained were extremely serious and he will need to use a wheelchair for the rest of his life.
“Working at height remains the single biggest cause of workplace deaths and one of the main causes of major injury. It should be managed by implementing and enforcing suitable and sufficient control measures.
“Companies are required by health and safety legislation to take reasonable measures to ensure the safety of employees and others that may be affected by their work. In this case, a suitable platform should have been used to remove the joints from
below, rather than from above. Had such steps been taken, this incident could have been avoided.
“The tragic outcome of this incident, and the subsequent fine, must act as a reminder that the results can be serious for businesses that fail to comply with the legislation.” More information about working safely at height is available at http://www.hse.gov.uk/falls/
Harold Roach fell ten feet through roof joists at a refurbishment site on Gertrude Street in Birkenhead while he was working for Property People (NW) Ltd.
The company, which is based at Stanhope House, Mark Rake, Bromborough, Wirral, was fined £92,000 and ordered to pay full costs of £11,404 at Liverpool Crown Court on Monday 20 July after pleading guilty to two health and safety offences.
Property People admitted contravening Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 by failing to ensure the safety of its employees. It also pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 3(1) of the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1995 by failing to report the injury to HSE.
The court heard that the incident happened on 23 April 2005 while joists were being removed from the ceiling of an archway, and that Property People had failed to provide a safe platform for its employees to use. Mr Roach suffered serious injuries to his back from the fall, resulting in permanent paralysis.
HSE Inspector Ian Betley said:
“The injuries Mr Roach sustained were extremely serious and he will need to use a wheelchair for the rest of his life.
“Working at height remains the single biggest cause of workplace deaths and one of the main causes of major injury. It should be managed by implementing and enforcing suitable and sufficient control measures.
“Companies are required by health and safety legislation to take reasonable measures to ensure the safety of employees and others that may be affected by their work. In this case, a suitable platform should have been used to remove the joints from
below, rather than from above. Had such steps been taken, this incident could have been avoided.
“The tragic outcome of this incident, and the subsequent fine, must act as a reminder that the results can be serious for businesses that fail to comply with the legislation.” More information about working safely at height is available at http://www.hse.gov.uk/falls/
Friday, 27 November 2009
Tower Crane Register to be Statutory soon!
Detailed recommendations for a statutorily-based tower crane register have been agreed today (25 November) by the HSE Board following a three-month public consultation. These details will now be put to Ministers for approval.
HSE received 100 responses; from trades unions, construction contractors and other stakeholders.
The new Regulations, developed by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) are intended to come into force in April 2010 and cover conventional tower cranes on construction sites.
The register is in response to increasing public concern about tower crane safety. Eight people have been killed in incidents involving tower cranes since 2000, including one member of the public.
The new proposed regulations, which are designed to be easy to follow:
1. place the duty to notify on the employer
2. require notification of the relevant information within 14 days of thorough examination of the crane
3. require cranes already erected when the Regulations come into force to be registered within 28 days
4. allow electronic notification via the HSE website.
Details that would have to be notified to HSE are:-
the site address where the tower crane is being used
the name and address of the crane owners
details needed to identify the crane
the date of its thorough examination
details of the employer for whom the examination was made
whether any defects posing a risk of serious injury were detected.
All details notified to HSE would be contained in a register that will be open to public scrutiny. Registrations would be subject to an administration fee of £20.
Philip White, HSE Chief Inspector of Construction said:
"There have been a number of high profile and tragic failures of tower cranes in recent years and there is widespread interest in finding ways to improve safety. The public consultation has helped us to develop a proportionate response to an established risk.
"We have learnt a great deal from recent incidents and are working together with hirers, suppliers, manufacturers and stakeholders to ensure that anything we have learnt is acted upon."
Around 1800 conventional tower cranes are thought to be operated in Britain, with around 1300 in use at any one time.
Following Ministerial approval, HSE plans to send out information to all duty-holders over the next few months.
The register is part of a package of measures which involves HSE and the construction industry continuing to work together to address issues around tower cranes: creating a competency requirements framework for crane erectors and dismantlers; undertaking more research into the effect of wind loading on cranes; consideration of the adequacy of crane design standards; greater research to improve understanding of crane accidents at an international level; greater promotion of the industry safe crane campaign to improve public confidence in crane safety.
The new registration site is scheduled to be launched on 6th April.
Thursday, 26 November 2009
Gas and Cowboys do not mix!
Anyone employed to work on gas appliances in domestic premises must be Gas Safe registered and competent in that area of gas work. By using a Gas Safe registered engineer, and by checking the back of their ID card to see if they are qualified to do the type of gas work you want, you can be sure that any work completed by them will be done competently and safely.
We advise that you should arrange for regular maintenance and an annual safety check to be carried out on your gas appliances and installation by a Gas Safe registered engineer. Landlords have a legal duty to ensure that this is carried out.
Unsafe gas work can lead to a gas leak, fire, explosion and exposure to carbon monoxide, which could result in you, your family or friends being seriously injured or killed.
Go to the Gas Safe Register[1] or phone 0800 408 5500 to find out more about how to make sure your engineer is Gas Safe registered and how to protect yourself and your family from unsafe gas work.
We advise that you should arrange for regular maintenance and an annual safety check to be carried out on your gas appliances and installation by a Gas Safe registered engineer. Landlords have a legal duty to ensure that this is carried out.
Unsafe gas work can lead to a gas leak, fire, explosion and exposure to carbon monoxide, which could result in you, your family or friends being seriously injured or killed.
Go to the Gas Safe Register[1] or phone 0800 408 5500 to find out more about how to make sure your engineer is Gas Safe registered and how to protect yourself and your family from unsafe gas work.
Tuesday, 24 November 2009
FLT Operators Trained?
Mitesh Patel lost his right leg below the knee after he was pinned by a forklift truck during his holiday job. He was working for the Tile Depot in London in June 2008 when the accident happened, having taken the sales job over the summer holidays to help pay for his business studies degree at Hertfordshire University.
His work colleague was using the forklift truck without any previous training and rammed into Mitesh. The truck’s rear end swung round and pinned his leg against a gas tank.
Despite eight hours of surgery doctors were unable to save his leg. It was amputated below the knee. The GMB instructed Thompsons Solicitors which was successful in settling a compensation claim after the Tile Depot admitted liability.
Over the last 18 months Mitesh has adapted to his injuries and has now returned to his studies at Hertfordshire University. He plans to use the compensation to buy a tailor-made prosthesis.
He said: “The last 18 months have been a nightmare. I never imagined that an accident like this could happen to me. Dealing with my injuries was difficult at first but I’ve learnt that you have to just pick yourself up and get on with things.
“It is good to be back at university now. I get tired very easily and I still have phantom pains in my leg, but I am determined to finish my degree regardless of my injuries. I am looking forward to being able to use my new prosthesis which this compensation will allow me to buy.”
David Thompson from Thompsons Solicitors added: “This was a very serious and tragic accident. It is simply unacceptable that a worker untrained in using a forklift truck was allowed to do so.”
His work colleague was using the forklift truck without any previous training and rammed into Mitesh. The truck’s rear end swung round and pinned his leg against a gas tank.
Despite eight hours of surgery doctors were unable to save his leg. It was amputated below the knee. The GMB instructed Thompsons Solicitors which was successful in settling a compensation claim after the Tile Depot admitted liability.
Over the last 18 months Mitesh has adapted to his injuries and has now returned to his studies at Hertfordshire University. He plans to use the compensation to buy a tailor-made prosthesis.
He said: “The last 18 months have been a nightmare. I never imagined that an accident like this could happen to me. Dealing with my injuries was difficult at first but I’ve learnt that you have to just pick yourself up and get on with things.
“It is good to be back at university now. I get tired very easily and I still have phantom pains in my leg, but I am determined to finish my degree regardless of my injuries. I am looking forward to being able to use my new prosthesis which this compensation will allow me to buy.”
David Thompson from Thompsons Solicitors added: “This was a very serious and tragic accident. It is simply unacceptable that a worker untrained in using a forklift truck was allowed to do so.”
Demo Worker Sedated for 3 Weeks
Demolition company, G Baskerville Ltd, of Stoke-on-Trent, pleaded guilty at Newcastle-under-Lyme Magistrates Court to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974. The company was fined £8,000 and ordered to pay costs of £6,000.
The case arose from an incident in which an unnamed man was using a power saw at Barnfields Industrial Estate in Staffordshire, when he fell from the first floor through the side of the building to the ground in October 2008.
The HSE investigation showed the walls of the building had been removed and there was an inadequately positioned steel girder around the sides.
HSE Inspector Guy Dale said: "Although there was a horizontal steel girder around the sides of the building, there were still substantial gaps and there was a significant risk that other workers could also have fallen four metres to the ground below.
"The injured party sustained serious injuries from the fall. He had to be sedated for three weeks and spent a further three weeks in hospital. At one stage his injuries were believed to be life threatening."
"It is vital that if workers have to work at height that there are adequate barriers erected to prevent them from falling."
The case arose from an incident in which an unnamed man was using a power saw at Barnfields Industrial Estate in Staffordshire, when he fell from the first floor through the side of the building to the ground in October 2008.
The HSE investigation showed the walls of the building had been removed and there was an inadequately positioned steel girder around the sides.
HSE Inspector Guy Dale said: "Although there was a horizontal steel girder around the sides of the building, there were still substantial gaps and there was a significant risk that other workers could also have fallen four metres to the ground below.
"The injured party sustained serious injuries from the fall. He had to be sedated for three weeks and spent a further three weeks in hospital. At one stage his injuries were believed to be life threatening."
"It is vital that if workers have to work at height that there are adequate barriers erected to prevent them from falling."
Tuesday, 17 November 2009
Choosing a competent Health and Safety Consultant
As the only organisation in the world that offers Chartered membership to health and safety practitioners, IOSH can help you achieve the highest professional standards.
Employers know that when they work with a Chartered Safety and Health Practitioner, they're dealing with someone who's at the top of their profession. Chartered Members also have the respect of their peers – other professionals know that they've been through a rigorous process to become Chartered and have met the high standards of the world's most prestigious body for health and safety professionals. You can only become a Chartered Member after gaining Graduate membership.
Why Chartered?
Businesses, employers and recruitment consultants are already well used to working with and hiring Chartered professionals. They recognise Chartered status as shorthand for 'best in class' and they know they'll get the highest professional standards from a Chartered individual.
Chartered status will help you:
improve your ability to influence decision-makers
work on an equal footing with other professionals
increase your future employability.
As a Chartered Member of IOSH, you're entitled to use the designation Chartered Safety and Health Practitioner and the designatory letters CMIOSH. All Chartered Members need to maintain a CPD record.
RHSS employ Chartered Safety & Health Practitioners.
Employers know that when they work with a Chartered Safety and Health Practitioner, they're dealing with someone who's at the top of their profession. Chartered Members also have the respect of their peers – other professionals know that they've been through a rigorous process to become Chartered and have met the high standards of the world's most prestigious body for health and safety professionals. You can only become a Chartered Member after gaining Graduate membership.
Why Chartered?
Businesses, employers and recruitment consultants are already well used to working with and hiring Chartered professionals. They recognise Chartered status as shorthand for 'best in class' and they know they'll get the highest professional standards from a Chartered individual.
Chartered status will help you:
improve your ability to influence decision-makers
work on an equal footing with other professionals
increase your future employability.
As a Chartered Member of IOSH, you're entitled to use the designation Chartered Safety and Health Practitioner and the designatory letters CMIOSH. All Chartered Members need to maintain a CPD record.
RHSS employ Chartered Safety & Health Practitioners.
Work at Height Warning
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has delivered a stark warning to companies who fail to protect employees working at height - they will be held to account.
The warning follows a hearing yesterday (November 12) at Nottingham Magistrates' Court when Pontiac Coil Europe Ltd, of Queens Drive Industrial Estate in Nottingham pleaded guilty to/was found guilty of a breach of Regulation 6(3) and 4(1) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005. The company failed to take sufficient measures to prevent employees falling from a height, after a member of staff fell from a mezzanine floor.
Pontiac Coil Europe Ltd was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay £4,867 costs for the incident on 25 June 2008, when employee, Norman Leonard Cole of Carlton, Nottingham fractured his skull and shoulder and sustained a number of fractured ribs when he fell 2.4 metres from a mezzanine floor. Mr Cole, who was 62 at the time, was dismantling the mezzanine floor surface at the company's premises on Longwall Avenue, Queens Drive Industrial estate in Nottingham.
The company failed to ensure that the work was properly planned, or to take suitable and sufficient measures to prevent Mr Cole falling.
HSE Inspector Stuart Pilkington said:
"Falling from height continues to be one of the most common causes of fatal injury to workers, accounting for 58 fatalities in 2007/08 in Great Britain. On this occasion Mr Cole sustained a fractured skull as well as other injuries, and was lucky to escape death.
"More than half (59%) of deaths reported in the construction industry in 2007/08 were as a result of working at height. These incidents are easily preventable and guidance on working at height is available on the HSE website."
The warning follows a hearing yesterday (November 12) at Nottingham Magistrates' Court when Pontiac Coil Europe Ltd, of Queens Drive Industrial Estate in Nottingham pleaded guilty to/was found guilty of a breach of Regulation 6(3) and 4(1) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005. The company failed to take sufficient measures to prevent employees falling from a height, after a member of staff fell from a mezzanine floor.
Pontiac Coil Europe Ltd was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay £4,867 costs for the incident on 25 June 2008, when employee, Norman Leonard Cole of Carlton, Nottingham fractured his skull and shoulder and sustained a number of fractured ribs when he fell 2.4 metres from a mezzanine floor. Mr Cole, who was 62 at the time, was dismantling the mezzanine floor surface at the company's premises on Longwall Avenue, Queens Drive Industrial estate in Nottingham.
The company failed to ensure that the work was properly planned, or to take suitable and sufficient measures to prevent Mr Cole falling.
HSE Inspector Stuart Pilkington said:
"Falling from height continues to be one of the most common causes of fatal injury to workers, accounting for 58 fatalities in 2007/08 in Great Britain. On this occasion Mr Cole sustained a fractured skull as well as other injuries, and was lucky to escape death.
"More than half (59%) of deaths reported in the construction industry in 2007/08 were as a result of working at height. These incidents are easily preventable and guidance on working at height is available on the HSE website."
Monday, 16 November 2009
No E/L? Think again!
A Cambridgeshire retailer has been fined £1,000 for failing to have compulsory insurance to protect his employees.
The case has prompted the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) to remind all employers about the need for insurance and warn that it will take action against those who fail to protect their staff.
Dipak Kumar Kantial Solanki, who owns Melbourn Stores, 49 High Street, Melbourn, was asked to produce a current Employers' Liability Compulsory Insurance (ELCI) certificate when an Environmental Health Officer from South Cambridgeshire District Council visited the store in April 2009.
Mr Solanki failed to present a certificate and he was issued with an ELCI "notice to produce" by the HSE. Despite this, Mr Solanki still failed to present the document.
All employers who are required to have an ELCI certificate must produce a copy if requested to do so by a HSE inspector.
Yesterday (Thursday 12 November 2009) Mr Solanki pleaded guilty to two charges of failing to have insurance at Cambridge Magistrates' Court.
HSE Inspector Andrew Saunders said: “This case should serve as a warning to all employers about how seriously HSE takes this issue.
“Employers' Liability Compulsory Insurance is designed to protect employees and ensure they are covered if there is an accident in the workplace. Failing to have this insurance potentially leaves members of staff doubly vulnerable in the event of an accident or ill health."
The case has prompted the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) to remind all employers about the need for insurance and warn that it will take action against those who fail to protect their staff.
Dipak Kumar Kantial Solanki, who owns Melbourn Stores, 49 High Street, Melbourn, was asked to produce a current Employers' Liability Compulsory Insurance (ELCI) certificate when an Environmental Health Officer from South Cambridgeshire District Council visited the store in April 2009.
Mr Solanki failed to present a certificate and he was issued with an ELCI "notice to produce" by the HSE. Despite this, Mr Solanki still failed to present the document.
All employers who are required to have an ELCI certificate must produce a copy if requested to do so by a HSE inspector.
Yesterday (Thursday 12 November 2009) Mr Solanki pleaded guilty to two charges of failing to have insurance at Cambridge Magistrates' Court.
HSE Inspector Andrew Saunders said: “This case should serve as a warning to all employers about how seriously HSE takes this issue.
“Employers' Liability Compulsory Insurance is designed to protect employees and ensure they are covered if there is an accident in the workplace. Failing to have this insurance potentially leaves members of staff doubly vulnerable in the event of an accident or ill health."
Property Developer Fined
A London property developer and landlord was yesterday fined £10,000 at City of London Magistrates Court after workers on two of his developments were put at risk.
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) prosecuted Lahrie Mohamed of South Woodford, London, after uncovering breaches of health and safety law on two sites in Waltham Forest, north east London.
Mr Mohamed was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay costs of £4,103 after pleading guilty to breaching regulations 4(1) (a) and 9(1) (a) of the Construction (Design & Management) Regulations for offences committed at 78-80 Spruce Hills Road and breaching regulations 9(1) (a) and 4(1)(a)of the Construction (Design & Management) Regulations 2007 for offences committed at 67-67a Chingford Mount Road.
The court heard how Mr Mohammed failed on both sites to appoint a competent contractor and failed to take reasonable steps to ensure that proper arrangements were in place for work to be managed safely - putting workers and neighbours at risk.
Open flames were used at Chingford Mount Road site, which is close to a petrol station, but there were no fire extinguishers on site. Inspectors also found that scaffolding at the property was substandard or missing and had insufficient guard rails, while 240 volt power tools were used in areas where the cables were likely to be damaged, creating a risk of electrocution and fire. Domestic quality cables were also run through damp areas. HSE inspectors ordered works to down tools after visiting the site.
HSE Construction Inspector Sarah Snelling said: "Mr Mohamed put the lives of the men working on his sites at serious risk by failing to appoint competent contractors to carry out and manage the work.
"As a long-standing property developer and professional landlord who owns over 100 properties in and around Waltham Forest, Mr Mohamed should have had the knowledge and resources to ensure the work was carried out safely and legally."
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) prosecuted Lahrie Mohamed of South Woodford, London, after uncovering breaches of health and safety law on two sites in Waltham Forest, north east London.
Mr Mohamed was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay costs of £4,103 after pleading guilty to breaching regulations 4(1) (a) and 9(1) (a) of the Construction (Design & Management) Regulations for offences committed at 78-80 Spruce Hills Road and breaching regulations 9(1) (a) and 4(1)(a)of the Construction (Design & Management) Regulations 2007 for offences committed at 67-67a Chingford Mount Road.
The court heard how Mr Mohammed failed on both sites to appoint a competent contractor and failed to take reasonable steps to ensure that proper arrangements were in place for work to be managed safely - putting workers and neighbours at risk.
Open flames were used at Chingford Mount Road site, which is close to a petrol station, but there were no fire extinguishers on site. Inspectors also found that scaffolding at the property was substandard or missing and had insufficient guard rails, while 240 volt power tools were used in areas where the cables were likely to be damaged, creating a risk of electrocution and fire. Domestic quality cables were also run through damp areas. HSE inspectors ordered works to down tools after visiting the site.
HSE Construction Inspector Sarah Snelling said: "Mr Mohamed put the lives of the men working on his sites at serious risk by failing to appoint competent contractors to carry out and manage the work.
"As a long-standing property developer and professional landlord who owns over 100 properties in and around Waltham Forest, Mr Mohamed should have had the knowledge and resources to ensure the work was carried out safely and legally."
Getting Started with Health and Safety
Register your new business[1]Decide whether you need to notify the Health and Safety Executive or your local authority about your business and where necessary, do so.
Take out Employer's Liability Compulsory Insurance[2] Employer's Liability Compulsory Insurance covers you against claims from employees who are injured or become ill as a result of their work.
Appoint a competent person [3]The law says you must appoint a competent person to help you meet your health and safety duties. This does not have to be an external consultant.
Write your health and safety policy[4]Your health and safety policy sets out the arrangements you have put in place for managing health and safety in your business. It is a unique document that says who does what, when and how.
Assess the risks[5]Decide what could harm people and what precautions to take. This is your risk assessment. You must act on the findings of your risk assessment, by putting sensible controls in place to prevent accidents and ill health and making sure they are followed.
Provide basic welfare facilities[6]You must provide a safe and healthy environment for all your employees. This includes toilets, washing facilities and drinking water, and appropriate lighting and temperature.
Provide free health and safety training and supervision [7]Everyone who works for you, including self-employed people, needs to know how to work safely and without risks to health. So you need to train them and supervise their work.
Consult your workers [8]Consultation means discussing health and safety with your workers allowing them to raise concerns and influence decisions.
Display the health and safety law poster [9]This is required by law. The poster includes basic health and safety information and lets people know who is responsible for health and safety in your workplace. Or you can give workers a leaflet.
Understand RIDDOR reporting procedures[10]The Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1995 (RIDDOR), require you to report work-related accidents, diseases and near-miss incidents. Make sure you know how to report, even if you never need to.
Keep up to date[11]
Take out Employer's Liability Compulsory Insurance[2] Employer's Liability Compulsory Insurance covers you against claims from employees who are injured or become ill as a result of their work.
Appoint a competent person [3]The law says you must appoint a competent person to help you meet your health and safety duties. This does not have to be an external consultant.
Write your health and safety policy[4]Your health and safety policy sets out the arrangements you have put in place for managing health and safety in your business. It is a unique document that says who does what, when and how.
Assess the risks[5]Decide what could harm people and what precautions to take. This is your risk assessment. You must act on the findings of your risk assessment, by putting sensible controls in place to prevent accidents and ill health and making sure they are followed.
Provide basic welfare facilities[6]You must provide a safe and healthy environment for all your employees. This includes toilets, washing facilities and drinking water, and appropriate lighting and temperature.
Provide free health and safety training and supervision [7]Everyone who works for you, including self-employed people, needs to know how to work safely and without risks to health. So you need to train them and supervise their work.
Consult your workers [8]Consultation means discussing health and safety with your workers allowing them to raise concerns and influence decisions.
Display the health and safety law poster [9]This is required by law. The poster includes basic health and safety information and lets people know who is responsible for health and safety in your workplace. Or you can give workers a leaflet.
Understand RIDDOR reporting procedures[10]The Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1995 (RIDDOR), require you to report work-related accidents, diseases and near-miss incidents. Make sure you know how to report, even if you never need to.
Keep up to date[11]
Monday, 9 November 2009
We have moved office!!
Our new address is:
RHSS Limited
Allen Court Business Centre
22 South End
Croydon
CR0 1DN
T: 0208 274 2926
F: 0871 714 6092
RHSS Limited
Allen Court Business Centre
22 South End
Croydon
CR0 1DN
T: 0208 274 2926
F: 0871 714 6092
Monday, 26 October 2009
Non English Speaking Workforce
A campaign has been launched to inform Romanian, Polish and Indian construction workers based in London about on-site health and safety.The new HSE campaign wants to get the message across to workers from these communities about the role of the HSE in helping to protect them using existing law and making them aware that they have just as many rights to a healthy and safe working environment as indigenous workers.As well as employing Romanian, Polish and Indian outreach workers, HSE has produced health and safety information in different languages, for example wallet-sized cards which will be distributed among the communities. A dedicated phone line, web pages and an email address have been set up so workers can contact HSE with confidence.You can contact the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) by calling one of these Helpline numbers (English also spoken):- 0207 556 2181 - Gujarati - 0207 556 2206 - Hindi - 0207 556 2294 - Punjabi - 0207 556 2239 - Polish - 0207 556 2200 - Romanian Please note: All calls made to these numbers are confidential and you do not have to give your name if you don't want to.
Sunday, 11 October 2009
Training Offers
We are now able to deliver the following courses at your premises at a time to suit you:
- 1/2 day Appointed Persons First Aid Course HSE approved upto 12 delegates £450 + VAT
- 1/2 day CDM Awareness upto 12 delegates £375 + VAT
- 1/2 day Manual Handling Course upto 12 delegates £485 + VAT
- 2 hour Fire Awareness upto 12 delegates £285 + VAT
- 6 hour Health and Safety Foundation / Risk Assessment upto 12 delegates £475+VAT
Call Rob Anderson to discuss details/content/arrangements on 0208 651 1022 or e-mail info@rhssltd.co.uk
Wednesday, 16 September 2009
Firm Ordered to Pay more than £42,000 After Worker Injured
A Lincolnshire based company has been ordered to pay £42,631 after a worker was seriously injured after he was struck by a trailer.
Peter Borley of Limagrain UK Ltd endured serious back and chest injuries at the firm's Woolpit Business Park site after he was struck by a trailer on 27th March 2008.
The company admitted to failing to ensure the health and safety of an employee at Ipswich Crown Court on Monday 24th August and were fined £35,000 plus ordered to pay costs of £7,631. The incident occurred after a one-tonne trailer toppled over as it was being lifted onto a chasis.
Mr Borley suffered injuries to his ribs, vertebrae and sternum. Ruth Barber who was prosecuting for the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) said that workers had propped a refurbished trailer on its side, before trying to lift it on the its chassis using a forklift truck.
Even though Mr Borley was not involved in the move, he was struck by the trailer when it toppled over despite efforts to hold it back by the manager.
Results of an investigation by the HSE found a risk assessment had not been carried out, staff had not been trained for the task and that the straps used to lift the trailer were marked stating 'not for lifting'.
The company said in mitigation that they regretted the accident and had fully cooperated with the HSE's investigation and that in the past year they had spent £140,000 on health and safety. The company also described the accident as an 'isolated lapse' and had no previous convictions.
Since the incident, the company has introduced a policy of wearing high-visibility vests and has employed health and safety consultants to advise staff.
A spokesman for the HSE said after the hearing: "Cases like this highlight the need for all employers to ensure a proper and full risk assessment is in place.
"It is imperative work is carried out safely, and the HSE will not hesitate to take action against those who are in breach of the law and put people's safety at risk."
Peter Borley of Limagrain UK Ltd endured serious back and chest injuries at the firm's Woolpit Business Park site after he was struck by a trailer on 27th March 2008.
The company admitted to failing to ensure the health and safety of an employee at Ipswich Crown Court on Monday 24th August and were fined £35,000 plus ordered to pay costs of £7,631. The incident occurred after a one-tonne trailer toppled over as it was being lifted onto a chasis.
Mr Borley suffered injuries to his ribs, vertebrae and sternum. Ruth Barber who was prosecuting for the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) said that workers had propped a refurbished trailer on its side, before trying to lift it on the its chassis using a forklift truck.
Even though Mr Borley was not involved in the move, he was struck by the trailer when it toppled over despite efforts to hold it back by the manager.
Results of an investigation by the HSE found a risk assessment had not been carried out, staff had not been trained for the task and that the straps used to lift the trailer were marked stating 'not for lifting'.
The company said in mitigation that they regretted the accident and had fully cooperated with the HSE's investigation and that in the past year they had spent £140,000 on health and safety. The company also described the accident as an 'isolated lapse' and had no previous convictions.
Since the incident, the company has introduced a policy of wearing high-visibility vests and has employed health and safety consultants to advise staff.
A spokesman for the HSE said after the hearing: "Cases like this highlight the need for all employers to ensure a proper and full risk assessment is in place.
"It is imperative work is carried out safely, and the HSE will not hesitate to take action against those who are in breach of the law and put people's safety at risk."
Near miss as Winch Falls on Oil Platform
An investigation has commenced after a giant winch broke free and was dragged across the deck of an offshore platform.
The incident occurred while oil workers were testing the lifting equipment. The winch was lifting a heavy piece of equipment when it was wrenched across the desk. Luckily, two workers managed to jump out of the way of the winch and escaped unhurt.
The incident occurred on BP's Bruce Platform, which is located approximately 240 miles north east of Aberdeen.
A spokesman for BP said that they will be carrying out a full investigation and prevent a recurrence of an incident like this again from the lessons they will learn. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) have also confirmed that they will be investigating the incident.
This incident comes after a recent report demonstrated that accidents on North Sea rigs had fallen to a record low.
The incident occurred while oil workers were testing the lifting equipment. The winch was lifting a heavy piece of equipment when it was wrenched across the desk. Luckily, two workers managed to jump out of the way of the winch and escaped unhurt.
The incident occurred on BP's Bruce Platform, which is located approximately 240 miles north east of Aberdeen.
A spokesman for BP said that they will be carrying out a full investigation and prevent a recurrence of an incident like this again from the lessons they will learn. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) have also confirmed that they will be investigating the incident.
This incident comes after a recent report demonstrated that accidents on North Sea rigs had fallen to a record low.
Construction Firm Fined After Ignoring Prohibition Notice
A construction firm has been fined £8,500 plus costs of £9,526 after continuing to work on an unsafe excavation even though they had been served a prohibition notice.
JAS Truscott & Son Ltd. was refurbishing a house in Belgravia, London, and was excavating the property's ground floor. They had dug four three metre deep pits to create a basement.
During the basement's development, the company was advised by the local building control that their pits were not supported properly. However, the company continued to work, having received this advice and were subsequently reported to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE).
The site was visited by HSE Inspector Kevin Shorten on 2nd June 2008, who noticed that two of the pits did not have any supports in place to prevent the sides from collapsing in. The remaining two pits had insufficient supports in place which were present on only two sides of the hole. They also consisted of a plywood backboard which was supported by a horizontal timber strut. The tops of the pits did not have any edge protection.
The company was issued a prohibition notice, prohibiting them from any further work to be carried out with immediate effect until the excavation was suitably planned, and edge protection was put in place. However, when Kevin Shorten visited again the next day, work had continued without any sufficient supports in place and a rope was being used for edge protection.
On 18th August, JAS Truscott and Son Ltd appeared at City of London Magistrate’s Court and pleaded guilty to breaching section 33(1)(g) of the HSWA for contravening a Prohibition Notice and received a fine of £6,500. They were also fined for breaching regulation 31(1)(a) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 for failing to erect proper supports and for breaching regulation 6(3) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005. The company was fined £1,000 for each of these breaches and ordered to pay full costs to the HSE of £9,526.
The company mitigated that they didn’t have any previous convictions, and to ensure that the project was concluded safely, they worked closely with the HSE. They have since sub-contracted a specialist company to carry out basement work on their similar sites.
JAS Truscott & Son Ltd. was refurbishing a house in Belgravia, London, and was excavating the property's ground floor. They had dug four three metre deep pits to create a basement.
During the basement's development, the company was advised by the local building control that their pits were not supported properly. However, the company continued to work, having received this advice and were subsequently reported to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE).
The site was visited by HSE Inspector Kevin Shorten on 2nd June 2008, who noticed that two of the pits did not have any supports in place to prevent the sides from collapsing in. The remaining two pits had insufficient supports in place which were present on only two sides of the hole. They also consisted of a plywood backboard which was supported by a horizontal timber strut. The tops of the pits did not have any edge protection.
The company was issued a prohibition notice, prohibiting them from any further work to be carried out with immediate effect until the excavation was suitably planned, and edge protection was put in place. However, when Kevin Shorten visited again the next day, work had continued without any sufficient supports in place and a rope was being used for edge protection.
On 18th August, JAS Truscott and Son Ltd appeared at City of London Magistrate’s Court and pleaded guilty to breaching section 33(1)(g) of the HSWA for contravening a Prohibition Notice and received a fine of £6,500. They were also fined for breaching regulation 31(1)(a) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 for failing to erect proper supports and for breaching regulation 6(3) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005. The company was fined £1,000 for each of these breaches and ordered to pay full costs to the HSE of £9,526.
The company mitigated that they didn’t have any previous convictions, and to ensure that the project was concluded safely, they worked closely with the HSE. They have since sub-contracted a specialist company to carry out basement work on their similar sites.
"Appalling State" of Welding Equipment Resulted in Explosion
A motor engineer working beneath a vehicle suffered serious burns after a cracked hose caught fire.
The accident happened on 16th July 2008 at A1 Rewinds Ltd. in Aston, Birmingham when Mr Harjit Singh Matharu, an electrical fitter at the company was trying to remove a car exhaust. He was using an oxy-acetylene welding gun, that had not been properly maintained.
The hose, which transported the acetylene to the gun, had numerous cracks and the gas leaked out into an air pocket underneath the vehicle. When the gun's flame came into contact with the leaking gas, it caught fire and subsequently exploded, which sparked a fire underneath the car.
Mr Matharu escaped from underneath the vehicle and extinguished the flames, but still received serious burns. After being rushed to hospital for treatment, Mr Singh Matharu was off work for several months following his serious injuries.
Pam Folsom, the HSE inspector investigating the incident, said that it was "immediately obvious" that the hose had not been properly maintained since its first use 28 years previous. The equipment was condemned after it had been taken away for inspection.
A1 Rewinds Ltd pleaded guilty to breaching regulation 5(1) of the Provision and use of Work Equipment Regulations (PUWER) 1998 at Birmingham Magistrates' Court on 24th April 2009. They were fined £2,000 and ordered to pay £1,500 towards the HSE's costs.
The company who have no previous convictions for safety offences expressed its remorse for the incident.
Inspector Folsom said: "The hoses were in an absolutely appalling state, totally perished, and had been shortened each time that a bend split the hose, allowing highly flammable gas to escape. The consequences of a gas cloud igniting beneath a vehicle, while a man is in the middle of that explosive mixture, are likely to be horrific.
"It is important for companies to ensure that they have fully considered all the risks their employees may face when using any equipment. The hoses were so obviously badly perished that there is no excuse for this incident."
The accident happened on 16th July 2008 at A1 Rewinds Ltd. in Aston, Birmingham when Mr Harjit Singh Matharu, an electrical fitter at the company was trying to remove a car exhaust. He was using an oxy-acetylene welding gun, that had not been properly maintained.
The hose, which transported the acetylene to the gun, had numerous cracks and the gas leaked out into an air pocket underneath the vehicle. When the gun's flame came into contact with the leaking gas, it caught fire and subsequently exploded, which sparked a fire underneath the car.
Mr Matharu escaped from underneath the vehicle and extinguished the flames, but still received serious burns. After being rushed to hospital for treatment, Mr Singh Matharu was off work for several months following his serious injuries.
Pam Folsom, the HSE inspector investigating the incident, said that it was "immediately obvious" that the hose had not been properly maintained since its first use 28 years previous. The equipment was condemned after it had been taken away for inspection.
A1 Rewinds Ltd pleaded guilty to breaching regulation 5(1) of the Provision and use of Work Equipment Regulations (PUWER) 1998 at Birmingham Magistrates' Court on 24th April 2009. They were fined £2,000 and ordered to pay £1,500 towards the HSE's costs.
The company who have no previous convictions for safety offences expressed its remorse for the incident.
Inspector Folsom said: "The hoses were in an absolutely appalling state, totally perished, and had been shortened each time that a bend split the hose, allowing highly flammable gas to escape. The consequences of a gas cloud igniting beneath a vehicle, while a man is in the middle of that explosive mixture, are likely to be horrific.
"It is important for companies to ensure that they have fully considered all the risks their employees may face when using any equipment. The hoses were so obviously badly perished that there is no excuse for this incident."
Pre-qualification Process in Construction Set to Become Easier
May 2009 saw the official launch of a body whose aim is to reduce the burden on construction firms created by health and safety pre-qualification questionnaires. Its website was unveiled which contains comprehensive information for clients, consultants and contractors.
The Safety Schemes in Procurement (SSIP) Competence Forum was established in response to concerns from the construction industry and small firms about the over-abundance of pre-qualification (PQ) assessments and forms they were having to complete, which add significant costs and paperwork.
A recent report by the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR) found that in order to compensate for the cost of unnecessary PQ activity, the construction industry would have to generate more than £1 billion in turnover.
PQ assessment providers are encouraged to maximise mutual recognition between their schemes by the SSIP Forum so that tendering for business work will only require one set of PQ documents in order to meet the stage one requirements of a wide range of construction clients.
John Murphy, the Forum chair said: "A major benefit for SSIP Forum members is that by tackling the cost and uncertainty surrounding pre-qualification, we can encourage far more suppliers, including SMEs to take part. This will widen market opportunities for SMEs and give more choice to clients."
Stakeholders have welcomed the Forum's step in the right direction to cut bureaucracy in construction. John Lacey, chair of the IOSH Construction Group said that this initiative would help "small and medium-sized businesses demonstrate they are competent in health and safety". The fact that an independent annual audit of the processes employed by each member scheme will be carried out, he added, "means industry can have confidence that the process of accreditation or registration carried out by a member scheme will be consistent and fit for purpose".
RoSPA said that they hoped the initiative "will be of value to other stakeholders, including insurers, investors, enforcing authorities, trades unions, and industry associations".
Brian Berry, the director of external affairs at the Federation of Master Builders believes that the initiative should particularly help smaller firms as the time-consuming PQ process has squeezed many of them out: “Local authorities, in particular, make it very difficult for SMEs, in terms of the types of questions being asked – they are geared towards larger contractors. Making it difficult for smaller firms means losing out in terms of the creativity and innovation they can offer. We need the Government to recognise that PQs are a major burden on small firms, and that we need more of this kind of mutual recognition – not just in terms of health and safety but also environmental and diversity issues, particularly in the current economic climate."
There is also concern that the Forum's success depends largely on the various PQ schemes that will join up. Paul Reeve, Head of HS&E at the Electrical Contractors' Association said that it is vital that more schemes join up and recognise each other: "Some leading schemes are not involved, and we are disappointed to see that they have not joined up. If it turns out that they do not then receive the full support of the construction industry, so be it."
Visit the SSIP Forum website
The Safety Schemes in Procurement (SSIP) Competence Forum was established in response to concerns from the construction industry and small firms about the over-abundance of pre-qualification (PQ) assessments and forms they were having to complete, which add significant costs and paperwork.
A recent report by the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR) found that in order to compensate for the cost of unnecessary PQ activity, the construction industry would have to generate more than £1 billion in turnover.
PQ assessment providers are encouraged to maximise mutual recognition between their schemes by the SSIP Forum so that tendering for business work will only require one set of PQ documents in order to meet the stage one requirements of a wide range of construction clients.
John Murphy, the Forum chair said: "A major benefit for SSIP Forum members is that by tackling the cost and uncertainty surrounding pre-qualification, we can encourage far more suppliers, including SMEs to take part. This will widen market opportunities for SMEs and give more choice to clients."
Stakeholders have welcomed the Forum's step in the right direction to cut bureaucracy in construction. John Lacey, chair of the IOSH Construction Group said that this initiative would help "small and medium-sized businesses demonstrate they are competent in health and safety". The fact that an independent annual audit of the processes employed by each member scheme will be carried out, he added, "means industry can have confidence that the process of accreditation or registration carried out by a member scheme will be consistent and fit for purpose".
RoSPA said that they hoped the initiative "will be of value to other stakeholders, including insurers, investors, enforcing authorities, trades unions, and industry associations".
Brian Berry, the director of external affairs at the Federation of Master Builders believes that the initiative should particularly help smaller firms as the time-consuming PQ process has squeezed many of them out: “Local authorities, in particular, make it very difficult for SMEs, in terms of the types of questions being asked – they are geared towards larger contractors. Making it difficult for smaller firms means losing out in terms of the creativity and innovation they can offer. We need the Government to recognise that PQs are a major burden on small firms, and that we need more of this kind of mutual recognition – not just in terms of health and safety but also environmental and diversity issues, particularly in the current economic climate."
There is also concern that the Forum's success depends largely on the various PQ schemes that will join up. Paul Reeve, Head of HS&E at the Electrical Contractors' Association said that it is vital that more schemes join up and recognise each other: "Some leading schemes are not involved, and we are disappointed to see that they have not joined up. If it turns out that they do not then receive the full support of the construction industry, so be it."
Visit the SSIP Forum website
Employees' Warnings About Machine Ignored by Firm
A general operative at a factory received serious injuries while cleaning an unguarded machine. Wayne Lello, who was working at Swancote Foods Ltd in Telford, was cleaning a conveyor-fed potato processing machine, when his hand came into contact with an in-running nip and was drawn into the machine.
This was the first time that he had worked on the machine and he was shown how to clean it by a supervisor. He was instructed to use a scouring pad to wipe the conveyor belt while the machine was in operation when the incident took place on 20th April 2007.
Mr Lello was unable to free himself once the incident had occurred and called out for help. One of his colleagues reversed the conveyor belt to free his hand after isolating the machine. Mr Lello was then rushed to hospital and treated for lacerations, friction burns and tendon damge to his elbow and left forearm. Due to the severity of the accident, he has lost feeling in part of his arm has been unable to return to work for 3 months.
The potential dangers of this way of working had been previously highlighted and these concerns were reported to management, however nothing was done to rectify the situation.
On 31st March this year, Swancote Foods Ltd pleaded guilty to breaching section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay costs of £5,000.
A senior manager at the company, Edward Davies, was found not guilty of breaching the same offence.
The firm was very repentant about the incident, and has carried out risk assessments on the machine following the incident. They have also installed guarding to prevent access to the danger area, and introduced a safe system of work, which states that during cleaning, the machine must be isolated.
HSE inspector, David Kivlin, said: "Adequate safeguards on moving machinery and safe systems of working should always be in place. Employees had themselves spotted fundamental flaws in cleaning procedures and raised their concerns that insufficient safeguards existed for their protection, but senior management did not heed those warnings.
"The worker's injuries were sufficiently serious to cause some long-term discomfort and adversely affect his work capabilities. The machine should clearly have been properly guarded.
"This incident could have been avoided if the company had established a safe way of tackling the job and ensuring that competent persons are regularly assessing and minimising the associated risks."
This was the first time that he had worked on the machine and he was shown how to clean it by a supervisor. He was instructed to use a scouring pad to wipe the conveyor belt while the machine was in operation when the incident took place on 20th April 2007.
Mr Lello was unable to free himself once the incident had occurred and called out for help. One of his colleagues reversed the conveyor belt to free his hand after isolating the machine. Mr Lello was then rushed to hospital and treated for lacerations, friction burns and tendon damge to his elbow and left forearm. Due to the severity of the accident, he has lost feeling in part of his arm has been unable to return to work for 3 months.
The potential dangers of this way of working had been previously highlighted and these concerns were reported to management, however nothing was done to rectify the situation.
On 31st March this year, Swancote Foods Ltd pleaded guilty to breaching section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay costs of £5,000.
A senior manager at the company, Edward Davies, was found not guilty of breaching the same offence.
The firm was very repentant about the incident, and has carried out risk assessments on the machine following the incident. They have also installed guarding to prevent access to the danger area, and introduced a safe system of work, which states that during cleaning, the machine must be isolated.
HSE inspector, David Kivlin, said: "Adequate safeguards on moving machinery and safe systems of working should always be in place. Employees had themselves spotted fundamental flaws in cleaning procedures and raised their concerns that insufficient safeguards existed for their protection, but senior management did not heed those warnings.
"The worker's injuries were sufficiently serious to cause some long-term discomfort and adversely affect his work capabilities. The machine should clearly have been properly guarded.
"This incident could have been avoided if the company had established a safe way of tackling the job and ensuring that competent persons are regularly assessing and minimising the associated risks."
Health and Safety Guidance to be Free Online
From September 2009, the Health and Safety Executive will be giving away authoritative guidance about how to protect employees from workplace dangers.
Approximately 250 priced publications will be made freely available on the HSE website in PDF Format that can be viewed online or printed for reference.
A full range of HSE guidance and Approved Codes of Practice (ACOPs) and guidance on regulations will be available.
The aim of removing the costs of these publications is to aid employers in the better understanding of their legal duties and the health and safety precautions to be taken. It also intends to help Safety Representatives to maintain and improve health and safety at work.
Approximately 250 priced publications will be made freely available on the HSE website in PDF Format that can be viewed online or printed for reference.
A full range of HSE guidance and Approved Codes of Practice (ACOPs) and guidance on regulations will be available.
The aim of removing the costs of these publications is to aid employers in the better understanding of their legal duties and the health and safety precautions to be taken. It also intends to help Safety Representatives to maintain and improve health and safety at work.
Corporate Manslaughter Legislation has Raised Awareness of the Need for Alcohol Policies
According to HR consultancy Jaluch, there has been an increasing number of employers asking for help in putting together alcohol policies.
Since August 2008 there has been an increase of 50% in this number due to the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act. Under this legislation, an employer who knowingly allows an employee to come to work under the influence of alcohol can be prosecuted.
A director at Jaluch, Gina Leccacorvi said: "Certain industries, particularly the rail and manufacturing industries, clamped down on this some time ago to comply with the Health and Safety at Work Act, but now office-based firms are beginning to take heed.
"With lunchtime and evening networking a key part of working life for many city firms, imposing a no-alcohol policy has its challenges. But the risk of failing to have a clear policy in place can be high. Drinking during working hours impairs judgement which can put colleagues at risk."
Since August 2008 there has been an increase of 50% in this number due to the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act. Under this legislation, an employer who knowingly allows an employee to come to work under the influence of alcohol can be prosecuted.
A director at Jaluch, Gina Leccacorvi said: "Certain industries, particularly the rail and manufacturing industries, clamped down on this some time ago to comply with the Health and Safety at Work Act, but now office-based firms are beginning to take heed.
"With lunchtime and evening networking a key part of working life for many city firms, imposing a no-alcohol policy has its challenges. But the risk of failing to have a clear policy in place can be high. Drinking during working hours impairs judgement which can put colleagues at risk."
HSE Warns Construction Companies after Deaths Of Two Workmen
A crane company has been prosecuted for breaching health and safety law, prompting the HSE to remind construction companies of the financial penalties of not carrying out full risk assessments or ensuring staff are properly trained.
WD Bennett's Plant & Services Ltd was fined £125,000 plus costs of £264,299 on 31st July 2009 after they were found guilty of two health and safety breaches at Chichester Crown Court at a previous hearing in March. The two breaches led to an incident which caused the deaths of two workers and injuring a third.
Eurolift (Tower Cranes) Ltd have been charged alongside the company and pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and Regulation 8(3) of the Construction (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1996 at the start of the trial.
The incident took place at a construction site in Worthing on 11th February 2005, when Steve Boatman and Gary Miles were working on the jib of a crane. Both men died, with another was severely injured.
The injured man was working in the mast of the crane and was instructed to begin de-tourquing the crane's mast bolts. This should have been carried out one-by-one and then retightening each bolt in turn, however, he was not trained in this area of work and did not retighten the bolts, leaving them part undone. Subsequently the crane collapsed as it turned.
Mr Boatman and Mr Miles, died from the injuries they received after being thrown from the crane.
Peter Collingwood, the HSE inspector who led the investigation said: "This fine reflects the seriousness of the company's breaches of health and safety legislation. The accident, in which two men lost their lives, was avoidable. It was caused by the inadequate supervision of a worker who was not trained, nor competent for the task that he was asked to undertake.
"To avoid future tragedies like this, employers and contractors must ensure that tower crane work including erection and dismantling is only undertaken by trained, experienced and competent people who are supervised adequately."
WD Bennett's Plant & Services Ltd was fined £125,000 plus costs of £264,299 on 31st July 2009 after they were found guilty of two health and safety breaches at Chichester Crown Court at a previous hearing in March. The two breaches led to an incident which caused the deaths of two workers and injuring a third.
Eurolift (Tower Cranes) Ltd have been charged alongside the company and pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and Regulation 8(3) of the Construction (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1996 at the start of the trial.
The incident took place at a construction site in Worthing on 11th February 2005, when Steve Boatman and Gary Miles were working on the jib of a crane. Both men died, with another was severely injured.
The injured man was working in the mast of the crane and was instructed to begin de-tourquing the crane's mast bolts. This should have been carried out one-by-one and then retightening each bolt in turn, however, he was not trained in this area of work and did not retighten the bolts, leaving them part undone. Subsequently the crane collapsed as it turned.
Mr Boatman and Mr Miles, died from the injuries they received after being thrown from the crane.
Peter Collingwood, the HSE inspector who led the investigation said: "This fine reflects the seriousness of the company's breaches of health and safety legislation. The accident, in which two men lost their lives, was avoidable. It was caused by the inadequate supervision of a worker who was not trained, nor competent for the task that he was asked to undertake.
"To avoid future tragedies like this, employers and contractors must ensure that tower crane work including erection and dismantling is only undertaken by trained, experienced and competent people who are supervised adequately."
HSE issues Safety Alert on Road Surface Top Cutting Machines
The HSE has issued a safety alert warning of the dangers involved when using top cutting machines to prepare trenches in roads without proper safety devices. This comes after a fatal incident in July, involving a worker who became entangled in the rotating drum of a top cutting machine.
The HSE wishes to raise awareness of the dangers and possible risks of becoming trapped in a top cutting machine by sending out a safety alert to the construction and utilities industries.
Helena Tinton, HSE Inspector says: "Most machines of this type require a deactivation device which automatically stops the machine when the operator leaves the drivers seat.
"Employers are legally required to ensure that work equipment is maintained in an efficient state and to make sure all safety devices are in working order. Operators should also make sure that the power is disconnected and the machine has come to a standstill before carrying out any maintenance on the cutting wheel.
"We urge those in the construction and utilities industries to check the safety devices on their top cutting machines and to prevent similar incidents occurring."
The HSE is currently undertaking an investigation into the Incident with the Wiltshire police.
Click here to read the HSE's Safety Alert: Construction machinery - Access to cutting wheel of top cutting machines.
The HSE wishes to raise awareness of the dangers and possible risks of becoming trapped in a top cutting machine by sending out a safety alert to the construction and utilities industries.
Helena Tinton, HSE Inspector says: "Most machines of this type require a deactivation device which automatically stops the machine when the operator leaves the drivers seat.
"Employers are legally required to ensure that work equipment is maintained in an efficient state and to make sure all safety devices are in working order. Operators should also make sure that the power is disconnected and the machine has come to a standstill before carrying out any maintenance on the cutting wheel.
"We urge those in the construction and utilities industries to check the safety devices on their top cutting machines and to prevent similar incidents occurring."
The HSE is currently undertaking an investigation into the Incident with the Wiltshire police.
Click here to read the HSE's Safety Alert: Construction machinery - Access to cutting wheel of top cutting machines.
Company and its Director Fined in Case Brought by HSE
An electrical network company based in Cottenham, Cambridge and its director have been ordered to pay more that £12,500 each after breaching health and safety legislation.
The case was brought against Fenland Electrical Network Services Ltd and the company director Nicholas McCarthy by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), after a man needed his leg to be amputated whilst training to work with overhead power lines.
The incident occurred on 17th December 2007 when during training for an emergency descent from a mobile elevating work platform (MEWP), one man from a group of electricity company linesmen fell from the bucket of the MEWP as he was not attached to the bucket by his harness.
The victim's right leg needed to be amputated below the knee after he received significant injuries to it. He also suffered a fractured pelvis, spinal injuries and tendon damage to his left ankle.
Gavin Bull, HSE Inspector said after the case: "The accident occurred during a rescue training exercise, which went tragically wrong when the linesman fell a height of four metres from a mobile elevated work platform.
"The case serves to highlight the need to ensure that essential safety measures are in place for training and work at height."
Fenland Electrical Network Services Ltd pleaded guilty to breaching Section 3 of the Health and Safety at Work Act, for failing to ensure the health and safety of those not in its employment, while Mr McCarty admitted breaching Section 37 of the same Act.
The company and Mr McCarty were both fined £7,000 plus costs of £5,503.20.
The case was brought against Fenland Electrical Network Services Ltd and the company director Nicholas McCarthy by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), after a man needed his leg to be amputated whilst training to work with overhead power lines.
The incident occurred on 17th December 2007 when during training for an emergency descent from a mobile elevating work platform (MEWP), one man from a group of electricity company linesmen fell from the bucket of the MEWP as he was not attached to the bucket by his harness.
The victim's right leg needed to be amputated below the knee after he received significant injuries to it. He also suffered a fractured pelvis, spinal injuries and tendon damage to his left ankle.
Gavin Bull, HSE Inspector said after the case: "The accident occurred during a rescue training exercise, which went tragically wrong when the linesman fell a height of four metres from a mobile elevated work platform.
"The case serves to highlight the need to ensure that essential safety measures are in place for training and work at height."
Fenland Electrical Network Services Ltd pleaded guilty to breaching Section 3 of the Health and Safety at Work Act, for failing to ensure the health and safety of those not in its employment, while Mr McCarty admitted breaching Section 37 of the same Act.
The company and Mr McCarty were both fined £7,000 plus costs of £5,503.20.
Corporate Manslaughter Trial to Begin in February
Cotswold Geotechnical Holdings, who are the first company being charged under the Corporate Manslaughter Act 2007 are expected to be tried next February, Bristol Crown Court was told today (19th August).
The company is being prosecuted under the Act, for the death of a geologist by gross negligence. The company's director, Peter Eaton is also charged with manslaughter under common law.
The deceased, Mr Alexander Wright, 27, was collecting soil samples from a trench, when the walls collapsed in on him.
Mr Eaton was due to enter his pleas at Bristol Crown Court, however, after an application for more time by his legal counsel, a plea hearing will now take place some time in October. The trial regarding the case however, has been provisionally set for 23rd February next year.
The company is being prosecuted under the Act, for the death of a geologist by gross negligence. The company's director, Peter Eaton is also charged with manslaughter under common law.
The deceased, Mr Alexander Wright, 27, was collecting soil samples from a trench, when the walls collapsed in on him.
Mr Eaton was due to enter his pleas at Bristol Crown Court, however, after an application for more time by his legal counsel, a plea hearing will now take place some time in October. The trial regarding the case however, has been provisionally set for 23rd February next year.
Firm Fined for Worker Pinned Inside Unguarded Conveyor
A lead manufacturing company has been fined after a factory worker received broken ribs after becoming trapped on a moving conveyor, while trying to remove a blockage.
Stephen Shore, an employee of Calder Industrial Materials, was trying to remove a blockage of metal swarf from a conveyor, which was positioned underneath an automatic saw. Mr Shore was cutting rolls of lead into various sizes with the saw when the incident occurred on 20th February 2008 at the company premises.
A tipping table is used to cut the lead and the excess metal falls onto a conveyor belt and taken to a collection area. Mr Shore crawled underneath the machine to remove the fragments which had built up on the conveyor causing a blockage.
However, Mr Shore had not isolated the machine and he was pinned against a metal bar after the tipping table came down on him as he was leaning over the conveyor.
A colleague switched off the machine after noticing Mr Shore was in trouble however he was unable to free him. He was freed by fire fighters who attended the scene. Mr Shore sustained two cracked ribs and a bruised heart and returned to work 4 days later.
On 30th July 2009 at Chester Magistrates' Court, Calder Industrial Materials pleaded guilty to breaching regulation 11(1) of PUWER 1998 for failing to prevent access to the dangerous part of the machine. The company was fined £4,500 and ordered to pay costs of £1,050.
The firm has since installed an interlock gate and guarding to prevent employees from accessing the conveyor.
Bruce Jones, HSE inspector said: "Mr Shore was badly injured because Calder Industrial Materials failed to prevent him from gaining access to dangerous machinery.
"Fixed guards and a padlocked gate should have prevented Mr Shore from entering the machine and accessing the underside of a tipping table, which is used to tip debris on to a conveyor belt. But the guards and gate were not installed until after the incident."
Stephen Shore, an employee of Calder Industrial Materials, was trying to remove a blockage of metal swarf from a conveyor, which was positioned underneath an automatic saw. Mr Shore was cutting rolls of lead into various sizes with the saw when the incident occurred on 20th February 2008 at the company premises.
A tipping table is used to cut the lead and the excess metal falls onto a conveyor belt and taken to a collection area. Mr Shore crawled underneath the machine to remove the fragments which had built up on the conveyor causing a blockage.
However, Mr Shore had not isolated the machine and he was pinned against a metal bar after the tipping table came down on him as he was leaning over the conveyor.
A colleague switched off the machine after noticing Mr Shore was in trouble however he was unable to free him. He was freed by fire fighters who attended the scene. Mr Shore sustained two cracked ribs and a bruised heart and returned to work 4 days later.
On 30th July 2009 at Chester Magistrates' Court, Calder Industrial Materials pleaded guilty to breaching regulation 11(1) of PUWER 1998 for failing to prevent access to the dangerous part of the machine. The company was fined £4,500 and ordered to pay costs of £1,050.
The firm has since installed an interlock gate and guarding to prevent employees from accessing the conveyor.
Bruce Jones, HSE inspector said: "Mr Shore was badly injured because Calder Industrial Materials failed to prevent him from gaining access to dangerous machinery.
"Fixed guards and a padlocked gate should have prevented Mr Shore from entering the machine and accessing the underside of a tipping table, which is used to tip debris on to a conveyor belt. But the guards and gate were not installed until after the incident."
Driver CPC for Lorry Drivers Takes Effect from 10th September 2009
The Driver Certificate of Professional Competence for lorry drivers comes into effect from 10th September.
Driver CPC is a qualification, which lorry drivers will need to have with aims to:
If you already hold a lorry driving licence on the start dates, you will have 'acquired rights' for the next 5 years and will not need to hold a CPC during that time.
If you wish to carry on driving after those 5 years, you will have to undertake 'periodic training', which consist of 35 hours training every 5 years in order to retain your Driver CPC.
However, new drivers who do not already hold a lorry driving licence on the start date will be required to undertake an initial Driver CPC test before being able to drive professionally. The initial Driver CPC test will consist of a theory test and a practical test.
Again, in order to retain the Driver CPC, drivers will need to complete 35 hours of 'periodic training'. If you fail to complete the training and continue to drive professionally beyond the end date of your CPC, you could face legal charges.
For more information view the DSA's Driver Certificate of Professional Competence Booklet.
Driver CPC is a qualification, which lorry drivers will need to have with aims to:
- improve road safety
- recognise and accredit skills for professional lorry drivers
- to encourage drivers to continually update their skills and knowledge
- raise the status of bus, coach and lorry drivers and promote driving as a career.
If you already hold a lorry driving licence on the start dates, you will have 'acquired rights' for the next 5 years and will not need to hold a CPC during that time.
If you wish to carry on driving after those 5 years, you will have to undertake 'periodic training', which consist of 35 hours training every 5 years in order to retain your Driver CPC.
However, new drivers who do not already hold a lorry driving licence on the start date will be required to undertake an initial Driver CPC test before being able to drive professionally. The initial Driver CPC test will consist of a theory test and a practical test.
Again, in order to retain the Driver CPC, drivers will need to complete 35 hours of 'periodic training'. If you fail to complete the training and continue to drive professionally beyond the end date of your CPC, you could face legal charges.
For more information view the DSA's Driver Certificate of Professional Competence Booklet.
Company Fined for Legionnaire's Test Failings
A company has been ordered to pay £41,276 after admitting that they didn't carry out the correct water treatment surveys in two care homes in South Wales.
DEBA UK Ltd appeared at Abertillery Magistrates Court on 6th August after failing to carry out legionella surveys on water systems at nursing homes in Tredegar and Llangattock.
This led to vulnerable residents at the homes being put at a considerably higher risk of contracting the potentially fatal legionnaire's disease.
The court was told that DEBA UK Ltd was commissioned to carry out the risk assessments for legionnaire's disease at the nursing homes and found the risk to be low. A following routine check at the nursing homes revealed there to be insufficient controls for legionella, and focus moved onto the work carried out by the company.
The company was fined £24,000 plus ordered to pay costs of £17,276 after pleading guilty to three charges under Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.
Speaking after the case, Matthew Hamar, HSE inspector, said: "The nursing home operators commissioned DEBA UK Ltd to carry out the surveys in good faith and to help them comply with their responsibilities to manage the risk posed by legionella on their premises. They were badly let down in this case.
"Elderly nursing home residents are at greater risk from the bacteria that give rise to conditions such as legionnaires disease, so it is imperative that safety critical surveys like those carried out by DEBA UK Ltd are adequate.
"Fortunately, there was no evidence of any outbreak of the disease as a result of these incidents, but there is a clear responsibility to those companies carrying out specialist work that they need to carry out adequate surveys and provide accurate information.
"The health and safety of all those who use our services, as well as our members of staff, is always our top priority. We take matters such as this very seriously and have been working very closely with the Health and Safety Executive throughout this case. We hope that everyone acts upon the valuable lessons from this case."
DEBA UK Ltd appeared at Abertillery Magistrates Court on 6th August after failing to carry out legionella surveys on water systems at nursing homes in Tredegar and Llangattock.
This led to vulnerable residents at the homes being put at a considerably higher risk of contracting the potentially fatal legionnaire's disease.
The court was told that DEBA UK Ltd was commissioned to carry out the risk assessments for legionnaire's disease at the nursing homes and found the risk to be low. A following routine check at the nursing homes revealed there to be insufficient controls for legionella, and focus moved onto the work carried out by the company.
The company was fined £24,000 plus ordered to pay costs of £17,276 after pleading guilty to three charges under Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.
Speaking after the case, Matthew Hamar, HSE inspector, said: "The nursing home operators commissioned DEBA UK Ltd to carry out the surveys in good faith and to help them comply with their responsibilities to manage the risk posed by legionella on their premises. They were badly let down in this case.
"Elderly nursing home residents are at greater risk from the bacteria that give rise to conditions such as legionnaires disease, so it is imperative that safety critical surveys like those carried out by DEBA UK Ltd are adequate.
"Fortunately, there was no evidence of any outbreak of the disease as a result of these incidents, but there is a clear responsibility to those companies carrying out specialist work that they need to carry out adequate surveys and provide accurate information.
"The health and safety of all those who use our services, as well as our members of staff, is always our top priority. We take matters such as this very seriously and have been working very closely with the Health and Safety Executive throughout this case. We hope that everyone acts upon the valuable lessons from this case."
Church Pleads Guilty to Fire Safety Offences
A church organisation has pleaded guilty to breaches of fire safety legislation following a prosecution brought against them by the London Fire Brigade.
Mountain of Fire and Miracles International have been ordered to pay £30,000 in costs and fines after pleading guilty to three breaches of the Regulatory (Fire Safety) Order 2005 at Woolwich Crown Court on 24th July 2009.
A prohibition notice was issued to the church in June 2007 restricting the number of visitors to 600 on the ground floor of its premises at Crabtree Manorway South in Erith.
However, the fire brigade undertook an inspection of the premises in January 2008 and found there to be 1,200 people in the main hall during a service. One of the fire exits was blocked by a steel bar with another adjoining fire exit was chained and locked.
The inspection also found that there was an increased risk of an explosive and fast spreading fire due to the disorganised storage of 18 LPG and butane bottles and the use of naked flame heaters inside the main hall.
Assistant commissioner for fire safety regulation, Steve Turek, said: "It is regrettable that we had to bring this action against a charitable church organisation but there were significant fire safety failures."
"These offences presented a real risk of injury to the congregation who are our main concern. Church groups and others which organise large gatherings need to make sure their premises are fit for purpose and that they take their responsibility very seriously to ensure the safety to visitors."
Mountain of Fire and Miracles International have been ordered to pay £30,000 in costs and fines after pleading guilty to three breaches of the Regulatory (Fire Safety) Order 2005 at Woolwich Crown Court on 24th July 2009.
A prohibition notice was issued to the church in June 2007 restricting the number of visitors to 600 on the ground floor of its premises at Crabtree Manorway South in Erith.
However, the fire brigade undertook an inspection of the premises in January 2008 and found there to be 1,200 people in the main hall during a service. One of the fire exits was blocked by a steel bar with another adjoining fire exit was chained and locked.
The inspection also found that there was an increased risk of an explosive and fast spreading fire due to the disorganised storage of 18 LPG and butane bottles and the use of naked flame heaters inside the main hall.
Assistant commissioner for fire safety regulation, Steve Turek, said: "It is regrettable that we had to bring this action against a charitable church organisation but there were significant fire safety failures."
"These offences presented a real risk of injury to the congregation who are our main concern. Church groups and others which organise large gatherings need to make sure their premises are fit for purpose and that they take their responsibility very seriously to ensure the safety to visitors."
Hampshire Waste Firm Fined £60,000 over Worker's Death
The Health and Safety Executive is warning companies that adequate risk assessments must be in place after an employee died after being hit by a vehicle at a waste transfer station.
Frederick Aubrey who worked for John Stacey and Sons died on 1st June 2007 at its Tadley facility in north Hampshire.
Mr Aubrey and two other employees were hand-sorting material in a process known as totting at the waste management and construction firm. A fourth employee was instructed to tip over a skip using a shovel loader and in doing so, reversed over Mr Aubrey, who died from his injuries 5 days later.
John Stacey and Sons appeared at Winchester Crown Court on July 29th 2009 and pleaded guilty to section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 and regulations 3(1) of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 at a previous hearing at Basingstoke Magistrates Court on 29th June. The company was fined £60,000 and ordered to pay costs of £29,061, plus a victim surcharge of £15.
The HSE explained that the process of totting had only been carried out at the company for about 2 weeks before the incident occurred, and the company had not identified that this practice unnecessarily exposed employees to the risk of vehicles moving around them without protection to them.
HSE Inspector David Bibby said: "This case highlights the importance of assessing risks and putting adequate controls in place to protect pedestrians from vehicles, and the tragic consequences when this is not properly done."
"This should serve as a message to all companies, and especially those in the waste industry where unfortunately accidents like this are all too common, to ensure that risks from workplace transport are identified and suitable measures put in place to prevent accidents."
Frederick Aubrey who worked for John Stacey and Sons died on 1st June 2007 at its Tadley facility in north Hampshire.
Mr Aubrey and two other employees were hand-sorting material in a process known as totting at the waste management and construction firm. A fourth employee was instructed to tip over a skip using a shovel loader and in doing so, reversed over Mr Aubrey, who died from his injuries 5 days later.
John Stacey and Sons appeared at Winchester Crown Court on July 29th 2009 and pleaded guilty to section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 and regulations 3(1) of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 at a previous hearing at Basingstoke Magistrates Court on 29th June. The company was fined £60,000 and ordered to pay costs of £29,061, plus a victim surcharge of £15.
The HSE explained that the process of totting had only been carried out at the company for about 2 weeks before the incident occurred, and the company had not identified that this practice unnecessarily exposed employees to the risk of vehicles moving around them without protection to them.
HSE Inspector David Bibby said: "This case highlights the importance of assessing risks and putting adequate controls in place to protect pedestrians from vehicles, and the tragic consequences when this is not properly done."
"This should serve as a message to all companies, and especially those in the waste industry where unfortunately accidents like this are all too common, to ensure that risks from workplace transport are identified and suitable measures put in place to prevent accidents."
Safety Gear Continues to Suffer from Image Problems
A specialist survey commissioned by a diversified technology company and PPE manufacturer 3M has revealed that just 30% of health and safety managers think that essential Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) is always worn on construction sites. Thirty six per cent of managers on Olympic sites believe that this is because work safety gear is not macho enough.
Building site workers as well as managers were interviewed by the researchers to find out how manufacturers could improve the products. A female structural and civil engineering worker wanted to see "smaller sizes of shoes and safety boots for ladies".
The report illustrates the battles that health and safety managers have to face in the construction industry in order to get their workers to wear protective clothing and equipment, which could put simply, save their lives.
The marketing manager for 3M Occupational Health and Environmental Safety Vicky Randles, said "One of the issues the survey has thrown up is the negative general perception of 'elf and safety'. Many managers feel that the image overall needs be improved, not just the clothing. Forty-eight percent in companies of 250 workers and over cited this as the main item that could be addressed in the war to get 100 percent commitment."
Building site workers as well as managers were interviewed by the researchers to find out how manufacturers could improve the products. A female structural and civil engineering worker wanted to see "smaller sizes of shoes and safety boots for ladies".
The report illustrates the battles that health and safety managers have to face in the construction industry in order to get their workers to wear protective clothing and equipment, which could put simply, save their lives.
The marketing manager for 3M Occupational Health and Environmental Safety Vicky Randles, said "One of the issues the survey has thrown up is the negative general perception of 'elf and safety'. Many managers feel that the image overall needs be improved, not just the clothing. Forty-eight percent in companies of 250 workers and over cited this as the main item that could be addressed in the war to get 100 percent commitment."
Wakefield firm fined for Legionnaire's outbreak
A butchery processing company has been fined after two of their employees contracted Legionnaire's disease.
Boguslaw Plociennik and Zbigniew Rauk contracted the disease at the company's Bamber Bridge premises near Preston in September and October 2006 respectively.
Kepak UK pleaded guilty to breaching health and safety regulation at Preston Crown Court and were subsequently fined £25,000 and ordered to pay £20,000 costs.
A Health and Safety Executive led committee obtained water samples from the building and found significant levels of legionella were present in three locations.
Dorothy Shaw, HSE principal inspector said: "Kepak failed to carry out simple checks on the hot and cold water system. As a result, many of its employees working at the site were potentially exposed to the legionella bacteria, and two individuals were made seriously ill.
"Any system containing water at temperatures between 20 and 45 degrees Celsius, and which may release an aerosol during operation or maintenance, is at risk of exposure to legionella bacteria.
"Legionnaires' disease is a potentially fatal illness and, had the correct procedures been in place, the outbreak at Kepak's premises would not have occurred.
"Legionella bacteria can build up in purpose-built water systems and, if conditions are favourable, the bacteria can multiply, increasing the risk."
Boguslaw Plociennik and Zbigniew Rauk contracted the disease at the company's Bamber Bridge premises near Preston in September and October 2006 respectively.
Kepak UK pleaded guilty to breaching health and safety regulation at Preston Crown Court and were subsequently fined £25,000 and ordered to pay £20,000 costs.
A Health and Safety Executive led committee obtained water samples from the building and found significant levels of legionella were present in three locations.
Dorothy Shaw, HSE principal inspector said: "Kepak failed to carry out simple checks on the hot and cold water system. As a result, many of its employees working at the site were potentially exposed to the legionella bacteria, and two individuals were made seriously ill.
"Any system containing water at temperatures between 20 and 45 degrees Celsius, and which may release an aerosol during operation or maintenance, is at risk of exposure to legionella bacteria.
"Legionnaires' disease is a potentially fatal illness and, had the correct procedures been in place, the outbreak at Kepak's premises would not have occurred.
"Legionella bacteria can build up in purpose-built water systems and, if conditions are favourable, the bacteria can multiply, increasing the risk."
Safety Certification Problems Lose Nearly 40% of Subcontractors' Work
The National House-Building Council (NHBC) is to launch their own health and safety support service as figures have shown that self-certification administration is a problem for subcontractors.
The NHBC has advised that almost 40% of subcontractors are losing work over health and safety issues. These findings have encouraged the NHBC to initiate their own health and safety support service.
In accordance with the CDM regulations, subcontractors and contractors must demonstrate how they will effectively and competently manage health and safety issues on every new tender and a health and safety policy is to be included.
However, self-certification is a huge demand on time and money claims the NHBC, and even competent subcontractors are left hesitant regarding the issue, which is resulting in them losing bids.
Subsequently, NHBC has established SafeMark, a third party pre-qualification assessment scheme to help those in the house building industry. Its purpose is to save time, involving an initial assessment which is valid for one year.
Simon Mantle, health and safety manager at the NHBC said of the new scheme: "It is vital that subcontractors are fully prepared for all health and safety issues and the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) is having a real push on competence to reflect this."
"We know from our research that many subcontractors across the industry are competent - it's just a question of proving it. For some, and particularly smaller firms, the administration involved with this is simply not practical."
SafeMark is accredited to the Safety Schemes in Procurement (SSIP) standard. For more information view the NHBC's Health and Safety Competence Assessment Scheme Leaflet
The NHBC has advised that almost 40% of subcontractors are losing work over health and safety issues. These findings have encouraged the NHBC to initiate their own health and safety support service.
In accordance with the CDM regulations, subcontractors and contractors must demonstrate how they will effectively and competently manage health and safety issues on every new tender and a health and safety policy is to be included.
However, self-certification is a huge demand on time and money claims the NHBC, and even competent subcontractors are left hesitant regarding the issue, which is resulting in them losing bids.
Subsequently, NHBC has established SafeMark, a third party pre-qualification assessment scheme to help those in the house building industry. Its purpose is to save time, involving an initial assessment which is valid for one year.
Simon Mantle, health and safety manager at the NHBC said of the new scheme: "It is vital that subcontractors are fully prepared for all health and safety issues and the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) is having a real push on competence to reflect this."
"We know from our research that many subcontractors across the industry are competent - it's just a question of proving it. For some, and particularly smaller firms, the administration involved with this is simply not practical."
SafeMark is accredited to the Safety Schemes in Procurement (SSIP) standard. For more information view the NHBC's Health and Safety Competence Assessment Scheme Leaflet
Firm to Pay £733,000 After Deaths
An international firm has been fined more than £700,000 after two of its employees died after an argon gas leak.
Stuart Jordan, 50 and Richard Clarkson, 29, who worked for Bodycote HIP Ltd at a Hereford metal refining plant died 5 years ago after argon gas leaked from a large vessel in a pit.
After admitting to breaching the Health and Safety at work Act 1974, Bodycote HIP Ltd of Macclesfield, Cheshire, were fined £533,000 plus costs of £200,000.
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE), who brought the case against the firm, informed Worcester Crown Court that the two men were found collapsed on the stairs that lead to the pit at the College Road site on 14th June 2004. The HSE continued to tell the court that on the day of the incident, the pit's oxygen alarm system was switched off, and the ventilation system, which could have saved the men's lives, was not running.
The HSE also said that there was no evidence that Mr Jordan had received any appropriate safety training.
In it s defence, Bodycote HIP Ltd said that complacency had developed, however there was not a general disregard for health and safety at the company and that since the incident, the health and safety deficiencies have been remedied.
Speaking after the case, HSE inspector Luke Messenger said: "Both these tragic deaths were not only regrettable but also entirely preventable".
He added: "Confined spaces can be found in a wide range of workplaces and these deaths should serve as a reminder to all industries of the dangers of this type of work."
Stuart Jordan, 50 and Richard Clarkson, 29, who worked for Bodycote HIP Ltd at a Hereford metal refining plant died 5 years ago after argon gas leaked from a large vessel in a pit.
After admitting to breaching the Health and Safety at work Act 1974, Bodycote HIP Ltd of Macclesfield, Cheshire, were fined £533,000 plus costs of £200,000.
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE), who brought the case against the firm, informed Worcester Crown Court that the two men were found collapsed on the stairs that lead to the pit at the College Road site on 14th June 2004. The HSE continued to tell the court that on the day of the incident, the pit's oxygen alarm system was switched off, and the ventilation system, which could have saved the men's lives, was not running.
The HSE also said that there was no evidence that Mr Jordan had received any appropriate safety training.
In it s defence, Bodycote HIP Ltd said that complacency had developed, however there was not a general disregard for health and safety at the company and that since the incident, the health and safety deficiencies have been remedied.
Speaking after the case, HSE inspector Luke Messenger said: "Both these tragic deaths were not only regrettable but also entirely preventable".
He added: "Confined spaces can be found in a wide range of workplaces and these deaths should serve as a reminder to all industries of the dangers of this type of work."
Fatal Glasgow Factory Blast "Avoidable"
An inquiry into an explosion at a plastics factory in Glasgow, which killed 9 people, concluded it to be "an avoidable tragedy".
The incident which occurred in May 2004 at ICL Plastics Ltd and its associate company ICL Tech Ltd also injured about 40 workers after the explosion flattened the factory in the Maryhill area of the city.
The inquiry found that the blast was undoubtedly caused by a leak from an old underground metallic pipe, which was carrying liquefied petroleum gas.
The pipe was corroded due to being buried without proper protection and the report found that the management of the two companies had shown a lack of understanding concerning LPG and the risk of explosion.
The report also mentioned that there were deficiencies in the HSE's oversight of the site with a failure to understand the risk of underground pipes and to promptly carry out the follow up visits.
Lord Gill, the inquiry chairman wrote: "This was an avoidable tragedy... Nearly five years after the explosion HSE has not produced a coherent action plan to deal with underground metallic pipework and the risk of a recurrence.
While the probability of another explosion may be low, the consequences of a similar event, should it occur, may be catastrophic. A sense of urgency would be an appropriate response to the serious issue of public confidence that this disaster has raised."
In 2007, ICL Plastics and ICL Tech pleaded guilty to four health and safety breaches and were fined £200,000 at the Glasgow High Court and were both fined £200,000.
The firms commented: "The ICL companies wish to express profound sadness and apologise for their omissions and the shortcomings of those who were responsible for the health and safety of the employees".
They continued: "The inquiry's analysis of the essential facts and crucial expert knowledge provides much needed answers and recommendations which will have an important bearing on the future."
Jim Murphy, Scottish Secretary said that the government will be providing a full response to the report in January: "What is clear from the report published today is that this disaster could and should have been avoided," he said. "It lays out a litany of failings and it is imperative that we take on board Lord Gill's recommendations for a better and more effective safety regime surrounding LPG installations to ensure an unnecessary and preventable fatal incident such as this never happens again."
The incident which occurred in May 2004 at ICL Plastics Ltd and its associate company ICL Tech Ltd also injured about 40 workers after the explosion flattened the factory in the Maryhill area of the city.
The inquiry found that the blast was undoubtedly caused by a leak from an old underground metallic pipe, which was carrying liquefied petroleum gas.
The pipe was corroded due to being buried without proper protection and the report found that the management of the two companies had shown a lack of understanding concerning LPG and the risk of explosion.
The report also mentioned that there were deficiencies in the HSE's oversight of the site with a failure to understand the risk of underground pipes and to promptly carry out the follow up visits.
Lord Gill, the inquiry chairman wrote: "This was an avoidable tragedy... Nearly five years after the explosion HSE has not produced a coherent action plan to deal with underground metallic pipework and the risk of a recurrence.
While the probability of another explosion may be low, the consequences of a similar event, should it occur, may be catastrophic. A sense of urgency would be an appropriate response to the serious issue of public confidence that this disaster has raised."
In 2007, ICL Plastics and ICL Tech pleaded guilty to four health and safety breaches and were fined £200,000 at the Glasgow High Court and were both fined £200,000.
The firms commented: "The ICL companies wish to express profound sadness and apologise for their omissions and the shortcomings of those who were responsible for the health and safety of the employees".
They continued: "The inquiry's analysis of the essential facts and crucial expert knowledge provides much needed answers and recommendations which will have an important bearing on the future."
Jim Murphy, Scottish Secretary said that the government will be providing a full response to the report in January: "What is clear from the report published today is that this disaster could and should have been avoided," he said. "It lays out a litany of failings and it is imperative that we take on board Lord Gill's recommendations for a better and more effective safety regime surrounding LPG installations to ensure an unnecessary and preventable fatal incident such as this never happens again."
'Inappropriate' working at height methods lead to big fines
The Health and Safety Executive has reported that a company and its contractor have been fined following the fall of an employee from a height of more than 10 metres.
Veolia Environmental Services Birmingham was fined £100,000 with costs of £22,000, while the contractor Hansen Transmissions of Huddersfield was fined £70,000 with costs of £22,000.
The incident took place when an employee of the contractor, was replacing a gear box in a condenser unit at Veolia Environmental Services' premises. The employee fell causing him to suffer broken ribs, a hernia and a punctured lung. His fall was broken when he landed on a pallet of copper pipes.
Paul Smith, HSE investigating inspector said of Hansen Transmissions system: "was plainly unsafe - men [were] working ten metres and more up in the air, [they] were manoeuvring bulky plant using inappropriate methods, [and they were] on and above an inadequate working platform, with markedly inadequate protection from the drop beneath".
Veolia Environmental Services Birmingham was fined £100,000 with costs of £22,000, while the contractor Hansen Transmissions of Huddersfield was fined £70,000 with costs of £22,000.
The incident took place when an employee of the contractor, was replacing a gear box in a condenser unit at Veolia Environmental Services' premises. The employee fell causing him to suffer broken ribs, a hernia and a punctured lung. His fall was broken when he landed on a pallet of copper pipes.
Paul Smith, HSE investigating inspector said of Hansen Transmissions system: "was plainly unsafe - men [were] working ten metres and more up in the air, [they] were manoeuvring bulky plant using inappropriate methods, [and they were] on and above an inadequate working platform, with markedly inadequate protection from the drop beneath".
Director Fined for Smoking at Desk
An anonymous complaint to the HSE led to a company director being fined for smoking in his office after council officers visited the firm.
Metric Scaffolding of Preston, Lancashire, was reminded of their responsibilities under the smoke-free legislation back in November 2008, after the council was informed that the firm's staff smoked frequently in the office and in the company vehicles.
Enforcement Officers re-visited the premises in January 2009 and found Martin Lenehan, Operations Director, smoking at his desk.
An on the spot penalty of £50 was issued to Mr Lenehan, which he refused to pay, and subsequently a court date was appointed. On 11th June 2009, South Ribble Magistrates, found Mr Lenehan guilty in his absence of smoking in a smoke-free area. He was fined £175 plus costs of £75.
Councillor Peter Mullineaux commented "This latest conviction will hopefully serve as a reminder to the small minority of employers who are not observing the smoke-free legislation that they have a legal duty to comply and will be prosecuted if they do not."
Metric Scaffolding of Preston, Lancashire, was reminded of their responsibilities under the smoke-free legislation back in November 2008, after the council was informed that the firm's staff smoked frequently in the office and in the company vehicles.
Enforcement Officers re-visited the premises in January 2009 and found Martin Lenehan, Operations Director, smoking at his desk.
An on the spot penalty of £50 was issued to Mr Lenehan, which he refused to pay, and subsequently a court date was appointed. On 11th June 2009, South Ribble Magistrates, found Mr Lenehan guilty in his absence of smoking in a smoke-free area. He was fined £175 plus costs of £75.
Councillor Peter Mullineaux commented "This latest conviction will hopefully serve as a reminder to the small minority of employers who are not observing the smoke-free legislation that they have a legal duty to comply and will be prosecuted if they do not."
Plant Fined £30,000 After Worker Loses Three Fingers
An employee at a meat processing plant in Prestwick lost three fingers when a machine he was attempting to repair started up. The owners of the company have been convicted of failing to have a safe isolation procedure in place for the machinery.
The incident happened in June 2008 when employee Steven Glass was working on an Endoline tape packaging machine which had been under repair. When the machine wouldn’t work he tried to fix it. As the machine could not be properly isolated to prevent accidental operation, it started and subsequently trapped three of his fingers, which were amputated. One of his fingers was successfully reattached.
Since Mr Glass' accident, the company has been taken over hand has seen significant improvements in regards to health and safety.
On 2nd July 2009 at Ayr Sherriff Court, Belcher Food products Ltd of Prestwick, pleaded guilty to breaching Sections 2(1); 2 (2) and 33 (1) (a) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and was fined £30,000.
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has stressed the importance of ensuring machinery is capable of being isolated to prevent operation and to ensure employees are given sufficient training, instruction and supervision.
Helen Diamond, HSE Investigating Inspector is now warning companies of the importance of maintaining machinery and ensure that it is properly guarded: "This serious accident was entirely foreseeable and preventable. The company themselves had identified a large number of serious faults with their machinery well before this accident, yet little was done to rectify these faults. The company also failed to follow the advice of our inspectors.
"It is vital for the safety of all employees that companies ensure machinery is properly maintained and that systems are in place to ensure it cannot accidentally be operated when under repair. Our investigations showed that it was normal practice for employees to repair their own machines."
A year previous to the accident, the court heard that an electrical inspection of their premises identified 866 faults with the electrics and wiring system, 200 of these regarded as most urgent. Little or no work had been done to correct these faults by the time of the accident.
HSE inspectors visited the plant 3 months prior to the accident and informed the company that they have a procedure in place to ensure machinery could be properly isolated while being prepared. This had not been carried out at the time of the accident.
The incident happened in June 2008 when employee Steven Glass was working on an Endoline tape packaging machine which had been under repair. When the machine wouldn’t work he tried to fix it. As the machine could not be properly isolated to prevent accidental operation, it started and subsequently trapped three of his fingers, which were amputated. One of his fingers was successfully reattached.
Since Mr Glass' accident, the company has been taken over hand has seen significant improvements in regards to health and safety.
On 2nd July 2009 at Ayr Sherriff Court, Belcher Food products Ltd of Prestwick, pleaded guilty to breaching Sections 2(1); 2 (2) and 33 (1) (a) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and was fined £30,000.
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has stressed the importance of ensuring machinery is capable of being isolated to prevent operation and to ensure employees are given sufficient training, instruction and supervision.
Helen Diamond, HSE Investigating Inspector is now warning companies of the importance of maintaining machinery and ensure that it is properly guarded: "This serious accident was entirely foreseeable and preventable. The company themselves had identified a large number of serious faults with their machinery well before this accident, yet little was done to rectify these faults. The company also failed to follow the advice of our inspectors.
"It is vital for the safety of all employees that companies ensure machinery is properly maintained and that systems are in place to ensure it cannot accidentally be operated when under repair. Our investigations showed that it was normal practice for employees to repair their own machines."
A year previous to the accident, the court heard that an electrical inspection of their premises identified 866 faults with the electrics and wiring system, 200 of these regarded as most urgent. Little or no work had been done to correct these faults by the time of the accident.
HSE inspectors visited the plant 3 months prior to the accident and informed the company that they have a procedure in place to ensure machinery could be properly isolated while being prepared. This had not been carried out at the time of the accident.
Stakeholder Forum: Reviewing Workplace Temperatures Legislation and Guidance
The HSE has prompted a review of health and safety at work in regards to workplace temperatures following the request of the Secretary of State.
The Stakeholder Forum will take place on Thursday 23rd July 2009 and will examine the reasons for and against a maximum workplace temperature. The Chief Executive of the HSE Geoffrey Podger will be opening the event.
The event will be an opportunity to discuss:
The Stakeholder Forum will take place on Thursday 23rd July 2009 and will examine the reasons for and against a maximum workplace temperature. The Chief Executive of the HSE Geoffrey Podger will be opening the event.
The event will be an opportunity to discuss:
- Whether the legislation and guidance is up to date and relevant with the nature of working patterns and workplaces;
- Whether there is good reason for having a recommended minimum working temperature, but not a maximum working temperature;
- If more can be done for those who work outside in regards to the effects of seasonal variations;
- What there is to be learnt from good practice, e.g. access to drinking water and other facilities in the working environment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)