Reversing cameras could have
prevented serious injury
A Devon company has been fined after a man
was seriously injured by a reversing vehicle at a recycling centre in Exeter.
Exeter Magistrates’ court heard on the 20th January that Leases Limited
hired the telehandler in September 2012, but did not have it fitted with a
reversing camera.
This failure to ensure that the driver’s direct field of vision was
adequate seriously compromised safety.
On 4 October Marvon Van Rijk and four other pedestrian workers were
sorting through recycling waste at the company’s site at Matford Business Park
in Exeter when he was hit by the reversing telehandler.
He suffered serious and life threatening leg injuries, requiring
immediate emergency surgery and ongoing surgical treatment.
Leases Limited were prosecuted following an almost identical incident at
the same site in October 2011. Leases Limited of 14 Oak Tree Place, Manaton
Close, Matford Business Park, Exeter pleaded guilty to beaching Regulation
28(e) of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998.
They were fined £33,000 and ordered to pay £13,389 in costs. After the
hearing, HSE inspector Simon Jones, said: "Marvon Van Rijk was hit by the
reversing telehandler while he was in the blind spot of the vehicle. Leases
Limited failed to ensure that all vehicles on their sites had their blind spots
eliminated and Mr Van Rijk suffered serious and life changing injuries as a result.
"The telehandler, a large and powerful machine, was operating in
close proximity to workers sorting through recycling waste. Despite having a
known blind spot, the telehandler had to undertake numerous reversing
manoeuvres and it was only a matter of time before it hit one of the workers.
"The dangers of blind spots on reversing vehicles are well known
within the waste and recycling industries. The easiest way to eliminate such
blind spots is to install reversing CCTV which is easy and inexpensive to fit.
It is regrettable that Leases Limited did not learn the lessons from an almost
identical incident and subsequent prosecution by HSE at the same site just 20
months ago.”
Illegal gas fitter in court following unsafe gas work
A Suffolk plumber has been given a suspended prison sentence after
carrying out illegal and dangerous gas work at a home in Lowestoft.
Barry Goodge, 59, from Oulton Broad, attempted to repair a faulty boiler
at a home on London Road South on 28 June 2013, despite not being registered
with Gas Safe – a legal requirement in the UK.
He did not complete the work, claiming a necessary replacement part was
unobtainable, and left the boiler without a key component.
Lowestoft Magistrates’ Court heard
that the householder then contacted a registered gas fitter, who
discovered a gas pipe had not been capped off. He immediately made this pipe
safe, and sourced the correct replacement part to repair the boiler.
The fitter then contacted Gas Safe Register which informed the Health
and Safety Executive (HSE).
Barry Goodge, of Gorleston Road in Oulton Broad, was given a 36 week
prison sentence, suspended for 18 months, and ordered to pay costs of £599 and
£80 victim surcharge after pleading guilty to two breaches of the Gas Safety
(Installation and Use) Regulations 1998.
After the case, HSE Inspector Ivan Brooke said:
“Barry Goodge has shown a complete disregard for the law. He carried out
gas work whilst unregistered, leaving a domestic boiler in a dangerous
condition and likely to leak gas.
“People can die as a result of gas leaks. It is therefore vital that
only registered gas engineers, who are trained and competent, work on gas
appliances and fittings.
“HSE will not hesitate to take action in cases of unsafe and
unregistered gas work, and will always hold offenders to account.”
Russell Kramer chief executive of Gas Safe Register, added:
“Every Gas Safe registered engineer carries a Gas Safe ID card, which
shows who they are and the type of gas appliances they are qualified to work on.
“We always encourage the public to ask for and check the card and if
they have any concerns about the safety of work carried out in their home, to
speak to us. Every year we investigate thousands of reports of illegal gas
work.
Cardiff contractors in court over worker’s roof plunge
A Cardiff building contractor has been fined for breaking safety
legislation after a young worker broke his back in a seven-metre fall through
an unprotected hole in a roof.
Daniel Thorley, 25, from Llantrisant, was working on the roof of a new
three-storey home in Dinas Powys when he fell. He suffered spinal injuries,
needed significant rehabilitation and was unable to work for more than a year.
The incident was investigated by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE),
which prosecuted his employer, Blackflair Ltd, at Cardiff Magistrates’ Court.
The court was told Mr Thorley had been building a block wall on the
timber-framed house when it started to rain and a colleague asked him to lend a
hand to waterproof the flat roof. A window was in the process of being fitted
to the roof at the time.
As he was laying-out and fixing the polythene to the roof Mr Thorley
took a step backwards and fell down the hole to the ground floor, landing on a
concrete slab.
HSE found there was nothing over the hole where the window was to be
fitted to protect workers from falls and no safety measures underneath to
mitigate falls. The work had not been properly planned by Blackflair Ltd and
insufficient measures had been put in place to reduce the risk of workers
falling through the roof.
Blackflair Ltd, of Four Elms Road, Cardiff, pleaded guilty to breaching
Regulation 6(3) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005 and was fined £7,000 and
ordered to pay £1,137 in costs.
In his sentencing remarks, District Judge Bodfan Jenkins, said: “This
was an accident waiting to happen and in the circumstances caused serious
injuries. The lack of a risk assessment and supervision were the underlying
causes”
HSE Inspector Liam Osborne, speaking after the hearing, said:
“Mr Thorley was badly injured and has suffered severe pain for a
prolonged time, but he could have been killed. “The risks could have
been much reduced if measures such as guardrails had been installed around the
hole or a temporary crash deck structure placed underneath. Airbags or beanbags
commonly used in the construction industry could have been placed to cushion
any fall.”
“Falls from height are the biggest cause of workplace deaths and the
risks are well known in the construction industry. It is crucial that employers
make sure work is properly planned, appropriately supervised and that
sufficient measures are put in place to protect staff from the dangers
involved.”
Further information about working safely at height can be found on the
HSE website at http://www.hse.gov.uk/falls
Suspended prison sentence for builder after bricklayer paralysed by fall
A Lincoln builder has been handed a four-month suspended prison sentence
after a self-employed bricklayer broke his back in two places after falling
three metres from faulty scaffolding.
Robert Wilkin, 70, of Lincoln, was left paralysed from the waist down
and confined to a wheelchair for the rest of his life following the incident at
a warehouse on Freeman Road, North Hykeham, on 14 February 2013.
Mr Wilkin spent five months in hospital and has had to have his home
especially converted so he can live on the ground floor.
An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) identified
serious safety failings in the construction of the scaffolding by Rodney
Foyster, who had sub-contracted Mr Wilkin to carry out the bricklaying work.
Lincoln Magistrates’ Court was told that HSE found Mr Foyster was not
trained in building scaffolding. He failed to check it was safe for use and
failed to ensure the safety of workers once it was in use.
Mr Foyster was hired to fix a wall that had been damaged at the
warehouse after a lorry had reversed into it and had sub-contracted Mr Wilkin
for the bricklaying.
Mr Foyster bought and erected the second-hand scaffolding before Mr
Wilkin was appointed. Scaffolding towers were positioned both on the inside and
the outside of the warehouse. Wooden boards were removed from the tower on the
inside and used to form a makeshift bridge between the two towers.
When the incident happened, Mr Wilkin’s son, Damien, climbed the ladder
to the top of the scaffold tower inside the building and successfully made it
across the makeshift bridge to the outside scaffold tower.
However, when Mr Wilkin climbed the ladder, he fell from the wooden
boards onto the concrete floor three metres below, suffering life-changing
injuries.
After the incident HSE served a Prohibition Notice on Mr Foyster halting
further work on the scaffolds until acceptable safety measures were put in
place.
Rodney Foyster, 56, of Mons Road, Lincoln, was sentenced to four months
in prison, suspended for 18 months, ordered to carry out 200 hours worth of
unpaid community work. He was also ordered to pay £2,941 in costs after
pleading guilty to breaching Section 4(1)(c) of the Work at Height Regulations
2005
Speaking after the hearing, HSE inspector Martin Waring said:
“Our investigations revealed a catalogue of errors made by Mr Foyster in
the assembly of this scaffolding – something he was neither qualified for nor
competent in doing.
“There were numerous defects such as no edge protection, poor ladder
safety and insufficient access onto the scaffolds.
“Mr Wilkin has unfortunately paid for this lack of care with his health,
having been left paralysed for the rest of his life.”
Mr Wilkin said:
“I don’t remember much about what happened after I fell. Lots of people
were rushing about and it took the ambulance crew about 20 minutes to get me
onto a back board because I had fallen in an awkward place between pallets of
bricks.
“I had an operation to fuse together my spine which was fractured in two
places. I remember being in a lot of pain and was on morphine and sleeping
tablets.
“Within a couple of days I was told it was unlikely I would ever walk
again and I’ve been in a wheelchair ever since.
“My hobbies used to be collecting antiques, walking and gardening but I
can’t do these things anymore. I find this all very difficult as I used to be
very active.
“My life has been ruined because I can no longer do the things I used to
do. I can’t go out on my own or drive. I feel my freedom has been taken from me
and it’s been really hard on my family.”
West Yorkshire school in court over climbing wall fall
A Bradford grammar school has been fined after a PE equipment manager
suffered multiple fractures when he fell nine metres from a climbing wall.
Stephen Painter, 30, from Haworth, was just days away from becoming a
father when the incident happened at Thornton Grammar School on 3 November
2011. He broke a forearm and elbow, fractured two vertebrae and bit through his
tongue.
A prosecution was brought by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) after
inspectors identified serious safety failings at the school.
Bradford Magistrates heard that Mr Painter, who looked after resources
and equipment in the PE department, had gradually got more involved in helping
out with student lessons and had learned the basics of climbing a rigged wall
and belaying techniques.
He was working his way up the wall to rig it for a lesson by threading
the rope through anchor points. A colleague on the ground was belaying to
provide added rope when needed, but minimising the amount of loose rope, which
means a slip would only mean a drop of a short distance for the climber.
However, the technique failed and Mr Painter fell during the rigging,
hitting the gym floor below. There were no mats or padding and he was not
wearing a helmet.
The court was told HSE found the management of the wall and the safety
system regarding it was almost none existent; the competence of the staff using
it and providing instruction to others was an after-thought and not effectively
put in place.
It was two months before Mr Painter was able to help his wife with their
first baby after she was born just eight days after his fall.
Thornton Grammar School, of Leaventhorpe Lane, Bradford, was fined
£5,000 and ordered to pay £7,500 in costs after admitting breaching Section
2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.
After the hearing, HSE Inspector Geoff Fletcher said:
“This was a serious incident that could have been prevented. In a fall
of that scale, it is fortunate that we were not dealing with a fatality.
“The risks to those engaged in climbing are self-evident but those risks
should be addressed in line with available guidance. It is essential that those
who provide climbing instructions should themselves be properly trained and
certificated.
“The training and development of staff using the climbing wall at this
school was not adequate and they were allowed to undertake tasks on it that
they had not been trained for.
“Thornton Grammar School failed to properly address risks to the safety
of staff and ensure the climbing wall was managed safely.” Advice and
information on health and safety in schools is available at http://www.hse.gov.uk/services/education and from national and local
government
Repairs to fork arms of fork-lift trucks
This guidance provides information regarding the repair of fork arms of
fork-lift trucks (FLT), and alerts all to certain bad practices which may cause
FLT arms to fail. BS ISO Standard recommends that repairs are carried out by
the manufacturer or someone of equal competence.
The current relevant BS ISO Standards for fork arms for fork-lift trucks
are as follows:
BS 5639-1: 1978, ISO 2331: 1974 Fork arms for fork-lift trucks
Vocabulary for hook-on type fork arms.
BS ISO 2328: 2007 Fork-lift Trucks. Hook-on type fork arms and fork arm
carriages. Mounting dimensions.
BS ISO 2330: 2002 Fork-lift trucks. Fork arms. Technical
characteristics and testing.
BS ISO 5057:1993 Industrial trucks. Inspection and repair of fork arms
in service on fork-lift trucks.
Part 5: 1978 Guide for inspection and repair of fork arms in service.
GN 62 – BITA Guidance – Maintenance, inspection and repair of fork arms
and attachments.
3 BS ISO 2330: 2002 is a performance standard, and although it does not
specify materials, method of manufacture or heat treatment etc. it does
however, specify that fork arms should be capable of withstanding 3 times their
specified capacity without permanent deformation.
Manufacturers therefore make their own decisions on how to meet this performance,
and select materials, manufacturing methods etc, accordingly. The steels from
which fork arms are made will thus cover a wide range of carbon and alloy
steels. The method of manufacture will also vary in that the top hook may be
forged integral with the shank, or may be welded on subsequently. Bottom hooks
are usually welded on.
BS ISO 5057: 1993 gives recommendations on the inspection of fork arms,
and deals with surface cracks, difference in height of fork tips, positioning
lock, wear in fork arm blade and shank and fork arm mountings. It also states
that only the manufacturer or an expert of equal competence shall decide if a
fork arm may be repaired for return to service. A common reason for the
rejection of fork arms is that wear of the heel has exceeded the 10% of the
original thickness permitted by BS ISO 5057: 1993. This wear is usually caused
by the forks rubbing along the ground possibly as a result of failure to adjust
the truck load chain(s) to provide the necessary clearance.
The reason for the BS ISO 5750 recommending that repairs are only
carried out by the fork arm manufacturer or an expert of equal competence may
not be clearly understood by the truck owner. If welding is to be carried out,
for example, to replace a top hook, the repairer should be aware of the steel
specification from which the original components were made. The correct
material for the replacement part, the correct welding consumable and the
correct welding method can then be selected. The welding method will include
weld preparation, pre-heating if necessary, stress-relieving if necessary and
re-heat treatment to the manufacturer's specification. Use of "mild
steel" materials and ordinary jobbing welding methods are likely to result
in an unsatisfactory and unsafe repair.
It should be noted that the BS ISO 5057 considers that surface cracks
and wear are not suitable for repair by welding. Reputable repairers do not
recommend welding at the heels of forks to replace metal removed by wear, as
this will only replace the thickness, not the strength, and may do further harm
by mis-matching of materials, localised heating, lack of heat treatment etc.
After welding repairs, re-setting etc, the BS ISO 5057 recommends that
the fork arms are tested to 2.5 times their capacity.
Enquiries by HSE Mechanical Specialists have shown that many repairers
have no understanding of the metallurgical welding and heat treatment aspects,
and are applying village blacksmith methods to such repairs. While
badly-repaired fork arms may achieve the 2.5 times proof load, the method of
repair is likely to cause detrimental long-term effects which may lead to
sudden failure of the fork arm in service.
Overhaul
of guidance on working at height launched
An
overhaul of guidance on working at height has been launched as part of the
government’s long-term economic plan to abolish or improve outdated, burdensome
or over-complicated regulations which waste businesses’ time and money.
More
than a million British businesses and 10 million workers are estimated to carry
out jobs involving some form of work at height every year. Falls are one of the
biggest causes of death and serious injury at work.
Now
the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has overhauled its guidance for such
activity, setting out in clear, simple terms what to do and what not to do –
and debunking common myths that can confuse and mislead employers.
Altogether,
more than 3,000 regulations have been identified for scrapping or improving
through the Red Tape Challenge – which asks businesses and the public
themselves to identify the rules that hold them back
Health
and Safety Minister Mike Penning said:
As
part of the government’s long-term economic plan, it’s vital that businesses
are not bogged down in complicated red tape and instead have useable advice
about protecting their workers.
As
a former fireman, I know that the 10 million people who are working at height
in this country face risks in their job. But I’m also clear that managing these
risks can be done sensibly, by giving simple and clear advice and tackling the
myths that can confuse employers.
Key
changes include:
- Providing simple advice about do's and don'ts when working at height to ensure people are clear on what the law requires
- busting some of the persistent myths about health & safety law, such as the banning of ladders when they can still be used
- offering targeted advice to helping business in different sectors manage serious risks sensibly and proportionately
- helping workers to be clearer about their own responsibilities for working safely
Judith
Hackitt, Chair of the Health and Safety Executive, said:
It’s
important to get working at height right. Falls remain one of the biggest
causes of serious workplace injury – with more than 40 people killed and 4,000 suffering
major injuries every year.
We
have a sensible set of regulations and have been working with business to
improve our guidance – making it simpler and clearer and dispelling some of the
persistent myths about what the law requires.
The
result is advice that employers can count on to help them manage their
businesses sensibly and proportionately.
The
need to ensure people understand what the law requires was identified in the
independent review of health and safety regulation undertaken by Professor
Ragnar Löfstedt, and this proposal has been developed through the Red Tape
Challenge.
No comments:
Post a Comment