A teacher has been awarded £230,000 after he slipped on a sachet of tomato ketchup in a school corridor.
He suffered severe injuries in the fall as he was walking out of the staff room at a secondary school in Essex.
The personal injury claim was settled outside court by council chiefs who believed they may have been forced to shell out up to £500,000 including legal fees if the case had gone ahead.
Yesterday it emerged that the payout was one of 34 handed to injured teachers in the county between 2011 and 2013 – and who received a total of £1.05million.
Critics have now complained of a ‘compensation culture’ in schools after it was revealed that other staff had claimed for slipping on wet floors or being injured by a cupboard door.
The teacher in the ketchup incident was hurt on March 18 2008, but did not file a claim until March 10 2011 – just eight days before the three-year legal time limit for making personal injury claims.
A Freedom of Information request revealed that the council agreed a final settlement of £230,000 in April last year, including £90,000 in damages for pain, suffering and loss of amenity as well as damages for losses such as those relating to earnings and pension.
The payout also included £120,000 for the teacher’s legal fees and £20,000 in other costs.
Other claims to emerge include a £110,000 settlement to a member of staff who suffered a spinal injury after slipping on a wet floor on two separate occasions on the same day.
Another employee received £39,450 after suffering a wrist injury when a faulty metal door swung open when they were taking plates to a cupboard.
Legal costs on top of the actual payouts only add to the overall bill and the whole process undermines the ability of teachers to actually teach.
'It’s time schools resisted unscrupulous claims before teachers are unable to leave the staff room for fear of the school being sued.’
However, Jerry Glazier, the National Union of Teachers representative for Essex, said there is no compensation culture in schools.
He said: ‘We need to see these claims in context.
'As a union we will support members who pursue claims for personal injury when we feel they have been poorly treated by management in schools.
‘Schools are generally very safe environments but employers have a duty of care to protect both teachers and pupils.’
Essex County Council said it takes ‘health, safety and wellbeing’ seriously, adding that all compensation claims are investigated and damages paid if the authority is liable.
Littleborough firm in court after employee badly burned in factory fire
- A Littleborough factory has been sentenced for safety failings following a major fire which left an employee with severe burns.
Multiroof Building Products Ltd was prosecuted by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) following the blaze on 28 May 2012, which destroyed the entire factory and several neighbouring businesses.
A 25-year-old employee from Rochdale, who has asked not to be named, sustained burns to his neck and hands, was in hospital for several weeks and has been unable to return to work.
Trafford Magistrates’ Court heard the factory, at Stansfield Mill in Calderbrook, mixed flammable solvents with hot bitumen to produce roof treatment coatings.
On the day of the incident, workers were using a hose to feed around one tonne of solvents from a plastic container, known as a composite IBC, into an adjacent storage tank containing around 20 tonnes of hot bitumen.
Without warning, there was a sudden whoosh and flames erupted from the top of the plastic container. The fire quickly spread and within minutes the whole factory was alight. A total of 21 fire engines were required to tackle the blaze.
The HSE investigation found that Multiroof had allowed flammable vapours, created by the mixing process, to be released in the work area where there were potential ignition sources.
Other containers of flammable substances were stored close to the hot bitumen tank, increasing the risk that a fire would quickly spread.
Multiroof Building Products Ltd, which is no longer operating at the site, was fined £5,000 and ordered to pay £6,000 in prosecution costs after pleading guilty to two breaches of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.
Speaking after the hearing, HSE Inspector Anthony Polec said:
“An employee suffered burns that will affect him for the rest of his life because simple safety precautions were not taken.
“Multiroof knew its manufacturing process involved working with highly flammable substances but not enough was done to control flammable vapours or remove potential sources of ignition.
“The fire caused considerable disruption in the local area and destroyed several neighbouring businesses, but it could easily have been prevented.
“This case should act as a warning to companies that work with flammable substances of the potential consequences of not taking suitable precautions and making sure safety measures are in place.”
Trafford Magistrates’ Court heard the factory, at Stansfield Mill in Calderbrook, mixed flammable solvents with hot bitumen to produce roof treatment coatings.
On the day of the incident, workers were using a hose to feed around one tonne of solvents from a plastic container, known as a composite IBC, into an adjacent storage tank containing around 20 tonnes of hot bitumen.
Without warning, there was a sudden whoosh and flames erupted from the top of the plastic container. The fire quickly spread and within minutes the whole factory was alight. A total of 21 fire engines were required to tackle the blaze.
The HSE investigation found that Multiroof had allowed flammable vapours, created by the mixing process, to be released in the work area where there were potential ignition sources.
Other containers of flammable substances were stored close to the hot bitumen tank, increasing the risk that a fire would quickly spread.
Multiroof Building Products Ltd, which is no longer operating at the site, was fined £5,000 and ordered to pay £6,000 in prosecution costs after pleading guilty to two breaches of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.
Speaking after the hearing, HSE Inspector Anthony Polec said:
“An employee suffered burns that will affect him for the rest of his life because simple safety precautions were not taken.
“Multiroof knew its manufacturing process involved working with highly flammable substances but not enough was done to control flammable vapours or remove potential sources of ignition.
“The fire caused considerable disruption in the local area and destroyed several neighbouring businesses, but it could easily have been prevented.
“This case should act as a warning to companies that work with flammable substances of the potential consequences of not taking suitable precautions and making sure safety measures are in place.”
Housing trust and two firms fined for potential asbestos risk
- A trust providing housing and care for the elderly and two firms hired to carry out refurbishment work at its premises in Alnwick have been fined after staff and residents were put at risk of exposure to asbestos.
West Yorkshire firm Express Elevators Ltd was contracted by Anchor Trust to replace the lift at St Paul’s Court sheltered housing scheme in November 2012. PC Lifts, of London, was subcontracted to remove the existing lift ahead of the new one being installed.
The lift shaft contained asbestos boards, which PC Lifts removed without putting any measures in place to prevent the spread of asbestos fibres.
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) told Bedlington Magistrates’ Court that Anchor Trust had a duty as the client to ensure that arrangements made for managing the lift replacement were suitable, and ensured there was no risk to health.
They failed in this duty as they provided Express Elevators Ltd with conflicting information and, although an asbestos survey was provided, it was not sufficiently accurate or detailed enough for the work being carried out.
The HSE investigation found that Express Elevators Ltd failed in its duty to plan and manage the work as it did not make adequate inquiries about the presence of asbestos. The company relied on verbal information from Anchor and although it received the survey, no reference was made to it before work began.
PC Lifts was also found not to have made adequate inquiries and to have worked in the lift shaft without adequate lighting. These factors may have contributed to the company’s failure in identifying the asbestos. Asbestos boards were broken out from the top of the lift shaft, but no measures were put in place to prevent the spread of asbestos fibres through the building.
The combined failures of all three parties led to the unsafe removal of the asbestos and the potential spread of asbestos fibres, which exposed residents and others to a potential risk to their health.
Anchor Trust, of Bedford Street, London, was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay £346.40 in costs after pleading guilty to breaching Regulation 9(1)(a) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007.
Express Elevators Ltd, of Otley Road, Baildon, Shipley, West Yorkshire was fined £8,000 with £827.30 costs after pleading guilty to breaching Regulation 13(2) of the same legislation.
PC Lifts Ltd, of St John Street, London, was fined £4,000 with £346.40 costs after pleading guilty to breaching Regulation 16 of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012.
Speaking after the case HSE Inspector Natalie Wright said:
“Asbestos is the single greatest cause of work-related deaths in the UK and those involved in the construction and refurbishment industry have a clear duty to ensure that work is managed so as to prevent the spread of asbestos.
“This incident occurred because not one of the defendants fulfilled their respective duties when carrying out the lift replacement at St Paul’s Court, leading to asbestos fibres being disturbed.
“As well as the companies’ employees, the residents at St Paul’s Court were also potentially put at risk.
“This incident was entirely preventable, had the companies carried out their respective safety duties. This prosecution should act as a reminder to all involved in such work, that whenever work is carried out which is liable to expose employees to asbestos a suitable survey must be done to establish whether asbestos is present before any work begins.”
Suffolk firm in court after workers exposed to asbestos
The lift shaft contained asbestos boards, which PC Lifts removed without putting any measures in place to prevent the spread of asbestos fibres.
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) told Bedlington Magistrates’ Court that Anchor Trust had a duty as the client to ensure that arrangements made for managing the lift replacement were suitable, and ensured there was no risk to health.
They failed in this duty as they provided Express Elevators Ltd with conflicting information and, although an asbestos survey was provided, it was not sufficiently accurate or detailed enough for the work being carried out.
The HSE investigation found that Express Elevators Ltd failed in its duty to plan and manage the work as it did not make adequate inquiries about the presence of asbestos. The company relied on verbal information from Anchor and although it received the survey, no reference was made to it before work began.
PC Lifts was also found not to have made adequate inquiries and to have worked in the lift shaft without adequate lighting. These factors may have contributed to the company’s failure in identifying the asbestos. Asbestos boards were broken out from the top of the lift shaft, but no measures were put in place to prevent the spread of asbestos fibres through the building.
The combined failures of all three parties led to the unsafe removal of the asbestos and the potential spread of asbestos fibres, which exposed residents and others to a potential risk to their health.
Anchor Trust, of Bedford Street, London, was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay £346.40 in costs after pleading guilty to breaching Regulation 9(1)(a) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007.
Express Elevators Ltd, of Otley Road, Baildon, Shipley, West Yorkshire was fined £8,000 with £827.30 costs after pleading guilty to breaching Regulation 13(2) of the same legislation.
PC Lifts Ltd, of St John Street, London, was fined £4,000 with £346.40 costs after pleading guilty to breaching Regulation 16 of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012.
Speaking after the case HSE Inspector Natalie Wright said:
“Asbestos is the single greatest cause of work-related deaths in the UK and those involved in the construction and refurbishment industry have a clear duty to ensure that work is managed so as to prevent the spread of asbestos.
“This incident occurred because not one of the defendants fulfilled their respective duties when carrying out the lift replacement at St Paul’s Court, leading to asbestos fibres being disturbed.
“As well as the companies’ employees, the residents at St Paul’s Court were also potentially put at risk.
“This incident was entirely preventable, had the companies carried out their respective safety duties. This prosecution should act as a reminder to all involved in such work, that whenever work is carried out which is liable to expose employees to asbestos a suitable survey must be done to establish whether asbestos is present before any work begins.”
Suffolk firm in court after workers exposed to asbestos
- A Suffolk window replacement company has been fined after it exposed workers to potentially fatal asbestos material during work to replace window units at a school in Bury St Edmunds.
Frames Conservatories Direct Ltd (FCDL) informed Westley Middle school that asbestos panels would be removed by registered contractors and disposed of in the correct manner over the school summer holidays in 2012.
However, Bury St Edmunds Magistrates’ Court was told the company was not licensed to work with asbestos. Furthermore, employees undertaking the work were not told they would be handling asbestos, nor did they use any control measures to prevent the spread of fibres.
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) investigated after being alerted both by FCDL employees and the school’s headteacher.
The court heard that concerns were first raised when other contractors noticed suspect material in a floor void and consulted a licensed asbestos contractor who then visited the school. The contractor saw window panels being removed and notified FCDL employees that they were handling materials likely to contain asbestos. Work was immediately stopped and the area sealed off.
A licensed contractor undertook an extensive programme of cleaning under strictly controlled conditions in all affected areas of the school. Once completed, air tests were carried out and the areas certified safe for re-occupation.
The school spent some £111,495 on environmental cleaning and replacement of teaching aids and other items that had to be destroyed because of contamination.
Frames Conservatories Direct Ltd, of Barton Retail Park, Barton Road, Bury St Edmunds, was fined a total of £24,000 and ordered to pay £10,571 in costs after pleading guilty to breaching regulations 8(1) and 11(1) of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012.
Speaking after the hearing, HSE Inspector Elizabeth Fowle said:
“This incident has been extremely stressful for those affected and has also been disruptive and costly for the school. All of this could have been avoided if the company had simply asked, ‘Should we be doing this work with asbestos?’
“Frames Conservatories Direct Ltd knew the window panels they planned to remove contained asbestos but wrongly decided they would work with the material. They did not tell their employees about the presence of asbestos or specify any safety measures.
“As a result, they exposed workers to asbestos levels many times in excess of the Control Limit. The long term health risks associated with inhalation of asbestos fibres include lung cancer and mesothelioma.
“It was extremely fortunate that this work took place during the school holiday which meant that there were no pupils on site and few school staff.”
However, Bury St Edmunds Magistrates’ Court was told the company was not licensed to work with asbestos. Furthermore, employees undertaking the work were not told they would be handling asbestos, nor did they use any control measures to prevent the spread of fibres.
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) investigated after being alerted both by FCDL employees and the school’s headteacher.
The court heard that concerns were first raised when other contractors noticed suspect material in a floor void and consulted a licensed asbestos contractor who then visited the school. The contractor saw window panels being removed and notified FCDL employees that they were handling materials likely to contain asbestos. Work was immediately stopped and the area sealed off.
A licensed contractor undertook an extensive programme of cleaning under strictly controlled conditions in all affected areas of the school. Once completed, air tests were carried out and the areas certified safe for re-occupation.
The school spent some £111,495 on environmental cleaning and replacement of teaching aids and other items that had to be destroyed because of contamination.
Frames Conservatories Direct Ltd, of Barton Retail Park, Barton Road, Bury St Edmunds, was fined a total of £24,000 and ordered to pay £10,571 in costs after pleading guilty to breaching regulations 8(1) and 11(1) of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012.
Speaking after the hearing, HSE Inspector Elizabeth Fowle said:
“This incident has been extremely stressful for those affected and has also been disruptive and costly for the school. All of this could have been avoided if the company had simply asked, ‘Should we be doing this work with asbestos?’
“Frames Conservatories Direct Ltd knew the window panels they planned to remove contained asbestos but wrongly decided they would work with the material. They did not tell their employees about the presence of asbestos or specify any safety measures.
“As a result, they exposed workers to asbestos levels many times in excess of the Control Limit. The long term health risks associated with inhalation of asbestos fibres include lung cancer and mesothelioma.
“It was extremely fortunate that this work took place during the school holiday which meant that there were no pupils on site and few school staff.”
No comments:
Post a Comment