Mitchells and Butler Retail, a major retail management group which manages chains such as All Bar One and O’Neills has been prosecuted by Newham Council and ordered to pay over £50,000 after a worker was crushed to death in a bowling machine.

Ferdinand de la Cruz, was cleaning a pinsetter machine that had not been fitted with protective guarding at a Hollywood Bowl outlet. A further investigation found that the machinery did not comply with safety standards in the UK or in Europe. The HSE has issued new guidance on pinsetters to the local authority enforcement teams since the accident and Mitchells and Butlers now use bowling machines that have guarding systems,  which prevent assess to dangerous parts of the bowling machinery.

Chromalloy UK Ltd, a technology company in Nottingham, was fined £50,000 after a worker suffered from serious burns.

Paul Gothard, 54, was hit by a fireball after the aluminium powder he was loading into an electric power blender exploded.  The fireball set fire to his overalls and he suffered serious burns to his hands, arms and face.

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) concluded that the explosion was likely to be caused by a discharge of static electricity, which led to the ignition of the aluminium powder.

Noelle Walker, an Inspector at HSE said: “Mr Gothard suffered serious burns in this incident and he’s been left with some permanent lack of function in his hand. Chromalloy failed to carry out assessments and control risks as required in relation to powdered aluminium, which is an explosive dust.”

Analysis on the British Crime Survey by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), has found that hundreds of thousands of violent acts were committed against workers in England and Wales during 2008/09. An estimated 327,000 workers experienced at least one incident of violence at work, 168,000 of these workers had been assaulted and 176,000 had been threatened.

 Workers in ‘protective service’ occupations, such as police officers, fire service officers and prison service officers, were most at risk of violence at work. Figures showed that 9.0 per cent of people in the ‘protective services’ experienced one or more incidents on violence. Other high risk groups included health professionals and social care professionals.

 Under the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 employers are required to assess the risks to their employees and must implement measures to eliminate and/or reduce the risks. Personal safety training is one of the most effective ways of reducing the risk of violent and aggressive incidents occurring in the workplace and is something you may wish to consider if you are at risk of violence.

A former NHS worker has been awarded £150,000 in damages after suffering from a nervous breakdown which was caused by three years of harassment and bullying from her manager.

Nanette Bowen, 28, worked at the Prince Phillip Hospital in Llanelli, South Wales. In 2000, the Prince Phillip Hospital merged with Dinefwr Trusts which became Carmarthenshire NHS Trust. During the merge Bowen’s manager was replaced by Eric Lewis. Bowen was bullied and harassed by her new manager so much that she started suffering from stress and panic attacks.

Bowen claimed that Lewis made sexual innuendos towards her and made her complete a daily diary so he could monitor her work. After years of harassment Bowen was signed off sick but she felt that the Trust failed to support her and said the money would never make up for her life being ruined.

Marks and Spencer plc and four contractors have been accused by the Health and Safety Executive of exposing staff and members of the public to asbestos whilst refurbishment work at stores in Reading, Bournemouth and Plymouth took place.

The high street chain pleaded not guilty to contravening sections (2)1 and (3)1 of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act at all three of its stores.  Styles and Wood Ltd, one of the contractors that worked at the store in Reading, pleaded guilty to breaching the same sections of the Act. The second contractor, Willmott Dixon Construction, did not enter a plea for allegedly breaching the same sections of the Act for work at the Bournemouth store.  PA Realisations Ltd was not represented in court but was accused of breaching regulation 10 and 15 of the Control of Asbestos at Work Regulations 2002 for work carried out at the Reading store.

The committal hearing will take place on Tuesday 9 February 2010.

Centriforce Products Ltd, a plastics-recycling company in Liverpool, was fined £2,500 after a worker lost four fingers that were cut off by a guillotine.

Wesley Dickinson, 22, got his fingers trapped in the guillotine when he was trying to remove a jam.  Two of his four fingers were reattached by Doctors, but he still has very limited movement in his hand.

Martin Paren, an Inspector at HSE, said: “The Company should have had a guard on the guillotine to prevent workers from reaching the blade. An automatic mechanism should also have been in place so that the power was cut if the guard opened”.

Centrewest London Buses Ltd was fined £400,000 after one of its drivers was crushed to death between two buses. The incident occurred in a garage that was housing almost twice as many vehicles that it was designed to hold.

The court heard that Robert Cherry, 59, had just finished making routine checks to his vehicle and was talking to colleagues. He stepped in between two parked buses and one of the buses suddenly lurched backwards, trapping Mr Cherry against the rear vehicle. He died at the scene.

The HSE investigation revealed that traffic management at the station was poor. The garage was designed to hold a maximum of 65 buses, but on the morning of the accident it was holding 119. Additionally, the bus that struck Mr Cherry had a defective gear selector, which might have caused the wrong gear to be indicated to the driver. The bus company was found guilty of breaching section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974.

 Bill Hazleton, HSE Inspector, said: “Robert Cherry died because his employer did not do enough to ensure his safety or that of his colleagues. He was a much loved family member who was killed while going about his daily work. Like so many workplace accidents, this one was entirely preventable and should never have happened. The company’s traffic management system was poor and its processes for maintaining vehicles and for identifying and repairing defects were inadequate”.

When with old pals I tend to get plenty of stick regarding what I do for a living – i.e. managing a health and safety consultancy.  There’s always someone mockingly asking me if it’s safe to do this or that and I frequently get reminded about some ludicrous story that has appeared in the press during the week.

Earlier this month David Cameron was on television with a major speech about the plethora of bureaucratic nonsense associated with health and safety which is holding back society at large.  This was followed by a feature on Newsnight where Jeremy Paxman was goading John Holden, President of the Institute of Occupational Safety and Health into some sort of conflict with Professor Frank Furedi from Kent University who was supposed to be ‘anti’ health and safety.  Curiously enough, the two supposedly opposing factions agreed that we need a sensible approach to managing risk and organisations should concentrate on minimising serious risks. 

The whole debate really does divide the general public between those that mock the subject of health and safety and industry bosses who are encouraged to take it seriously.  Our view is as follows.

Whether anybody likes it or not, all employers are legally obliged to manage health and safety. This means having written policies, procedures and systems in place, which can be examined and verified. The popular press attempts to ridicule the overabundance of health and safety rules and regulations, and  it would be fair to say that the papers are full of stories that trivialise the issue. Children being asked to wear goggles while playing conkers, hairdressers being prevented from using scissors during training (on the Health and Safety Executive’s website – www.hse.gov.uk – is an excellent feature called Myth of the Month where you can check out such stories) – these border on nanny state absurdity. 

To tar all health and safety regulations with the same brush is equally absurd – many of these reported stories are untrue or distorted. Health and safety is the easy target to cover for other management deficiencies. When it comes to health and safety in the workplace, the regulations are as far removed from absurdity as possible.

 Protect your employees. Protect your business.

Approximately 200 people are killed at work every year (not including driving). Thousands of people incur injuries or develop conditions that prevent them working, both temporarily, and in many cases, permanently. The HSE reported that over 29 million working days were lost due to work related ill health and workplace injury during 2008/9. These injuries cost employers millions of pounds, despite the fact that the UK has the best health and safety record in the European Union.

Employers are often faced with court action from their employees (and visitors), attempting to prove that they were not properly protected whilst on company business. Even low risk work routines, such as using computers, can result in employees requiring time off work and prosecuting the employer.

Employers must have an effective health and safety regime in place, to protect themselves from serious accident and insurance claims. They simply can’t afford not to.

To manage an effective health and safety regime all employers must understand that health and safety is a process, not a short one-off project. To protect the business and its employees, employers must ensure they are keeping pace with regularly changing health and safety requirements. The employer should ensure its documentation is current and valid, all risks are measured and controlled and staff are properly trained in any aspect of health and safety which presents a risk.

Data Sound’s approach is to keep health and safety simple.

Poole Council has spent £14,000 on a fake cone shaped Christmas tree because of fears that a traditional fir tree would fall over in high winds and would be a danger to the public. The ‘cone tree’ is reported to be much safer and sturdier and doesn’t even need to be cordoned off.  It doesn’t have any branches or decorations and has been described by one shopper as ‘something that has landed from out of space’.

New Look, a top high street clothing chain was fined a record £400,000 for breaching fire safety law after a fire started at their Oxford Street, London, branch. Allegedly, inadequate emergency exits and poor staff training led to staff failing to react to the fire alarm and allowing customers to continue shopping as the fire spread through the building.

It was reported that the fire alarm went off intermittently, but it was only when people walking passed the store shouted warnings, staff realised the seriousness of the problem and ordered everyone to leave. The emergency services were contacted by the store manager of the store opposite.

Joanne Weaver, one of the shoppers in the store when the fire started said “Staff within the shop did not seem to have a plan to evacuate people. They went from no cause for alarm, to panic”.

This is the biggest fine a company has received since the new fire safety legislation came into force in 2006.

Next Page »