Health and Safety Consultants

Pinguin Food Ltd, an international frozen vegetable supplier has been fined after a worker’s finger was amputated when his hand was crushed. The worker was straightening some boxes on an automatic palletising machine when the incident occurred. Even though the machine he was working on had an aperspex guard attached, the worker still entered the enclosure when the machine was running. His fingers got caught between the pallet and conveyor.

 The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) conducted an investigation and found that a number of employees had been given interlock parts which effectively overrode the safety systems in place and allowed access to the enclosure.

 The company was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay full costs of £3,500 at Boston Magistrates’ Court after pleading guilty to breaching section 2(1) of the Health & Safety at Work etc Act 1974.

Scott Wynne, an HSE Inspector, said: “Pinguin is a large international company and it is often assumed companies of this size adhere to health and safety policies at all times. The employee regularly gained access to the machinery, defeating the safety device using an interlock mechanism given to him by another member of staff. The automatic palletising machine can carry up to a ton of boxes so the employee could easily have suffered more severe injuries. Pinguin should have had robust supervision and monitoring that should have identified staff were overriding interlocks and stopped it happening.”

American Airlines has been fined £70,000 after one of its workers had to have his leg amputated following an incident at Heathrow Airport.

Kulwant Bhara, 45, was preparing an aircraft at Terminal 3 at London Heathrow Airport when a 70-tonne ‘pushback tug’ used to move aircraft knocked him to the ground, running over his right leg.

Mr Bhara who has not been able to work since, said: “The incident has effectively turned my life upside down and has affected both myself and my family drastically in a number of different ways.”

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that the ‘pushback tug’ did not have reversing lights or an audible reversing alarm.

John Crookes, an HSE Inspector, said: “Mr Bhara suffered injuries of a life changing nature, which were in part due to American Airlines failing to follow internal guidance requiring modification to pushback tugs. By failing to identify the problems with this tug over many years, the company fell well below the expected standard of safety management for a major international airline.”

A NHS Trust has been fined £75,000 and ordered to pay £25,000 in costs after a mother who had just given birth died when she was given the wrong drug.

Mayra Cabrera, 30, was given an epidural drug in her arm instead of a saline solution. The drug mix up led to medical complications and she died hours later. Wiltshire Police and The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that both types of drugs had almost identical packaging and were stored in the same racking system.

Great Western Hospitals NHS Trust pleaded guilty to breaching Section 3 (1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.

Liam Osborne, an HSE Inspector said: “This was an absolutely heartbreaking case to investigate. Mayra Cabrera needlessly died as a result of comprehensive management failings at board, pharmacy and ward level. Had the hospital done something as simple as keeping these completely different but almost identical-looking drugs in separate cupboards, then Mrs Cabrera would not have died. It is really important that risks are properly assessed and safe systems put in place that minimise the chance of human error.”

Corus, a multinational steelmaker, has been fined £240,000, after a lorry driver was crushed to death at its site in Staffordshire. Ross Beddow, 22, was helping to load three tonnes of steel plates onto a lorry when the load became uneven and fell on top of Mr Beddow, killing him.

The firm pleaded guilty to breaching Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974.  The HSE investigation found that the system of work for loading steel was unsafe.

Dr Wai-Kin Liu, an inspector at HSE, said:”This was a tragedy that could and should have been avoided. All the steps involved in an overall task should be analysed to create a safe system of work, and the consequences of something going wrong should always be taken into account.

“Anyone can make errors – no matter how well trained and motivated they are – but employers must develop a safe way of working that helps to prevent mistakes and reduces the severity of the consequences if they do occur. If Corus had a safe system of working then Mr Beddow would not have been killed simply doing his job.”

Judith Hackitt, Chair of the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), blames the media for the lack of school trips and practical science lessons.  She believes that the media has planted a misplaced fear about potentially risky activities because of the way they report certain tragic incidents. Around half of the schools in the UK are wary of organising school trips and practical lessons because of increased fears over bureaucracy.

“The general risk aversion and propensity to look for others to blame is bound to have an effect on teachers, if parents have unrealistic expectations of what teachers can reasonably do,” she said.

“I have no doubt there’s a culture that taking a trip is hard, but it’s not as complicated as they think it is. I’m not unsympathetic, and we want to help make things easier” said Ms Hackitt.

Last week at the Independent Schools Council (ISC) Annual Conference many of Judith’s fears were confirmed. I attended the conference and spoke to several head teachers who regularly cancel trips because they do not have time to complete risk assessments and fear what would happen to them if something did go wrong.

A new set of simplified guidelines is being finalised.  Staff can use the new guidelines when organising trips. New checklist templates for risk assessments will be made available to schools and will replace the four sets of documents that schools currently have to complete.  

 ”This tries to put it all in one place and is written in a way that people shouldn’t be overwhelmed. It’s saying it is pretty simple when you look at it” said Ms Hackitt.

Romtech Ltd, a manufacturing firm based in Cardiff, has been fined £40,000, after a worker’s arm was seriously hurt when it became trapped in a rotating drill. The incident occurred on 2 February 2009 at Watling Street Business Park in Norton Canes.

Steven Jones, 28, from Staffordshire was using a radial arm drill when his right hand glove became entangled in the rotating drill.  His arm got trapped in the drill and broke both bones in his forearm and damaged his muscles. The emergency services had to cut him free when they arrived on the scene.

The firm pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 11(1) of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulation 1998 and Regulation 3(1) of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999.

Andrew Bowker, an inspector at HSE, said: “Mr Jones suffered a shocking fracture to his right arm and his injuries may have been much worse if he had not been able to use his left hand to hit the machine’s stop button. The potential safety risks associated with entanglement on radial arm drilling machines have been well known for decades and control measures have been well documented in HSE guidance going back to the 1970s. It is not acceptable that this type of incident is still happening.”

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.

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.

Edinburgh Council has been fined £14,000 for putting 14 of its workers at risk of exposure to asbestos.  The council’s joiners were carrying out refurbishment work at Castlebrae Community High School, when one of the laboratory doors they were instructed to remove, started leaking white dust.  The council did not have clear procedures in place for informing workers that the substance was in the building and they failed to keep accurate records of the location and condition of the asbestos. The council was found guilty of breaching the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2006.

This is not the first time the council has had to pay out over work carried out at the school. Back in February this year, they were fined £17,000 after unqualified workmen were sent in to remove toxic material.

Over the next year, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) plans to double inspections of licensed asbestos removal contractors and is appointing more fixed term inspectors as part of their new asbestos Hidden Killer campaign. We would like to remind you that under the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2006 all contractors removing asbestos must be licensed by the HSE.  All new licence holders and contractors renewing their licenses are likely to be checked by the HSE. You have been warned!