Company fined $200,000 following the stabbing of an employee
On 24 May 2004, a client attended the employer place of work a community service centre for the purpose of an access visit to her three children, who had been removed from her care the week prior. An interview was conducted between the client and two of the employees. During the interview the client stabbed one of the employees and threatened other staff present. The client was arrested, subsequently found guilty of intent to maliciously wound and sentenced to a term of imprisonment. Even though the employer knew of the classes of risk faced by its employees and had various paper systems in place, the paper systems were not effectively implemented. This case highlights the importance of implementing the paper systems and for the employer to ensure all foreseeable risks are identified, assessed and appropriately controlled including those that relate to workplace violence. Full Judgement
Subsidiary Company fined $150,000 following death of an employee
An Australian subsidiary owned by a Netherland company is fined $150,000 following the death of an employee. The accident occurred on 3 July 2006 when an employee of the company, was engaged in cleaning a mixer. There were power circuits that could be isolated while this task was performed, especially since it involved employees entering the large mixer to perform the cleaning work. On this particular day, however, the mixer was not effectively isolated and the machine was turned on by another employee while the employee was inside the machine. The employee was seriously injured and later in the morning passed away.
The company pleaded guilty to s 8(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000, for failure to ensure the health, safety and welfare of employees.
The following points arise from this case:
1. An employer’s obligation is not only to be reactive to situations that arise in the day-to-day operation, but to also be energetic and active in seeking out and identifying potential risks before they occurred.
2. It is not a satisfactory to assume that if a task is relatively simple, reducing risk by way of training or documentation is not necessary.
Company fined after a worker is trapped under the tynes (forks) of the forklift
A Company was fined $100,000 following a guilty plea to Section 8 of OHS Act 2000 after worker is trapped under the tynes (forks) of the forklift. The incident occurred when 2 employees where attempting to empty a bin attached to the tynes of the forklift, the tynes had become stuck and the bin could not be lowered. The workers then attempted to lower the bin by hitting it with metal bars, the tynes released trapping one of the workers underneath it. The worker was taken to hospital suffering from a head injury, an abdominal injury and a fractured hip.
At the time of the incident the employer had a comprehensive and effective system for dealing generally with defects or faults identified in forklifts. The workers were trained in many aspects of the system and were aware, in particular, of what to do when encountering a problem with a forklift. However, in the present circumstances the Employer’s system, although comprehensive, lacked a procedure for dealing with the lowering and removal of suspended forklift loads in circumstances where the mast of a forklift became jammed.
“This case is yet another illustration of the need for employers to exercise abundant caution, maintain constant vigilance and take all practicable precautions to ensure safety in the workplace. It is essential that the approach should be a pro-active and not a re-active one; employers should be on the offensive to search for, detect and eliminate, so far as is reasonably practicable, any possible areas of risk to safety, health and welfare which may exist or occur from time to time in the workplace". Full Judgement
Builder, Subby and Supervisor fined after a trainee was pinned by a EWP causing his death
Builder fined $180,000, Subby fined $180,000 and Supervisor fined $18,000 after a trainee was pinned by a elevated work platform causing his death. The killed worker was tightening bolts over the joints of the metal roof purlins. The task was carried out from the platform of the boom lift at a height of 7.7 meters above ground level. The killed worker was noticed not to be wearing a harness and had been warned earlier. Later on the day he was found pinned between the platform and purlins. He did not respond when the supervisor called out to him. As the supervisor tried to lower the boom, the worker tumbled to the ground.
Firstly, this case demonstrates the importance of ensuring site safety plans are adhered to by all subcontractors on site. Secondly, workers are often reluctant to wear harnesses while working on a elevated work platform, this serves as a reminder on the importance of wearing harnesses. Full Judgement
Supplier of Plant fined $60,000 following the death of an employee
On July 2006, a 37-year-old employee working alone commenced operating a Pallet Paint Line De-stacker (plant), almost 1 hour later the employee was found in an unconscious state trapped between a stack of 20 pallets. The employee died 3 days later from the injuries he received. The supplier pleaded guilty for failure “to ensure that a person who designs, manufactures or supplies any plant or substance for use by persons at work must ensure that the plant or substance is safe and without risks to health when properly used…” (OHS Act). The supplier was fined $60,000 and the director of the supply company was fined $9000. It must be remembered that Suppliers, Manufacturers and Designers have an obligation under the NSW OHS Act. Full Judgement.
Company fined $100,000 after a worker received lacerations and serious injuries to his arm
A worker bent down under the head of the conveyor, which had stopped to retrieve a parcel of meat which had fallen onto a steel rack. Suddenly the conveyor started and the worker’s right arm was dragged into a shear hazard at the head of the conveyor. At the time of the accident the conveyor had insufficient guarding to prevent persons gaining access to the shear hazard at the head of the conveyor. The maximum penalty which the company faces is $550,000. However, in the absence of prior convictions the company was entitled to leniency. The company was fined $100,000 under section 10(2) of OHS Act 2000. Under section 10(2) a person who has control of any plant or substance used by people at work must ensure that the plant or substance is safe and without risks to health when properly used. In this case it was possible to achieve greater effectiveness in the implementation of safe work practices which includes guarding and lockout devices. Full Judgement
Company fined 275,000 following electrocution of a worker
A company has been fined $275,000 for failure to ensure that people other than its employees were not exposed to risks to their health or safety and welfare at their workplace. At the time of the incident a crane crew had been working in close proximity to 11000V over head power lines. As the crane jib came close to the power lines an employee received an electric shock as he was holding onto the chain or hook – he later died in hospital. The company had failed to provide a spotter and obtain a safe work method statement from the crane crew. The case highlights the importance of ensuring the safety of others in the workplace which can include visitors, general public and subcontractors. It is also important for companies to ensure that OHS management systems are implemented in the workplace.Full Judgement
