Categorising head protection

Useful section in IOSH Magazine's PPE Guide supplement categorising head protection with examples of where it may be applied:

EN812 Bump Caps

• Vehicle manufacture and maintenance
• Loft insulation
• Plumbing
• Removals

EN 397 Industrial safety helmets-Lightweight 

• Low rise construction
• Highway maintenance
• Utilities

EN 397 Industrial safety helmets-Standard

• Construction
• Manufacturing
• External terlecoms

EN 12492 Mountaineering helmets

• Rigging
• High rise construction
• Building sites
• Tower climbing
• Energy and network sites

EN 14052 High-performance industrial safety helmets 

• High rise construction
• Mining
• Demolition

Felt Supplies Ltd. fined £239,000 and director given suspended sentence after fatality

Felt Supplies Ltd., a textile manufacturing company was fined £239,000 (inc.costs) and one of its directors, Wazir Hussain sentenced after a fatal accident to the company’s Managing Director, Nasir Hussain.

The circumstances were:

• On the 1 February 2012 the carding machine had become blocked with waste. 
• Nasir Hussain gained access to the line whilst it was still running.
• Nassir overrode the safety system using a spare key to unlock one of the gates. 
• He then stood on top of the carding machine with a metal bar in order to clear the blockage while the line was still running. 
• Although the machine was switched off after a time it was still running down when his clothing became entangled and he was pulled into the machine and killed.
• The use of a spare key to access machinery, whilst it was operational, was commonplace by the workforce. 
• It was custom and practice for workers to gain access to the machinery in order to clear a jam or blockage.
• Despite HSE issuing a Prohibition Notice to stop these unsafe practices and taking the spare keys into possession the unsafe practices were allowed to continue for a sustained period following the fatal accident with the knowledge and consent of company director Wazir Hussain.

Felt Supplies Ltd was fined £239,000 (inc. costs).

Wazir Hussain received a 12-month suspended prison sentence for 18-months.

The HSE inspector commented:
“This is a tragic incident that could so easily have been avoided. In this case it was the Director that was fatally injured and it could so easily have been an employee, in which case, we may have been looking at a corporate manslaughter charge. Companies should be aware that HSE will not hesitate to take appropriate enforcement action against those that fall below the required standards especially where there has been a deliberate breach or a flagrant disregard for the law.”

Tayto Group fined £341,750 after an agency worker lost the tops of three fingers

Tayto Group Limited who manufacture crisps and snacks was fined £341,750 (inc.costs) after an agency worker lost the tops of three fingers.

The circumstances were:

• The agency worker was clearing a blockage of material from a machine on the production line.
• The guard on the machine was not secured at the time of the incident. 
• The company had not implemented a formal monitoring system on this machine, to ensure that all guards were in place and secure before the machine was started.
• The worker's hand came into contact with shears and three fingers on his right hand were severed, below the first knuckle.

The HSE Inspector said:
‘This man suffered a life-changing injury in what was an entirely preventable incident. Employers must have adequate and robust systems to ensure that guards used to prevent access to dangerous parts of machinery are in place and secure before machinery is put into use.’

North Eastern engineering company fined £150,000 after 2 employees sustained chemical burns

PSL Worldwide Projects Ltd., were fined £150,000 for safety breaches after two of its workers were burned when they were sprayed with chemicals during chemical cleaning of a pipework system.

The circumstances were:

• The accident occurred during cleaning of pipework at a Hyclone UK Ltd site, in Cramlington on 31 July 2014.
• The cleaning of the pipework system used sodium hydroxide (caustic soda).
• PSL Worldwide Projects Ltd., had not adequately risk assessed the task.
• The equipment provided to do the job, in particular the hosing, was not suitable for the solution.
• PSL failed to provide adequate personal protective equipment.
•  A reaction occurred between the chemicals and water in the system that caused the liquid to heat up building up pressure in the hose. 
• The hose detached and sprayed the two workers with the solution, causing severe burns.
• One operative received life threatening burns to his back, buttocks, arms, leg, neck and one side of his face. 
• The other operative received burns to the right side of his head, his neck, and back, left arm and behind his right ear.

No costs were awarded due to the company being in liquidation.

The HSE inspector commented:
“If a suitable risk assessment had been undertaken it would have identified that the equipment being used was not right for the chemicals or the work being carried out. All companies who work with high hazard chemicals should learn from this case and ensure that their workers are properly protected.”

Cohart Asbestos Disposal fined £45,674 for leg amputation

Cohart Asbestos Disposal Ltd., an Essex-based hazardous waste disposal company was fined £45,674 (inc.costs) after a worker was crushed beneath a tracked excavator at a sorting and recycling site.

The circumstances were:

• 7 February 2014 a company director was operating a 360^o tracked excavator, which he was using to transfer waste from a main pile to an adjacent manual-sorting area at the Cohart site.
• The excavator’s reversing alarm and beacon were not working and a mirror was missing from the side of the cab.
• There was no camera or mirror on the rear of the vehicle.
• The company had failed to ensure effective communications between the operator of the excavator and persons working in the yard.
• A worker was processing wood waste .
• He moved behind the excavator to pick up an old door and place it in a skip. 
• As he did so, the operator reversed the excavator, crushing the worker beneath one of the tracks. 
• He sustained serious crush injuries to his right leg which later required amputation in hospital.
• A visibility assessment on the excavator also revealed that the operator would have been affected by a ‘blind spot’ of up to eight metres directly behind the vehicle.  

The HSE Inspector said:
“Potentially fatal risks arise from operating heavy plant on waste sites, particularly if, as in this case, the vehicle operator’s visibility is restricted. This worker suffered life-changing injuries after the company failed to put in place effective measures to protect pedestrian workers from its heavy plant operations. Every year many people are killed or seriously injured in incidents involving workplace transport, and there is no excuse for employers to neglect this risk. Pedestrians, whether employees or others, should be kept separate from workplace vehicle movements by using physical barriers or safe systems of work that are clear and well supervised.

Volvo fined £900,000 after fall from fault step ladder

Volvo was fined £905,900 (inc.costs) after one of their workers fell and suffered head injuries.

The circumstances were:

• The accident occurred at their national truck, bus and plant division.
• On 17 September 2015 a worker was servicing a large delivery truck.
• A step ladder that he was using was damaged and its anti-slip feet were worn.
• It was not Volvo property and had not been maintained or checked to ensure it was suitable for use.
• Volvo UK had not trained their staff to select, inspect and use access equipment for work at height.
• He was repairing the driver’s access rope for the cab when he fell, striking his head and losing consciousness.
• He was placed in a medically induced coma for two-weeks. 
• He still suffers from ongoing complications and has been unable to return to work.

The HSE inspector said,
“This worker suffered life changing injuries that could have been prevented by simple health and safety precautions. For two weeks his family was told to prepare for the worst as he was placed in an induced coma to help manage the swelling on his brain. This case is not about banning ladders, on many occasions they are the right equipment to use when working at height, it is about companies ensuring they properly maintain their work at height equipment and train their workers on how to inspect them and select the correct tools for the job. As this case shows, even a fall from a relatively small height can have devastating consequences.”

Health and Safety Offences Guidelines bite. An explanation of how they work.

By a perverse coincidence, two cases for identical events at the same company (Burger King) enable us to compare the fines imposed after 12th March 2015 when the Health and Safety Offences Guidelines came into effect.

Both fines were for breaching section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 

• That imposed before 12 March 2015 was £13,300.

• That imposed after 12 March 2015 was £153,360.

I think that the fact that the second case was a repeat of the first would have increased the fine because Burger King had not learnt the lessons, but the new level of fines means that companies must be aware of what could potentially hit them. 

Hence the link below to our 2015 blog explaining how the Health and Safety Offences Guidelines work.

See our blog explaining the Sentencing Guidelines