Nestle fined £807,776 after a repeat of an accident on a conveyor belt

Nestle was fined £807,776 (inc.costs) after an employee suffered life-changing injuries at its factory in Newcastle upon Tyne.

• The problem occurred on a machine used to make chocolate sweets.
• The company had not properly assessed the risk created by the rollers under the conveyor belt 
• They had failed to guard the roller, which was a dangerous part.
• On November 30, 2020 a maintenance technician was investigating a problem on the conveyor belt on this machine.
• While checking the machine, his sleeve was caught in a roller, which dragged his left arm into the machine, trapping it between the roller and a conveyor belt.
• It was foreseeable that employees would require access to this area and there was a clear risk of injury to employees coming into contact with this roller. 
• Nestle had previously been prosecuted following a similar incident at its Halifax factory

The HSE inspector said:
“This incident could easily have been avoided had Nestle properly reviewed the safety measures at its plant and its equipment to ensure that access to dangerous parts was prevented. Nestle were aware of this risk following a similar incident at its Halifax plant but failed to take appropriate action.”

Infinity Metals Limited fined £33,685 after machine operator lost parts of four fingers

Infinity Metals Limited, a scrap metal company was fined £33,685 (inc.costs) after a worker lost parts of four fingers while operating poorly maintained machinery.

The circumstances were:

1. The accident occurred on a crocodile shear on  27 March 2020
2. The operator of the machine leant over it while it was in motion to clear metal and caught his right hand in the machine. 
3. This caused him to suffer an amputation to four of his fingers.

The HSE inspector said: 
“The lack of clear roles and responsibilities together with insufficient training and poorly maintained machinery played a significant part in this incident. This incident could so easily have been avoided by simply maintaining the machinery in good working order, ensuring that the correct control measures were present, and ensuring that safe working practices were adhered too.”

Two companies fined a total of £393,000 after a lorry driver was crushed by a load of gates as he unloaded them

LM Bateman & Company Ltd were fined £136,334 (inc.costs) and Joseph Ash Ltd fined £256,834 (inc.costs) after a heavy goods vehicle (HGV) driver suffered fatal chest injuries while unstrapping a load on a trailer.

The circumstances were:

• Arrangements for planning and restraining loads were inadequate.
• They did not ensure that the stability of goods was independent of the load straps so that release of the straps did not allow the load to fall from the vehicle.
• The vehicle had been loaded with the gates at Joseph Ash Ltd.
• On 20 June 2018 it was driven by Andrew Bayley-Machin, an employee of LM Bateman & Company Ltd. to the LM Bateman site.
• When releasing the load straps, the gates fell approximately three metres from the flatbed trailer onto Mr Bayley-Machin.
• These fatally crushed him.

The HSE inspector said: 

“This death would have been prevented had an effective system for managing load restraint been in place at both companies. This is a reminder to all companies of the need to properly assess and apply effective control measures when securing loads to minimise the risks from transporting goods on road vehicles.”

FDS (Cambridge) Ltd fined £27,354 after member of public was crushed on their site

FDS (Cambridge) Ltd fined £27,354 (inc.costs) after member of public was crushed on their site.

The circumstances were:

• The accident occurred on 30 January 2020 at the company’s site near Ely.
• There was no method of preventing members of the public being able to get onto the site unchallenged.
• There was no method of preventing them from parking near an operating machine
• There were no barriers, etc., or suitable arrangements in place to ensure that the machine had ceased operating whilst people were in the vicinity.
• An FDS employee was moving and processing a stockpile of concrete and brick rubble using an excavator.
• A member of the public then came onto the site in a vehicle.
• He was removing building waste from his trailer.
• He became trapped against the trailer by the reversing excavator, sustaining multiple fractures to both of their legs.

The HSE inspector said: “This was a tragic and wholly avoidable incident, caused by the failure of the host company to implement safe systems of work, considering the breadth of their operations, including, and especially, those which involved visitors to its site. This risk was further amplified by the company’s failure to undertake a number of simple safety measures including the segregation of vehicles and pedestrians.”

ADA Machining Services fined £24,952 after second accident on vertical boring machine

ADA Machining Services Ltd., was been fined £24,952 (inc. costs) after a worker’s hand was partially severed when it was caught in machinery.

The circumstances were:

• The accident was on a Richards 16ft vertical boring machine'
• There was inadequate guarding to prevent access to dangerous parts of the machinery
• There was an inadequate risk assessment for operating the vertical boring machine..
• It was custom and practice to walk on the rotating machine table during operation of the vertical boring machine.
• On 24 March 2021 an employee was operating the machine when he stepped on to the rotating table to check the internal boring cut 
• He slipped and fell on the table.
• On his third attempt to steady himself after slipping, his hand was drawn into the in-running nip, and he suffered a partially severed hand. 
• He remains unable to work.
• ADA Machining Services Ltd., had previously pleaded guilty of breaching the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulation on 12 May 2010 for an entrapment accident on a vertical boring machine.
• HSE provided guidance on guarding these machines at that time so the company had been aware of the risks for a number of years and should have taken remedial action to prevent a second accident of the same nature happening again.

The HSE inspector said:
“This injury was easily prevented, and the risk should have been identified and eliminated when the company were given advice on guarding this machine by HSE 11 years ago. Employers should make sure they properly assess and apply effective control measures to minimise the risk from dangerous parts of machinery.”

Amberset fined after employee was drawn into unguarded machine

Manufacturer of paper and paperboard Amberset Limited was been fined £4,197 (inc.costs) after an employee was injured when they were drawn into a large paper re-winding machine.

The circumstances were:

• The paper rewinder was not suitably guarded.
• This had been the case since August 1998. 
• The rewinder allowed access to dangerous parts of machinery at various places including the front of the rewinder where the employee was drawn by their hand between two exposed rollers.
• On 19 July 2021 an employee sustained injuries of three broken bones in their shoulder, bruising of the elbow and wrist and superficial damage to their head. 
• The man then underwent surgery following the incident, where metal plates and pins were fitted in his shoulder and arm.

The HSE inspector said:
“Employers should regularly review the safety measures on their plant and equipment to ensure that access to dangerous parts is prevented. The guidance on safe operation of paper rewinders is well established as is the law and guidance on guarding dangerous parts of machinery.
Employees should be prevented from getting into a position where they can come into contact with dangerous parts of machinery.
It is fortunate that the quick action of the employee’s colleagues in stopping the machine, ensured that they were not pulled further into the machine as their injuries could have been much worse if not fatal.”

Laxtons fined £16,500 when employee lost part of his hand due to a defective guard interlock

 Laxtons Limited, a West Yorkshire manufacturing company, was fined £16,509 (inc.costs) for safety breaches after a worker lost part of their hand in a textile machine.

The circumstances were:

• On 24 March 2021 an employee was operating a textile machine.
• This machine had a defective interlock which allowed it to run when the guard over a pair of in-running rollers and gears, was opened.
• When he opened a guard to check on a build-up of fibres, he reached in to remove material, losing part of his hand.

Midland Steel Reinforcement Supplies fined £491,000 for multiple failings

Midland Steel Reinforcement Supplies (UK) Limited were fined £491,239 (inc.costs) after multiple health and safety failings were found at their site in Bishop Auckland.

The circumstance were:

• In June 2019, an employee was struck and injured by a work piece and suffered an injury to his right hand. 
• In July 2019, an agency worker suffered a finger amputation whilst manually removing a piece of metal near the unguarded blade of another machine.
• HSE visited the steel supplies site in 2019 ,finding wholly inadequate management of health and safety.
• An investigation by HSE found the company had failed to prevent access to the dangerous moving parts on both machines. These machines were metal rebar forming machines and had been used at the site for a number of years. 
• In addition to the guarding faults, HSE also found the emergency stop and safety devices wired out on one of the machines.
• The machinery risk assessments were substandard.
• Staff were trained to operate the machines in an unsafe manner. 
• The company also had a forklift truck in daily use, despite it having defective brakes.

B&M fined £1M after electrical explosion at their warehouse

Retail company B&M were fined £1,000,000 after an electrician suffered serious burns to 15 per cent of his body when he was caught in an explosion at a warehouse in Liverpool.

The circumstances were:

• On 22 September 2018, an electrician was attempting to connect a generator to B&M’s Low Voltage supply in order to allow B&M to operate some of its core site functions whilst high voltage maintenance was being undertaken. 
• This work was complex involving several contractors and required co-ordination of different working parties with specific time limited requirements. 
• There was insufficient planning between parties beforehand including who was in charge of each site, coordination of work and exchange of relevant documentation.
• B&M failed to appoint a suitably competent person to plan and carry out the work to connect temporary generators to their distribution board at the premises.
• Electrical contractors Daker Ltd.’s work methods fell well below the required standards. Electrical work commenced without proper planning. 
• The power supply to the circuit was not stopped prior to the incident and live working was allowed to take place.
• This meant that the power supply could be switched on or off at any point, putting workers at risk of electric shock.
• The electrician was using a metal spanner to repair an electrical fault at B&M Retail Ltd warehouse.
• The spanner he was using  came into contact with a live busbar  linked to the power distribution causing an electrical explosion.

Kent Auto Developments Limited fined £18,349 after employee was drawn into lathe whilst using hand-held emery cloth

Engineering company Kent Auto Developments Limited was fined £18,349 (inc.costs) after a worker suffered injuries after becoming entangled in a metal working lathe whilst using hand-held emery cloth.

The circumstances were:

• On  10 August 2020, Joshua Halls was completing the process of polishing brake drums for a Mini, rotating on a manual metalworking lathe. 
• Joshua was applying emery cloth by hand, a practice condoned by the company, 
• The business had failed to implement a safe system of work.
• Employees routinely polished brake drums with emery cloth by hand on the lathe, a task known to be dangerous due to the potential risk of entanglement of the cloth in the rotating parts of the lathe, which can result in serious personal injury.
• He was drawn into the machine which resulted in lacerations to his forearm and injuries to his neck and face.
• The incident was not RIDDOR-reported until three months after the incident.
• If the requirement to use emery cloth on a lathe is unavoidable, then tool posts and holding devices should be used.

The HSE inspector commented:
“We still see incidents like this, where unsafe work practices with machinery lead to injury, despite the existence of specific guidance published by HSE.
Workers coming into contact with machinery is the  fourth biggest cause of workplace fatalities in Great Britain, with 14 people  killed in the year 2020/21. Over 50,000 non-fatal injuries were reported by employers in the same year.
Employers should ensure that measures are taken to prevent workers from sustaining injury, where it is evident that persons are at risk of becoming entangled in machinery. It’s important that, when people do get hurt, the relevant authorities are notified so that action can be taken to prevent recurrence.”

Personal Protective Equipment Regulations now cover casual/contract workers

The Personal Protective Equipment at Work (Amendment) Regulations 2022 (PPER 2022) are now in force. They amend the 1992 Regulations (PPER 1992).

They now cover workers who generally have a more casual employment relationship and work under a contract for service; they were not included in the scope of PPER 1992.

What this means is that employers must provide the same type of PPE and instructions for casual/contract workers as they would for full-time employees.

Staircraft Group fined £206,477 after employee fell 3.5m from forklift truck whilst cleaning windows.

Carpentry and joinery company Staircraft Group Limited was fined £206,477 (inc. costs) after a man working unsecured on the forks of a fork-lift truck fell 3.5 metres to the ground.

The circumstances were:

• On 14 June 2021 an employee was cleaning windows.
• He was working from an unsecured stillage on the forks of a fork-lift truck in order to clean office windows at height.  
• The company failed to identify that using a stillage to lift someone on the forks of a forklift truck, a method that they had used before, was unsafe.
• There was a lack of training for employees on the dangers of working at height without the proper equipment .
• There were no systems of work or risk assessments in place.
• The stillage tipped and the employee fell 3.5 metres to the ground.  
• As a result of the incident, he sustained a broken leg and an injury to his elbow.

The HSE inspector said:
“The employee’s injuries were very serious, and he could have easily been killed.
This serious incident could so easily have been avoided by simply carrying out correct control measures and safe working practices.
Companies should be aware that HSE will not hesitate to take appropriate enforcement action against those that fall below the required standards.”

Dyson fine £1.2M + costs after accident when moving a machine tool

Technology firm Dyson was fined £1,211,511 (inc costs) after an employee sustained head and chest injuries when moving a machine tool.

The circumstances were:

• On August 27, 2019.a milling machine weighing 1.5 tonne was being moved at the Tetbury site.
• Dyson Technology Limited failed to provide suitable and sufficient information, instruction, and training to those undertaking the task. 
• They also failed to adequately assess the task and devise a safe system of work to ensure the machine was moved safely.
• Two employees lifted the machine using a five-tonne jack.
• They were in the process of replacing two fixed roller skates with several wooden blocks when it fell.
• One of the employees was struck by the machine and sustained a wound to his head and injuries to his chest.

The inspector said:
“This incident could have been fatal. Those in control of work have a duty to assess the risks, devise safe methods of working and to provide the necessary information, instruction, and training to their workforce.
“Had a suitable safe system of work been in place this incident and the related injuries could have been prevented.”