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.