bulletin
Health and safety case law update
2 August 2010
Workplace transport
Case 1 - employee injured by forklift
truck
The Depot Manager of a portable toilet hire firm was working in
the yard area of a depot when he was struck by a reversing forklift
truck. He sustained multiple fractures to his foot as a result of
the accident. The subsequent HSE investigation found that the yard
did not have adequately segregated routes separating pedestrians
and vehicles.
The company was prosecuted for failing to ensure, so far as was
reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of
its employees under Section 2 of the Health and Safety at Work etc
Act 1974. A further charge was brought under Regulation 17(1) of
the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 that
the workplace was not organised in such a way that pedestrians and
vehicles could circulate in a safe manner. The company admitted
both charges before the Stevenage Magistrates and was ordered to
pay a £7000 fine and £3198 in prosecution costs. After the case,
the HSE stated that they would not hesitate to take action against
companies failing to comply with the law.
Case 2 - employee crushed to death in distribution
depot
An HGV driver was reversing his tractor to line up with a
trailer unit parked in a loading bay. When the manoeuvre had been
completed he left his cab and discovered that his colleague had
been crushed between the tractor and the trailer, resulting in
fatal injuries. It was thought that the driver’s colleague was
removing a lock from the trailer so that it could be attached to
the tractor, however the driver could not see him because of the
vehicle’s blind spot.
The HSE prosecuted the company for failing to ensure, so far as
was reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work
of its employees under Section 2 of the Health and Safety at Work
etc Act 1974. The company pleaded guilty, acknowledging that there
should have been better segregation between pedestrians and
vehicles. The company was ordered to pay a £90000 fine and £42000
in prosecution costs. The HSE commented that the company had failed
to assess the risks to its employees in the depot and had failed to
identify and rectify the unsafe system.
What this means for employers
Employers need to be aware of their legal duty to protect people
who work near vehicle routes. The HSE will want to be satisfied
that routes have been assessed and relevant issues have been
considered. A suitable and sufficient risk assessment should be
conducted which covers the following:
- vehicles reversing
- parking
- coupling/uncoupling
- loading/unloading
- tipping
- load safety
- sheeting and netting
- preventing vehicles from overturning
Further guidance including a Site Inspection – Workplace
Transport Checklist is available on the HSE website.
Maintenance of equipment
Case 3 - farm worker crushed to death by faulty
tipper trailer
An agricultural worker was towing manure to a field and dumping
it out of a tipper trailer when the drawbar (a solid coupling
between the vehicle and its load) broke and crashed through the
back of the tractor. The worker was fatally crushed. An
investigation by the HSE found that the tipper trailer had not been
adequately maintained.
The farming and haulage company that had employed the worker
pleaded guilty to failing to ensure, so far as was reasonably
practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of its
employees under Section 2 of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act
1974. The company was sentenced at Norwich Crown Court and was
ordered to pay a £21000 fine and £54000 in prosecution costs. The
HSE commented that it was down to the company to ensure the
equipment was maintained properly and safe for use.
Case 4 - worker suffers multiple injuries in faulty
Bobcat
An employee was driving a Bobcat skid-steer loader when he got
out of the vehicle in order to refuel. He left the engine running
and when he got back into the vehicle he accidentally stepped on
the control to raise the bucket of the vehicle. He was crushed by
the bucket and suffered multiple and life threatening injuries.
It was subsequently discovered that the vehicle normally has a
bar to prevent the bucket from being raised unless there is a
person in the driving seat. However, the bar device on the Bobcat
involved in this incident was not working. The HSE prosecuted the
employer company for failing to ensure, so far as was reasonably
practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of its
employees under Section 2 of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act
1974. The company pleaded guilty and was ordered to pay a £17000
fine and £17000 in prosecution costs. After the case the HSE stated
that this had been a simple example of faulty equipment and
insufficient training.
What this means for
employers
Employers should be aware of the legal requirement to ensure
that work equipment is safe and suitable for use. Work equipment is
almost any equipment used by a worker. Employers should:
- consider what risks there are from using the equipment
- consider what can be done to prevent or reduce the risk
- implement preventative measures
- ensure that there is a regular maintenance system in place
- ensure that people using the equipment have received adequate
training, instruction and information.
Further guidance in relation to the Provision and Use of Work
Equipment Regulations 1998 is available on the HSE website.
talk to us
save to PDF
The content of this bulletin is provided for the purposes of
general interest and information. It contains only brief summaries
of aspects of the subject matter and does not provide comprehensive
statements of the law. It does not constitute legal advice and does
not provide a substitute for it.