Firm Fined for Worker’s Hand Injury | Health & Safety

Firm fined £3,000 for worker’s hand injury

Key Facts:

• A tool manufacturing firm have been prosecuted following a worker’s hand injury.
• A shift-manager’s hand was crushed in a machine whilst he was attempting to fix a fault. As a result of his injuries, he lost the index finger on his left hand.
• The firm was fined £3,000 and ordered to pay costs of £2,288.10.

The Case:

An investigation was launched into a tool manufacturing company after a worker lost a finger in an incident involving an unguarded machine.

On 15 December 2011, a 29-year-old shift manager was attempting to fix a machinery fault. The machine in question was a block printing machine, which embosses foil by using a weight pushing down on a ram. The shift manager had stepped onto the machine and was adjusting the weight when a colleague operated the machines controls. His index finger on his left hand was crushed between the weight adjustment and the top of the ram.

As a result of his injuries, his finger had to be amputated below the second knuckle and he was unable to return to work for a month.

The subsequent HSE investigation found that the machine was missing a Perspex guard that could have prevented the worker’s hand injury. The firm had failed to ensure a safe system of work was in place for adjusting the weight on the machine ram. Furthermore, there was no safe access to the machine, and there was no safe method in place for the isolation of the machine.

The case was heard at Nottingham Magistrates’ Court on 1 April, where the tool firm pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Etc. Act 1974. They were fined £3,000 and ordered to pay costs of £2,288.10.

What the HSE inspector had to say:

Speaking after the hearing the HSE Inspector Judith McNulty-Green stated that:

“This incident was entirely preventable yet several failures led to a man suffering a painful injury. 

To adjust the weight, workers were climbing on to the front ledge, a practice which should never have been allowed. Instead, Fiskars should have devised and implemented a safe system of work that ensured no-one had access to dangerous moving parts. In addition the workforce should have been provided with detailed training and instruction in how to carry out the task.” 

What the law states:

Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 states:

It shall be the duty of every employer to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of all his employees. 

Further information on safe work with machinery can be found here.

Find details of our safety training courses here

Follow us on twitter: @safety_matters

Don’t hesitate to get in touch if we can help you find a solution to your safety matters.