Health and Safety Failings – Company fined after worker loses fingers in machinery

Company fined after worker loses fingers in machinery

Key Facts:

• A worker’s fingers were severed in a machinery safety incident.
• The correct risk assessments had not been carried out for procedures relating to the machinery.
• The company was fined £20,000, costs of £1784.50 and a victim surcharge of £120.

The Case:

An HSE investigation has been launched following a machinery safety incident at an aluminium fabricator company on 18 March 2014.

A 41-year-old employee was working to unblock a machine that pushes out aluminium to produce a manufactured piece on the day of the incident. He had entered the machine with a second employee, through separate gates, to assess blockages to the machine. When the second person left the machine and closed his gate, the machine was no longer fully isolated, but the first employee was still inside the machine. When the machine restarted, it allowed the loading clamps to operate despite the first employee being inside. This is when his left hand became trapped in the loading clamps of the machine. He lost the end of his little finger and his ring finger up to the second joint. He also suffered burns. He was unable to return to work for 8 months, after which he returned to the company in a different role.

Several key machinery safety failings were identified. The interlocks on the machine did not fully isolate the power when they were opened. The company had failed to carry out a risk assessment on the machine following changes.

The case was heard at Chesterfield Magistrates’ Court on 18 March 2015. The company pleaded guilty to breaching regulation 3(1) of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 and regulation 11(1) of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998. They were fined £20,000, costs of £1784.50 and a victim surcharge of £120.

What the HSE inspector had to say:

Speaking after the hearing the HSE Inspector Lindsay Bentley stated that:

“Sapa Profiles UK Ltd allowed access to the dangerous parts of the press, including the loading arms and clamps that injured the worker. 

Furthermore, the company’s risk assessment was not suitable and sufficient to ensure that the relevant dangerous parts of the Press would stop before a person entered the Press. Following the incident it took just 10 minutes for these interlocks to be reprogrammed. 

It should not have been possible to access a danger zone without the machine being safely isolated.  It meant operators who had to frequently unblock the machine were routinely exposed to unnecessary risk. ”

What the law states:

Regulation 3(1) of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 states:

Every employer shall make a suitable and sufficient assessment of (a) the risks to the health and safety of his employees to which they are exposed whilst they are at work; and (b) the risks to the health and safety of persons not in his employment arising out of or in connection with the conduct by him of his undertaking, for the purpose of identifying the measures he needs to take to comply with the requirements and prohibitions imposed upon him by or under the relevant statutory provisions and by Part II of the Fire Precautions (Workplace) Regulations 1997.

Regulation 11(1) of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 states:

Every employer shall ensure that measures are taken in accordance with paragraph (2) which are effective (a) to prevent access to any dangerous part of machinery or to any rotating stock-bar; or (b) to stop the movement of any dangerous part of machinery or rotating stock-bar before any part of a person enters a danger zone.

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.