A Welsh-based company have been fined £40,000 after a roofer fell through an unguarded skylight. He sustained serious head trauma, broken ribs, a ruptured spleen and kidney damage, having profound long-term effects on his health. Following the incident, he now suffers with PTSD.

The subsequent investigation by the HSE found that the company failed to provide external scaffolding, internal safety measures, and failed to provide suitable instructions to workers. Their failure to plan the work properly resulted in life-changing injuries and could have resulted in fatality.

Be proactive

If you’re an employer, contractor, or site manager, take proactive steps today. Review your risk assessments, ensure proper training, and implement appropriate fall prevention measures. Workers’ lives depend on it.

How can LRB Consulting help you?

LRB Consulting Ltd can provide support by conducting site audits, validating current arrangements and helping you identify areas for improvement. We can also support with:

• Helping you achieve third-party accreditation (e.g. CHAS, SafeContractor)
• Assisting with incident investigation
• Providing risk assessment support (creation, review, training)
• Competent advice on work at height activity
• Delivering suitable training (e.g. work at height training)

Contact us today if you require any support.

The post Prosecution: Roofing company fined following fall from heights appeared first on LRB.

We are now several years on from the introduction of the introduction into UK law of the Work at Heights Regulations 2005. Despite that, not all organisations have come to terms with the implications of this law on their work activities.  Many organisations still view the Work at Heights Regulations 2005 as construction-related legislation. The truth is that the regulations apply to all working at height activities in all workplaces. This may include:

• manufacturing areas
• storage areas
• fabrication areas
• mixing areas
• silos
• walkways
• gantries; etc.

In common with nearly all recent health and safety legislation, risk assessment lies at the heart of the Work at Heights Regulations 2005

The risk assessment process aims to avoid the need for working at height where this is reasonably practicable, but where this is not reasonably practicable, to introduce measures to prevent falls and to mitigate the effects of such falls.

Falls remain the biggest cause of Britain’s workplace deaths accounting for about 27% of workplace fatalities. Causes of typical accidents involving working at height include using ladders and stepladders incorrectly, overstretching from ladders and standing on benches or chairs to reach high surfaces. Accidents can also involve access equipment, such as mobile elevated work platforms (MEWP) and suspended access equipment (SAE); window cleaning cradles for example. The big question is how can a business keep its workers safe, and stay compliant with its legal and regulatory obligations?

What is work at height?

1. work in any place, including a place at or below ground level
2. obtaining access to or egress from such place while at work, except by a staircase in a permanent workplace, where, if measures required by these Regulations were not taken, a person could fall a distance liable to cause personal injury. There is no minimum height requirement before these regulations apply (such as the two-metre rule) This means that not only must the employer consider elevated workplaces, but any workplace where there is a risk of injury from falling further. This includes areas around ground level openings into vehicle inspection pits and sumps, etc., it also includes areas below ground level where there is a risk of injury from falling.

Employers’ Duties

The duties imposed on an employer by the Work at Heights Regulations 2005 with respect to the employer’s employees will also apply to any other person under their control. Under the new Regulations, every employer must ensure that all work at height is:

• planned properly
• supervised appropriately; and
• carried out in a manner which is, so far as is reasonably practicable, safe
• selection of suitable work equipment
• provisions for dealing with emergencies and rescue; and
• regard for weather conditions (where appropriate)

The employer shall ensure that no person engages in any activity (including organisation, planning and supervision) in relation to work at height or work equipment for use in such work unless they are competent to do so or, if being trained, is being supervised by a competent person.

Risk Assessment

As is common in modern health and safety, risk assessment is a key element of the regulations. Regulation 6(1) requires the employer to carry out a suitable and sufficient assessment of the risks arising from any work at heights. There will be no need for a specific risk assessment dealing with working at height if this subject has been dealt with fully and satisfactorily in the risk assessments already completed for compliance with Regulation 3 of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999. For many employers, it will be necessary to revisit these assessments or to complete new “working at height” risk assessments to ensure compliance with the new regulations.

Avoidance of risks from work at height

The employer is under a duty to avoid the need for working at a height where it is reasonably practicable to do so (Regulation 6(2)):

“Every employer shall ensure that work is not carried out at height where it is reasonably practicable to carry out the work safely otherwise than at height.”

Work must be carried out in a manner such employees are not placed at risks of injury from falling from a height if this is reasonably practicable. Where reasonably practicable, work should be carried out at ground level (such as by the use of long-handled tools) rather than at height. This applies to maintenance activities as well as to assembly and production activities.

Prevention of falls

The requirement for prevention of employees working at a height from falling is introduced in Regulation 6(3):

“Where work is carried out at height, every employer shall take suitable and sufficient measures to prevent, so far as is reasonably practicable, any person falling a distance liable to cause personal injury.”

Where work involves access to areas from where a person may fall, access to that area must be prevented in some way. This may involve several solutions, such as:

• the use of suitable scaffolding systems,
• the use of mobile elevated work platforms and similar equipment,
• the construction of suitable walls or guard-rails (including intermediary guard-rails and toe-boards),
• the use of a harness and anchored lanyard that stops the person reaching the point from which they may fall (such as a 2m lanyard anchored 2.5 m from a fall, i.e. it is too short all allow the person wearing it to reach the edge over which they may fall).

Planning

The law on working at height requires employers to take into account the risk assessment when organising and planning work. That’s how the precautions (or control measures) required can be identified and work carried out with optimum safety. HSE’s clear advice is to avoid working at height whenever it is reasonably practicable to do so. That can mean using alternative methods such as telescopic water fed poles or, most simply of all, cleaning the windows from the inside. The next option should be using an existing place of work that is already safe: a balcony for example.

There are times when working at height is unavoidable. That’s when employers must make sure that the people doing the work are trained and competent, and that the equipment provided is suitable, properly maintained and will be correctly used.

Where use of the access equipment involves a risk of falling, additional measures to minimise the distance and consequences of any fall must be put in place. Prevent any person falling a distance liable to cause personal injury (such as by the use of a scaffold platform, erected by a competent person, with double guard-rail and toeboards).

Equally importantly, arrest a fall with equipment to minimise the distance and consequences of a fall. Options include safety nets, where work at height cannot be avoided or the risk of falling prevented.

Many HSE investigations of work at height accidents have been investigated and employers have been prosecuted. Perhaps unsurprisingly, one of the most common findings is that the work was not properly planned and supervised. Follow links to some HSE Prosecutions for Work at Height: Warburtons Case – Tesco Case

Mitigation of the effects of falls 

The employer is under a duty (Regulation 6(5)) to mitigate the effects of falling from a height where it is not reasonably practicable to eliminate the risks of the employee falling.

“Where the measures taken under paragraph (4) do not eliminate the risk of a fall occurring, every employer shall take:

1. suitable and sufficient measures, including the provision of work equipment, to minimise—
   1. the distance and consequences; or
   2. where it is not reasonably practicable to minimise the distance, the consequences, of a fall; and
2. without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (3), such additional training and instruction or other additional suitable and sufficient measures to prevent, so far as is reasonably practicable, any person falling a distance liable to cause personal injury

There are several ways of mitigating the effects of a fall from a height, these include:

• the use of a suitable fall arrest system,
• the use of suitably positioned and secured safety nets,
• the use of rail lock systems on vertical ladders,
• the use of suitably sited, specially designed airbags (note, there are, currently, no British or European Standards for such equipment),
• etc.

The specific requirements relating to suitable fall arrest systems are outlined in Schedule 5 to the Working at Height Regulations. Where a risk on a person being injured by a fall exists, the regulations require the use of suitable falls prevention measures and fall mitigation measures. This is a case of both, not either/or.

Falling Objects

Regulation 10 establishes a statutory duty on the employer to take suitable and sufficient steps to prevent, so far as is reasonably practicable, injury to any person arising from falling objects.

In the case of elevated work and storage areas (such as mezzanine floors), this may mean the provision of: suitable, secure storage facilities; suitable toe boards; suitable fencing or netting; solid walls in place of guard railings; etc.

Danger areas

The Regulations place a duty of the employer to ensure that an area where there remains a residual risk of any person being injured as a result of either a fall or as a result of being struck by a falling object is indicated clearly. As a minimum standard, suitable warning signs (complying with the provisions of the Safety (Safety Signs and Signals) Regulations 1996) must be displayed.

Ladders

There has been a great deal of discussion on how the Work at Heights Regulations 2005 affects the use of ladders. The use of ladders is permissible only if the risk assessment has demonstrated that the use of more suitable work equipment is not justified because of the low risk and there is a short duration of use or the existence on site of features which the employer cannot alter.

The above will have the effect of making it difficult to justify the use of ladders for many tasks. Employers will need to consider suitable alternatives, which could include the appropriate use of tower scaffolding and the use of podium steps. Where ladders are used to gain access to elevated work levels, consideration should be given to the provision of a suitable stairway as the primary means of access and egress.

Inspection and records

The employer must make suitable arrangements for all places of work at height, and all equipment used for working at heights, to be checked/inspected by a competent person, with suitable records being kept.

Selection of contractors for working at height

Even when the work at height is contracted out, the employer still has responsibilities. When selecting contractors to work at height, an employer must ensure that the contractor is competent to do such work. In brief, the employer should: Determine the experience and competence of the contractor by addressing the types of questions below:

• Do they have experience in the type of work?
• Is this supported by references?
• Do their workers have any appropriate qualifications, training and experience? (such as in the use of tower scaffolds, cherry pickers, etc.)
• Are the contractors members of a trade or professional body?
• What is their safety performance like (accident, incident and prosecution history)?
• Can the contractor provide examples of methods of work, risk assessments, etc.
• Do contractors have suitable procedures for managing health and safety?
• Will the contractor be using subcontractors (and how will this be managed)
• How will the contractor supervise and manage their site work?
• How will the contractor monitor and check their safety standards?
• How will the contractor inspect and check their equipment (both owned or hired)?
• Do they have adequate insurance?

Summary

Work at height is still the major cause of death within the workplace. All work at height activities need to be risk assessed, with a view to avoiding the need to work at height. Where this is not reasonably practicable, the work at height needs to be carried out in such a way as to ensure the safety of all those involved.

The post Work at Height appeared first on LRB.

The post Worker died after fall from a scaffolding access ladder appeared first on LRB.

Two contractors have been fined after a worker suffers a fatal injury following a fragile roof fall during construction work.

Wolverhampton Crown Court heard how in September 2015, at the Norton Aluminium foundry site in Norton Canes, a scaffold company employee was fatally injured after falling approximately eleven and a half metres through a fragile roof. The employee was working on the corrugated asbestos cement roof to move and fit temporary scaffold guardrails as part of a larger roof refurbishment project at the site.

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that Stephen John Brennan, trading as SB Scaffolding, failed to ensure the health and safety of his employees in relation to the work taking place on the fragile roof at the site. The investigation also found that Sandwell Roofing Limited, a contractor in overall control of the roof refurbishment project, failed to ensure that people not in its employment were not exposed to risks arising from work on the fragile roof.

Stephen John Brennan pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974. He was sentenced to six months imprisonment suspended for two years, 180 hours of unpaid community service and ordered to pay costs of £14,000.

Sandwell Roofing Limited of New Wood Farm Stourton, Stourbridge, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974. The company was fined £41,125 and ordered to pay costs of £33,000.

Speaking after the hearing, HSE inspector Andrew Bowker said:

Falls through fragile roof materials remain one of the most common causes of work-related fatalities during construction work. These risks are well known, and the required control measures well documented in both HSE and industry guidance. This was a tragic and wholly avoidable accident that led to the death of a young man. This death could easily have been prevented if suitable safe systems of work had been in place.

The post (Yet another) fatal injury arsing from a fall from height appeared first on LRB.

Leeds Magistrates’ Court heard that the Karro Food Group workers had not realised that the roof contained roof lights, which were not visible due to a build-up of moss and dirt. The two employees were injured in April 2016 at the firm’s plant in Malton, North Yorkshire, which produces bacon, sausages and other pork products.

According to the HSE, the two workers were walking closely together on the asbestos cement roof when they both stood on the same roof light, which collapsed under their weight.

One of the workers suffered four fractured ribs, a punctured lung, and severe bruising to his thigh, while his colleague’s injuries included a fractured skull, muscular injuries to his right leg and damage to his inner ear which led to ongoing problems with balance, memory and mental health.

The HSE investigation found that there were several roof lights that were not visible and that the employees had not been made aware of their presence. Two months after the accident, the HSE served an immediate prohibition notice which said that the company had not taken suitable steps to prevent persons falling through unprotected fragile surfaces and that there was no information available to confirm the non-fragility of the roof materials.

It also served an improvement notice, with a compliance date of 31 August 2016, which said that the company had failed to ensure that work at height on roofs was properly planned, appropriately supervised and carried out in a safe manner.

Karro Food Group pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act and were fined £1,866,000 and ordered to pay £8,019 in costs.

HSE inspector Mark Slater said:

This was a wholly avoidable incident, caused by the failure of the company to provide adequate controls against the risks arising from working at height.

Consideration of roof fragility and rooflights, visible or not, should be made, especially on older buildings.

The post Fall from height leads to £1,866,000 fine appeared first on LRB.

Leeds Crown Court heard that in November 2015 Mr Smith was contracted to carry out some roof repairs to a Guest House roof in Northallerton. Scaffolding was erected along the full length of the roof at the front of the property. There was a conservatory structure at the rear of the property and the company erected only a partial scaffold at the rear. The scaffolding erected at the rear failed to take the conservatory into account which left approximately two-thirds of the rear roof edge unprotected.

Health and safety risk managers at North Yorkshire County Council saw the project from their office window and were concerned for the safety of two workers on a roof. The workmen were under the control of Mr Smith and at risk of falling approximately 7m from the unprotected edge of the roof at the rear of the property.

Prison Sentence for Roofing Contractor – Chris Smith pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 6 (3) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005. The Court sentenced Mr Smith to an eight-month prison sentence (suspended for two) years and ordered that he complete 200 hours of community service and pay £5800 in prosecution costs.

After the hearing, HSE inspector Tania Shiffer commented:

Work at height, such as roof work, is a high-risk activity that accounts for a high proportion of workplace serious injuries and fatalities each year.

There were not suitable or sufficient measures in place to prevent the risk of a person falling a distance liable to cause personal injury.

This is a good example of HSE working closely with local authority partners, helping Great Britain work well.

The post Prison Sentence for Roofing Contractor appeared first on LRB.

In a prosecution brought by the Health & Safety Executive (HSE), Dudley magistrates heard how people were working on the roof for Woodhull Roofing had no safety measures in place to prevent them from falling. Woodhull Roofing Ltd was contracted to carry out work for Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council. The work was to coat roofing bolts in an asbestos cement roof, to seal leaks. While working on the corrugated roof a worker misplaced his footing when moving a board and stepped onto a fragile roof light. He fell through the roof onto a concrete floor approximately four metres below. He broke several ribs and suffered spinal injuries.

An HSE investigation found that the roof work was not undertaken with inadequate precautions to provide support or protection – unsafe roof work. Woodhull Roofing Ltd of Stratford Road, Shirley was fined £40,000 and ordered to pay costs of £495.27 after pleading guilty to breaching Regulation 9 (2) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005.

HSE inspector Gareth Langston said after the hearing: “Falls from height remain one of the most common causes of work-related fatalities in this country and the risks associated with working at height are well known. In this case, suitable measures such as sufficient platforms, handrails and netting should have been provided to ensure the health and safety of people working at height on the roof.”

Unsafe roof work is a significant (but avoidable,) cause of workplace death and injury.

The post Unsafe roof work appeared first on LRB.

Workers use crowbars to smash asbestos roof

Workers had not been given personal protective equipment and used crowbars to smash up asbestos cement roof sheets, which was then left on top of mobile elevated work platforms (MEWPs) and forklift trucks. They were also working near open service pits without fall restraint equipment or edge protection, and a MEWP had been parked 1 m away from the perimeter of one of the pits. Only one of the three foreign nationals who were operating the workplace vehicles spoke English, and there were no toilets or washing facilities on site.

In May 2016, the HSE served an immediate prohibition on Quainton for putting workers and the public at risk from the potential spread of asbestos and from falls from height, including the roof and open pits.

The company pleaded guilty to breaching regs 15(2) and 28(6) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015, for putting workers’ safety and health at risk and for failing to take measures to prevent a vehicle from falling into a pit respectively, and s 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act. It was fined £14,000 and ordered to pay costs of £6,870.

The post Catalogue of failures – including using crowbars to smash an asbestos roof appeared first on LRB.

Two men were removing panels on a fragile roof when one of them fell through to the floor approximately five metres below. The investigation by the HSE found that Prior Homes Limited had failed to plan the work on the roof or to carry out this work safely. Also, Director Paul Prior was found to be personally in charge of this work and had consented to the unsafe working practices.

Prior Homes Limited, of Gillingham, pleaded guilty at Westminster Magistrates’ Court to breaching Regulation 4(1) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005 and was fined £9,334 and ordered to pay costs of £6,398.20.

Director held to account: Paul Prior pleaded guilty to breaching section 37(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 and was sentenced to a custodial sentence of 8 weeks suspended for 12 months and ordered to undertake 100 hours of unpaid work.

Speaking after the case, HSE principal inspector Keith Levart said:

Falls from height remain one of the most common causes of work fatalities and serious injuries in this country. The risks associated with working at height are well-known.

Prior Homes Limited and Paul Prior had established an unsafe and poorly planned working practice which lead to a serious injury to one of the workers, and have been held to account for failing to take adequate action to protect the health and safety of persons working on their site.

Planning and Risk Assessment are simple tools to avoid and manage the risks associated with work at height, including work on fragile roofs.

The post Director held to account appeared first on LRB.

The Health and Safety Executive’s investigation found that Greencore failed to properly plan the activity from the beginning including access arrangements to be made for installation of motors to use to carry out this work activity.

Greencore Grocery Ltd of Apex Park, Amsterdam Road, Sutton Fields Industrial Estate Hull, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 3 (1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974, and the company was fined £1million and ordered to pay costs of £30,000 for this step ladder fall.

Speaking of the step ladder fall after the hearing HSE inspector Denise Fotheringham said:

Falls from height remain one of the most common causes of work related fatalities in Great Britain, the risks associated with working at height are well known.

The Work at Height Regulations 2005 requires that all work at height is properly planned and appropriate access is provided. If Greencore had carried this out this death could have been prevented.

The post Step ladder fall leads to £1,000,000 fine appeared first on LRB.