Tuesday 8 April 2014

Testimonial on Health & Safety support from Warwick Fabrics

The health and safety support provided by Strategic Safety Systems was simple and clear. 

 This has considerably reduced the worry we had about being legally compliant.

Carol Porter, Warwick Fabrics

Testimonial from Prinovis on 14001 and 18001

Strategic Safety Systems have been instrumental in assisting Prinovis Liverpool in gaining certification to ISO 14001 and OHSAS 18001. 

Phil Chambers made the experience an enjoyable one.

John Morris, Health, Safety, Environmental and Security Manager, Prinovis, Liverpool

Friday 4 April 2014

Failure to act on consultant's recommendations costs almost £50,000

Environmental Waste Recycling was fined £49,670 (inc.costs) after a worker almost lost his arm in machinery.
The circumstances were:
  • The accident occurred on a heavy-duty conveyor belt.
  • A health and safety consultant hired by the company had reported the missing guards following inspections in November 2008 and June 2010.
  • The company had failed to act on his recommendations.
  • After returning from his lunch break on 7 August 2013, the worker switched the power to the machine back on. 
  • He then walked through an 800 mm-wide gap by the side of the machine.
  • His arm was caught by the roller under the conveyor belt and dragged in. 
  • He called for help and one of his colleagues turned off the electrical supply but it took the emergency services 90 minutes to free him.
  • His arm was broken in several places and he lost a considerable amount of muscle tissue.

The HSE Inspector  said:
“The injuries suffered by this young worker have had a massive impact on his life, and he still requires hospital treatment. He has been unable to return to work and relies on his parents and family for support. It’s shocking that Environmental Waste Recycling was first made aware of the missing guards by its own health and safety consultant nearly five years before the incident but it failed to act on this, even when the issue was highlighted again in 2010. The firm should have carried out a proper assessment of the risks facing workers, and fitted guards to prevent access to the rollers on the conveyor belt. Instead, it waited for an employee to be seriously injured before taking any action.”

Lorry driver hit by forklift truck

LP Foreman & Sons or Chelmsford was fined £7621 (inc. costs) on 1st April after a worker was hit be a forklift truck.
The circumstances were:
  • It was common practice for van drivers to instruct forklift truck operators where to place loads within their vehicles for ease of delivery. 
  • There were no procedures for keeping pedestrians and forklift trucks apart.
  • On 19th August 2013 a  driver stepped from the rear of his vehicle and was struck by a reversing forklift truck
  • He suffered a fractured ankle and other

The HSE Inspector  said:
“This was an entirely preventable injury caused by LP Foreman & Sons’ failure to recognise the hazards arising from loading operations at their premises. Our investigation found that there was an absence of effective systems of control which were sufficiently robust to allow workplace transport and pedestrians to circulate the site in safety. It had become regular practice for delivery drivers to take up positions where forklift trucks were loading or unloading and this unsafe practice has led to a serious injury.”

Unguarded chain drive claims 2 finger tips

Biffa Waste Services Ltd was fined £21,542 (inc. costs) on 3rd April 2014 after an employee lost the tips of fingers in an unguarded chain drive.
The circumstances were:
  • The machine had been fitted with an external chain drive which was unguarded.
  • Workers had also received no training or instruction on isolation of the machine when clearing blockages.
  • On 2th February 2013, a worker was clearing a blockage when his glove became entangled in the moving drive.
  • This severed the tips of 2 fingers

The HSE inspector said:
“The company was fully aware of the requirement for the chains to be guarded and had made arrangements for guards to be added later that week, yet still allowed the machine to be used before that happened. As a result, a man suffered a painful injury that could have been prevented.”