AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Company fined £15,000 for amputated finger

17th November 2011
Page 15
Page 15, 17th November 2011 — Company fined £15,000 for amputated finger
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

Employee loses finger but HSE says the consequences could have easily been a lot worse

By Patric Cunnane

A BANKSMAN suffered a serious hand injury while loading a lorry, which led to his employer being ined £15,000 and paying £7,238 in costs.

Caledonian Building Systems, of Bridge of Weir, Renfrewshire, was prosecuted by the Health & Safety Executive (HSE) for the accident that happened at its Carlton-on-Trent, Nottinghamshire site in February 2009. The HSE says it was a routine lifting operation that was poorly assessed, and the consequences could have been even worse.

Banksman John Hughes of Newark was working in the irm’s yard, helping a fork lift truck driver to raise an 11-tonne modular building unit off blocks and a wheeled axle onto a lorry.

When the unstable load began rocking, Hughes put his hand on the block to move it out of the way but one end of the unit crashed onto his ingers.

His middle inger was damaged, while his index inger was crushed and amputated at the knuckle.

After further problems, it was completely amputated. He was off work for 12 weeks. The HSE investigated and found the lifting operation was disorganised and the employees involved were not provided with clear information and instructions. It was not clear who was supposed to carry out the work, what their role was, the equipment to be used and whether the unit would be moved elsewhere or vertically lifted.

Caledonian pleaded guilty to breaching the Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations 1998 and the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999.

After the hearing, HSE inspector Stuart Parry said: “This was a routine lifting operation, yet it was poorly assessed and planned, and was conducted in a disorganised manner.

“Although Mr Hughes received a life-changing injury, the consequences could have been even worse. The risks should have been assessed, and a plan devised and followed to eliminate or adequately control them.

“Firms moving large loads with lift trucks should remember these basic requirements to protect their employees.”

Tags

Locations: Newark

comments powered by Disqus