A luxury bedroom furniture company has been fined £113,000 after an employee fell more than 2m from a makeshift mobile elevating work platform (MEWP) that had already been deemed ‘unacceptable’ in a safety audit report from 2006.

On 1 February 2017, the And So To Bed Ltd employee had been working in the company’s warehouse at Pymore, Bridport, when he fell around seven feet from the make-shift mobile elevated working platform. The platform was attached to a forklift truck and was open sided.
 

The employee involved sustained injuries to his knee and face.
 

And So To Bed Ltd pleaded guilty to breaches of Sections 2(1) and 33(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 and of Regulation 3(1) of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999, in a prosecution brought by West Dorset District Council.
 

An investigation at the time of the incident by Environment Health officers working for the Council found that the company had poor health and safety practices associated with this work activity including:

Insufficient risk assessment;

Inadequate personal protective equipment provided for employees;

No safe system to address the risk of employees falling from the platform.

A health and safety audit report from as far back as 2006 commented that use of the make-shift platform was “unacceptable”. However the investigation found that despite a safer system being purchased by the company, the dangerous platform had continued to be used on an almost daily basis.
 

Sentencing
 

And So To Bed Ltd of Pymore Mills, Pymore, Bridport, Dorset was fined £113,000, ordered to pay costs of £6,924 and a victim surcharge of £170.
 

In mitigation the judge found that after the accident the company had addressed its health and safety failings and implemented a new health and safety regime.

Cllr Anthony Alford, Leader of West Dorset District Council, said:

“I would like to thank our officers for investigating this matter. The health and safety practices of And So To Bed Ltd were simply not good enough. This accident should never have happened and could have been avoided

“Employers should be aware that they have a duty to protect the health and safety of their employees. The district council will consider the option of taking enforcement action when investigating health and safety incidents.

“Good health and safety practice makes good business sense.”
 

Fall Protection

With falls being among the most common cause of serious injury in the work place fall protection is so important. The Arco Professional Safety Services Limited Fall Protection Department offers a nationwide service specialising in the design and installation of high level access solutions to facilitate the safe and efficient working environment of roof maintenance, on scaffolding, abseil cleaning and other high level tasks.

See more about our Fall Protection Services here

Fatal fall caused by failure to manage WAH and transport operations

A Suffolk-based trailer service firm has been fined after an employee suffered fatal head injuries in January 2015.

Ipswich Crown Court heard how an employee of the defendant was operating a scissor-lift working platform (MEWP) when this was struck by a long goods vehicle causing him to be ejected onto a roadway from a height of 1.5m.

HSE investigators found that the defendant failed to plan and organise work at height in a manner that ensured the safety of their workers.

Segregation of operations required

The work at height should have been organised to segregate activity in space and/or time from adjacent workplace transport operations.

SPR Trailer Services Limited – of Felixstowe, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2 (1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 and has been fined £120,000.

Speaking after the case, HSE Principal Inspector Norman Macritchie said

“This was a tragic and wholly avoidable incident, caused by the failure of the company to implement and monitor safe systems of work.

The company did not undertake the simple safety measure of segregating those working at height from adjacent workplace transport operations, in line with widely available industry guidance.”

Importance of Equipment

Incidents like these show people how important safety equipment such as lanyards and harnesses can be, as they help save workers lives. 
Click here to see our safety equipment

Firms failed to separate crane and elevated mobile work platform

Deans Construction Limited and Universal Coatings and Services Limited have been sentenced after workman was ejected from the basket of a cherry picker, resulting in serious chest injuries, in May 2016.

Teesside Magistrates’ Court heard that the injured person was carrying out roofing repairs inside a large industrial building at Port Clarence Offshore Base in Middlesbrough when the basket was struck by a moving crane.

The operator was wearing a work restraint lanyard and harness which saved him from falling 12m and suffering more far more serious injuries.

Risk not identified

HSE investigators found that the risk of impact between the cherry picker and the operational crane had not been identified by either defendant and suitable measures were not taken to prevent operation of the crane when the roof repairs were being carried out inside the building.

• Deans Construction Limited – of Hartlepool pleaded guilty to breaching Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 and was fined £1,000.00 and ordered to pay costs of £621.00.
• Universal Coatings and Services Limited – of Middlesbrough pleaded guilty to breaching Section 3 (1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 and was fined £18,000.00 and ordered to pay costs of £823.00.

Speaking after the hearing, HSE inspector Michael Kingston said:

“This incident could so easily have been avoided by the roofing contractor and the client working together to ensure that the risks were properly identified, and that suitable control measures were put in place.

The risk of impact between the operational crane and the cherry picker should have been identified, and the crane should have been isolated from its power supply to prevent it being used during the roof repairs.

Had these simple measures been taken, life changing injuries to the worker could have been avoided.”

Importance of Equipment

Incidents like these show people how important safety equipment such as lanyards and harnesses can be, as they help save workers lives. 
Click here to see our safety equipment

The HSE bring out Health and Safety bulletins to help keep people up to date with, safety failing, equipment failing/recalls, process procedures and all that may affect people in the workplace.

This Safety alert concerns all that use/work/own with MEWP's and as much as possible should be passed on to all relevant persons.

This alert must be read with the two referenced documents

Introduction:

• This alert advises that covers/shrouds on machine controls do not protect against entrapment of operators between the machine and nearby obstructions.
• Duty holders are directed to two sources of industry guidance which may be used in assessing and reducing the risk of entrapment/crushing accidents.

Background:

• In 2010 HSE issued an alert to introduce the publication of industry guidance on avoiding entrapment/crushing accidents in mewps; reference 1.
• Industry has been developing a range of devices which can help reduce the risk of serious entrapment/crushing injuries.  The International Powered Access Federation, IPAF has recently published a document outlining currently available devices to help protect against entrapment/crushing injuries on mewps; reference 2.
• HSE has reviewed seven fatal accidents in which operators were crushed.  In five of the accidents the operator was crushed between an overhead obstruction and a cover/shroud fitted over the controls of the machine.
• Covers/shrouds are classified as primary guarding devices designed to reduce

1. the risk of inadvertent contact with controls and,
2. the risk of entrapment/crushing accidents caused by the sustained involuntary operation of the machine controls resulting from the operator being pushed onto the controls by an obstruction.

• HSE acknowledges that it is not possible to conclude that the accidents involving shrouds would have been prevented if those machines had not been fitted with shrouds. Nevertheless HSE wants to share the conclusions of its review with those responsible for the selection of MEWPs (and secondary guarding devices) where there is a risk of entrapment and/or crushing of the operator.

Action required:

• Duty holders should assess the potential for entrapment/crushing accidents in MEWPs for the specific tasks they are to undertake.  In making the assessment and deciding on appropriate safeguards, they should consider the issues described in reference 1.
• Where a secondary guarding device (as defined in reference 2) is required, it should be selected for the specific application and its limitations should be clearly understood by those who will be using the machine.
• Covers/shrouds for machine controls should not be relied upon to reduce the risk of entrapment/crushing more generally.

Relevant legal documents:

• Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999
• Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations 1998
• Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998

References:

1. UK Strategic Forum for Construction Plant Safety Group, Best Practice Guidance for MEWPs, Avoiding Trapping/Crushing Injuries to People in the Platform
2. IPAF Guidance on Secondary Guarding Devices

Further information:

Health and Safety Executive  online advice form.

General note:

It is important that this message is passed on as far and wide as possible, and to all that may use this equipment.

(source)

There were 28 fatalities worldwide involving mobile-elevating work platforms (MEWPs) in the first half of this year – a rise of 65 per cent on the equivalent six-month period last year – according to records from the International Powered Access Federation (IPAF).

The main causes of fatalities in 2013 were: overturn (10), fall from height (nine), entrapment (five), electrocution (three), and impact with a MEWP (one). Thirteen of the fatalities involved booms, 10 involved scissor lifts, and three involved vehicle mounts. While the main causes of fatalities were fairly evenly spread in the first half of 2012, the first half of this year saw a rise in the number of fatalities resulting from overturn and fall from height.

Of the fatalities in 2013, 13 occurred in the USA, two each in France, Germany, the Netherlands and the UK, and one each in Armenia, Canada, Ireland, Malaysia, Norway, Spain and the UAE.

IPAF believes the jump in incidents over the two periods can be attributed to an accident-reporting project that is capturing more data, not necessarily that there are more accidents.

Said IPAF CEO Tim Whiteman: "Every fatality is one too many, but these figures show that powered access equipment remains a safe way to carry out temporary work at height."

IPAF technical officer Chris Wraith added: "The accuracy of the data relies upon those using MEWPs and other interested parties to report any known fatal accidents to IPAF at www.ipaf.org/accident or to an IPAF member of staff.

"The comprehensiveness of the data cannot be guaranteed but, where appropriate, action is taken to verify the facts. The data is updated should relevant information become available."

IPAF's accident data is based on information collected in a number of ways: direct reports to the IPAF accident database, information obtained by IPAF staff worldwide, and information collated from press releases and news reports.

All manufacturers, rental companies, contractors and users are encouraged to report any known fatal and serious accidents involving MEWPs and mast-climbing work platforms (MCWPs) worldwide to the IPAF accident database. The project is open to IPAF members and non-members, and includes an option for anonymous reporting.

All data collected is confidential and none of the detail of any accident is shared with third parties, or disclosed to safety authorities unless required by legal writ.

To register and to report an accident involving a MEWP or MCWP, go to www.ipaf.org/accident

Target delivery drivers for training and safety initiatives on the safe and effective use of mobile elevating work platforms (MEWPs). Watch out for slips/trips/falls at the same level and pay attention to manual handling when working at height. These were some of the initial findings following the commitment by IPAF rental company members in the UK to report any known MEWP accidents involving their staff at the IPAF accident database.

The findings were announced at the Vertikal Days exhibition in Haydock Park, where the IPAF stand featured demonstrations on the safe loading and unloading of MEWPs.

A total of 303 MEWP-related incidents were reported by IPAF UK rental company members involving their employees and employees of their customers where they have been made aware of incidents, from the time the project was voluntary in January 2012 until the end of April 2013.

Of these incidents, 46.2% (140) resulted in injury, 43.2% (131) resulted in damage, and 10.6% (32) were near misses.

Loading and unloading of MEWPs is potentially one of the most dangerous activities, an area that IPAF is focusing on. About a third of the incidents involved drivers (34.3%, 104). Industry sources estimate that there are approximately one million movements of MEWPs (delivery and collection) by road every year in the UK. Other incidents involved engineers (25.1%, 76), customers (22.4%, 68) and operators (18.2%, 55).

Closer analysis of the 140 incidents resulting in injury reveals certain patterns. The main causes of injuries were: slips/trips/falls at the same level (23.6%, 33), manual handling (16.4%, 23) and use of hand tools (15%, 21). Further down the list were: stranded in equipment (10%, 14), fall from height (7.1%, 10), walked/bumped into equipment (6.4%, 9) and injury while using the upper controls of a scissor lift while walking beside the machine, sometimes referred to as dog leading (6.4%, 9).

Almost 95 of a total of 125 IPAF UK member rental companies have registered to report MEWP-related incidents at the IPAF database. Those who commit to report and sign off monthly get access to a dashboard that shows their company’s incident figures against the national average, a major benefit for health and safety benchmarking.

Commenting on the findings, IPAF technical officer Chris Wraith said: “It is interesting to see that the initial data has produced no real surprises. The industry is aware of the hazards and risks rental company employees are exposed to, including dog leading, falls from the truck body, slips/trips etc. With this factual data, IPAF can do more to create greater awareness and support its members in reducing the frequency and severity of such incidents. Through focused safety campaigns, we can help drive behavioural change and improve safety throughout the rental industry.”

“The findings are groundbreaking,” said IPAF CEO Tim Whiteman. “Credit is due to IPAF’s UK member rental companies for committing to report any known MEWP accidents involving their staff, and to the combined efforts of the IPAF UK Country Council in championing this project. IPAF is looking to start similar initiatives in other countries.”

Source