Company Exposes 13 Employees and Contractors to Asbestos

We've been reminded of the value of a detailed risk assessment this week after it was revealed SSE Hornsea Ltd allowed 13 employees and contractors to be exposed to asbestos fibres.

Hornsea runs a natural gas storage facility on the East Yorkshire coast and tasked a team of maintenance staff with removing a non-return valve from a compressed air distribution system. In order to remove the sealing gasket material, they fitted a wire brush to an electric drill. That worked, but filled the workshop with dust.

It turns out the dust contained chrysotile (white) asbestos, which 13 people had then come into contact with over the course of two days before the danger was revealed and the workshop closed.

The Health and Safety Executive decided to prosecute SSE Hornsea. Not only had the risk assessment failed to identify the asbestos risk, but the records held regarding the non-return valve were inadequate. Also, the maintenance team leader had not undergone asbestos awareness training.

As well as the potential impact this dust could have on the future health of the 13 exposed people, Hornsea now has to pay a £300,000 fine and £12,670.72 in costs. The company pleaded guilty to breaching Sections 2 (1) and 3(1) of the Health & Safety at Work etc, Act 1974.

It should go without saying: train your staff! We carry out a range of training courses including asbestos awareness. Please get in touch if you would like to learn more or book places.

Source: HSE

More problems with the weather

We recently wrote about the effect of the weather and particularly the wind on site hoardings, and how they are temporary structures and need to be planned accordingly.

Unfortunately we are now reminded, by a recent court case, of how important it is to get this right. A building company refitting a shop in London’s Oxford Street, has just been fined £10,000 and ordered to pay £13,000 legal costs, after a 15ft high Kate Moss billboard fell on to shoppers, injuring 10 and leaving 3 with life changing injuries. One of these had serious vertebrae injuries which will prevent her working again.

“The Health and Safety Executive, which brought the prosecution, said the 11ft 10in (3.6m) high structure which weighed 0.8 tonnes was held upright by a single timber beam attached to the shop front by just two screws.Builders working at the site spotted the screws coming loose moments before the hoarding was blown to the ground by a gust of wind but were unable to stop it.”

Ironically they were able to attach the billboard because the company had increased the height of the existing barrier fencing, to stop debris flying over it into the public areas and hitting people walking past. We await the inevitable civil cases which will surely follow this prosecution.

For more technical information remember that hoardings are temporary works and must be designed in accordance with BS5957.

The cost of getting it wrong

Employers have a responsibility under Health and Safety legislation, as well as a moral responsibility to ensure the health, safety, and welfare of their employees and those affected by their work. But what about the financial costs if the company gets it wrong?

Provisional figures for 2013/14 show that the average fine imposed by the courts for Health and Safety breaches across all industries was £18,944, in construction industries it was £8,348. However breaches tend to come in twos or threes, so the average figure for cases brought is much closer to £30,000.

Add to this costs imposed by the court and the company's own defence team costs, which can run into many thousands, then you potentially have a very expensive outcome for the company. Another thing to remember is that the HSE have a 94% success rate for prosecutions.

Maybe the money the company spends now on health and safety isn’t so bad after all, and that’s not to mention the bad publicity, the potential for jail time for directors, the loss of contracts, the low staff morale, and the list goes on...

And Now The Weather Forecast – Wind, Wind and more Wind!

Autumn is traditionally the time of year for those South Westerly gales to be blowing across the country on a regular basis. Whilst they can bring obvious problems with working at height and creating dust, other, equally important issues need to be considered.

What about, for instance, your site hoardings or other types of barriers or fencing. They are all temporary works and as such need careful consideration and planning when being built, to ensure that high winds are taken in to consideration.

As past cases show, all too often these sorts of issues are not considered. The results can often be not only personal injuries to others, but financial costs to the companies.

http://www.hse.gov.uk/press/2013/rnn-em-11013.htm

That's just one example of a prosecution by the HSE which illustrates the point.

Why not book a Temporary Works Course by emailing margaret@demolishdismantle.co.uk to learn about how to avoid these problems.

Shocking safety failure sees buildings collapse

On August 1st Ethos Construction Solutions Ltd and the company's director Pritish Lad were prosecuted after two properties collapsed in Westminster.

The reason for the prosecution was the sheer number of safety failings that occurred during a refurbishment contract Ethos had won. An inspection by the HSE identified the following:

• allowing existing structures to become weak and unstable
• no ‘temporary works plan' in place for workers, and no checks on whether workers were sufficiently trained to undertake the work
• the poor installation and positioning of building props
• the storage of large piles of bricks on several floors of still-standing buildings, posing a potential over-loading risk
• no assessment as to whether any evidence existed of a collapse risk
• an unsafe excavation of up to three metres deep running the length of the development site
• working-at-height risks
• fire risks because of poorly-stored flammable materials
• failure to provide suitable emergency exits
• insufficient fire detection and fire-fighting equipment

Ethos has to pay a £14,000 fine and £9,000 in costs. Pritish Lad is facing a fine of £9,500 and costs of £6,750.

This clearly demonstrates that any demolition needs a trained team in place and expert advice should be sought. If you have a demolition project of any size or type please contact us asap for a no obligation quotation to ensure that the project is done in accordance with all current legislation and ACOPs.

For a detailed account of what happened visit SHP Online

Lancashire housebuilder fined for working at height incidents

Paddle Ltd has been fined £56,000 and £11,000 in costs for pleading guilty to breaching reg. 4 of the Working at Height Regulations 2005. Company director Derek Hugh Barnes received 8 months' imprisonment, suspended two years, and can't become a company director for 3 years. He also has to pay a further fine of £32,000 and £11,000 in costs. He pleaded guilty to the breaching of Section 37 of the HSWA 1974.

The action was taken after two reported incidents in 2011 and 2012. The first saw a bricklayer fall four meters injuring his back and foot, the second was a contractor photographed working at height in an excavator bucket while Barnes watched. Both incidents occurred in Cae Canol in Baglan, near Port Talbot.

The problem is, this isn't the first incident the company has faced HSE action against. With several Prohibition Notices being handed out over the years.

HSE inspector Phil Nicolle said:

"Paddle Ltd and Derek Barnes, have, over the years, shown a blatant disregard for health and safety management on their construction sites, as was clearly evident when we investigated the Baglan incidents.

Companies and directors have clear duties of care and safety responsibilities, and it is vital they properly assess, manage and supervise all work activity to mitigate risks at all times."

The company has since put two new company directors in place.

Source: SHP

Skip firm fined after death of worker

A skip company has been fined for safety breaches at its West Bromwich site where an employee was killed when run over by a 13-tonne shovel loader.

Need a Skip Ltd has been prosecuted at Wolverhampton Crown Court. The charge is one of failing to ensure the safe segregation of workers and vehicles on the site. Because of that, a 24-year-old worker died of his injuries after being hit by a loader while crouching over a manhole cleaning a drain pump.

HSE inspector Karl Raw commented:

"Transport is one of the biggest causes of death and injury within the workplace, especially where the machinery in use is large. For this reason it is imperative that where people and machinery need to work in close proximity the employer ensures, wherever possible, that measures are implemented to segregate them or put in place suitable and effective measures to ensure safety of their employees.

The ad hoc approach by Need a Skip to its on-site activities, combined with heavy machinery moving around, meant there was a high potential for an incident to occur."

Unfortunately a traffic management plan was not in place at the premises at the time of the accident. If you feel that you need training in preparing atraffic plan or require your operatives to be trained as traffic marshalls please contact us for details of course content, costs and dates.

Source: HSE

AA Construction prosecuted for asbestos safety breaches

AA Construction has been prosecuted by the HSE for safety breaches relating to the unsafe handling of asbestos.

Local residents reported the company to the authorities when a work site near Wimbledon Chase tube station in London was seen to have asbestos building up on the site. No safety measures were in place and the asbestos was smashed up without thought rather than being handled safely.

The HSE served three enforcement notices. AA Construction did not carry out an asbestos survey, produce a health and safety plan, or dispose of the asbestos correctly. They also employed labourers not experienced or trained to deal with the material.

In the end AA Construction pleaded guilty in court and received fines of £36,000 and must pay costs of £9,519.

Source: Construction Enquirer

Asbestos survey company fails to spot asbestos

When any kind of renovation or demolition work is being planned it is imperative an asbestos survey is carried out. If it isn't, chances are the presence of asbestos will put workers at risk and see prosecutions handed out by the HSE. But there's another problem we have to contend with: surveys being carried out that fail to identify asbestos.

PHH Environmental (UK) Ltd. has been prosecuted after an asbestos survey it carried out on the Old Castle Cinema in Merthyr Tydfil found no asbestos. Soon after, demolition of the cinema began and workers disturbed asbestos.

Such an oversight has put the health of those workers at risk, and PHH has pleaded guilty to breaching Section 3 (1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974. The company now has to pay a fine of £5,000 and costs of £3,000. Although that's little compensation for anyone working on the site who was exposed to the material.

Source: The Construction Index

Fall from height costs two companies £21,000

Two companies are having to share fines and costs totalling £21,000 after a 38-year-old worker suffered a fall from height fracturing two veterbrae and being unable to work for seven months. The reason for his injury? He was working at height without the proper safety precautions having been implemented.

The man was working on a mobile scaffolding tower, but the tower had not been erected to the manufacturer's specifications. Even worse, industry guidelines had not been followed and the platform the tower was placed on was unsuitable. There were no guard rails to protect the man on the tower, either.

The HSE prosecuted principal contractor Thomas Long & Sons and subcontractor M-tech Engineering, who were both working at the Convent Street, Nottingham site. Thomas Long & Sons received a £6,000 fine and £3,000 in costs. M-tech received an £8,000 fine and also £3,000 in costs.

The fines, costs, and injury could all have been prevented with proper training and procedures implemented on site. C&D Consultancy offer such training under the title of Working at Height. The course includes:

• Employer / employee responsibilities
• Health and safety law
• Understanding risk assessments
• Pre-shift safety inspections
• Electricity hazards
• Emergency procedures
• Hazards at height and ground level
• Safe working practice with ladders and access systems
• Practical session and assessment (if full day)
• Question & answer paper

Please email Jill if you would like to know more about this or any other course we offer.

Source: HSE

Demolition worker fined for causing severe leg injury

Devon Stoner, a 44 year old demolition worker employed by Sloane Demolition Ltd., has been prosecuted by the Health and Safety Executive.

In January last year Mr Stoner entered a 360 excavator on the site of a two-storey building that was being demolished in Kent. Four other men were present sorting and reclaiming bricks. Mr Stoner started the excavator, but could not control it.

The uncontrolled movements of the machine managed to knock over a wall. A co-worker could not move away from the wall quick enough and suffered severe injuries to his leg. The injury was so bad, the man now walks around with a steel plate in his shin and ankle. At the time, his shin was completely shattered and his ankle broken.

The blame for the incident lies with Mr Stoner who was both untrained and unauthorized to use the machine by his employer. After pleading guilty to breaching section 7(a) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974, a court ruled he pay a £500 fine and undertake 120 hours of community service.

That's little compensation for his co-worker who has to live with the consequences of Mr Stoner's actions in what was a completely avoidable incident.

Source: HSE

Lincoln University fined for asbestos failings

We all know that there are many buildings across the UK containing asbestos. Many of them will not be checked until either renovations are carried out or demolition occurs. In the case of universities, regular inspections are done to ensure that buildings remain safe for students and staff.

In the case of Lincoln University, it seems asbestos surveys were carried out at regular intervals, but approrpriate action was never taken based on their findings. Now the university is facing a bill of £22,759 after being prosecuted for breaching Regulation 5(1) of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999.

The threat of asbestos was discovered when a lecturer became trapped in a room due to a lock breaking. While breaking the door open it was discovered that asbestos insulation board surrounded it. Further checks were done and found similar boarding was used in other doors. An investigation carried out by the HSE discovered the surveys had been carried out, but their findings didn't result in any action.

Edward Walker, HSE Inspector, commented:

"The university had an asbestos management plan but had failed to follow it and failed to take appropriate steps to manage the risks associated with asbestos over a number of years, putting staff, students and contractors at risk of potential exposure."

It just goes to show that carrying out the checks is not enough. Any problems discovered during a survey must be dealt with immediately so as to stop prosecution. Now Lincoln University not only faces a large bill from the prosecution, they still have to pay for the work to make the university buildings safe again.

Source: HSE

Scrapyard claw crushes man, prompts prosecution and £50,000 fine

A lack of warning signs, no published site rules, and no formal systems for work, led to the death of a man in 2007 at a metal recyclers.

Barry and Joey Collins entered the James Huntley & Sons Ltd. of Sholing, Southampton metal recycling site on August 2nd, 2007. Access was gained through an open gate at the back of the site.

They were looking at a van and Barry got in to look at its parts. While inside, the scrapyard grab claw returned. Joey, standing outside the van, tried to signal to the driver that his brother was in the van. The driver misunderstood and proceeded to pick it up, crushing and killing Barry.

Roger Upfold, HSE Inspector, commented:

"This was a truly tragic miscommunication that led to a man’s death. Had simple measures been in place to control site access and let members of the public know where they should and shouldn’t go, this awful incident would probably never have happened.

Recycling sites are dangerous work environments. As such, warning notices, communication of site rules, and the use of high visibility clothing, should all be used to set clear expectations for the behaviour of visitors.”

The company pleaded guilty to the following:

- Breaching section 3(1) of the Health and Safety Work etc Act 1974
- Contravening Regulation 3(6) of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999

The case ended on November 27th last year with a fine of £50,000 awarded alongside £34,373.80 in costs.

Source: HSE