Farrell v B & A Fisheries Pty Ltd [2012] SAIRC 27
4/6/12 B & A FISHERIES PTY LTD (ACN 110 577 707): was convicted without penalty (in lieu of the company's voluntary ex gratia payment of $20 000 into a trust fund for the children of one of the victims) plus costs plus $20 000 compensation after pleading guilty to a breach of s19(1). The company was also ordered under s60A(1) to pay for public notification to the commercial fishing industry in SA and regional newspapers of the circumstances of the offence and its outcome.
On 28 September 2008, two crew members drowned after the shark fishing vessel they were working on sank in Gulf St Vincent, approximately six kilometres from Stansbury. A third person swam to shore.
The company failed to:
- provide and maintain plant in a safe condition, in that the vessel was unstable to the extent that it was unsuitable for use in the waters in which it was operating at the relevant time, and
- ensure that the employees wore personal flotation devices at all times while on the vessel in the waters in which it was operating at the relevant time.
Neale v Cater Plus Pty Ltd t/as Bidvest Australia [2012] SAIRC 26
24/5/12 CATER PLUS PTY LTD T/AS BIDVEST AUSTRALIA (ACN 090 443 093): was convicted and fined $72,000 plus costs after pleading guilty to a breach of s19(1). On 6 August 2009, a 47 year-old employee sustained a compound fracture of the top of the right femur with a disrupted femoral artery and severed sciatic nerve when the reach truck he was driving tipped over after hitting a loose metal grate.
The company failed to ensure the metal grate over the drain on the ramp was securely fixed to the ramp, so as to provide a solid surface for the truck.
Candetti Constructions Pty Ltd v Fonteyn [2012] SAIRC 24
18/5/12 CANDETTI CONSTRUCTIONS PTY LTD (ACN 007 657 150): was convicted and fined $47 500 plus costs after pleading not guilty to a breach of s19(1). On 20 April 2005, a 31-year-old employee suffered frontal lobe damage, a massive fracture to his pelvis, a fractured wrist and a variety of internal complications after falling through an unguarded opening in a suspended ceiling on to a cement floor approximately 7.2 metres below.
The company failed to provide and maintain secure fences, covers or other forms of safeguarding around the openings through which persons could fall.
Farrell v Alsco Pty Limited [2012] SAIRC 23
4/5/12 ALSCO PTY LIMITED (ACN 000 435 629): was convicted and fined $85,000 plus costs after pleading guilty to a breach of s19(1). The magistrate also ordered that Alsco provide a copy of his reasons for decision to each of its South Australian employees, and to each employee with a classification of manager or supervisor employed by it elsewhere in Australia. On 14 October 2009, a 21 year-old employee sustained loss of consciousness and a gash to the back of his head when he was struck by a falling metal trolley and hook assembly which had fallen from the overhead rail system that was meant to support the trolley.
The company failed to ensure the overhead rail system was provided in such a state that girder trolleys could not fall from the overhead railing system when the interchange gate was used.
Symons v Downer EDI Works Pty Ltd [2012] SAIRC 22
2/5/12 DOWNER EDI WORKS PTY LTD (ACN 008 709 608): was convicted and fined $187 500 plus costs after pleading guilty to a breach of s19(1). On 23 May 2009, a 50-year-old employee sustained severe injuries including partial tetraplegia when he slipped and fell into a pit, becoming trapped in an inclined belt.
The company failed to:
- fit guards to prevent or minimise access to the rollers and ends of the inclined conveyor,
- develop and implement a written safe work procedure for cleaning and maintenance that specified how cleaning and maintenance tasks could be safely performed;
- require that measures be taken to prevent or minimise the risk of a fall into the pit when employees were required to be in that area.
Hillman v All Laundry and Linen Pty Limited [2012] SAIRC 19
19/4/12 ALL LAUNDRY AND LINEN PTY LTD (ACN 053 866 925) was convicted and fined $80 750 after pleading guilty to breaches of s19(1) and r1.3.2 [s19(1) $72 250 and r1.3.2 $8 500] following a notifiable workplace incident on 13 March 2008 where a 56-year-old employee sustained a severe crush, de-gloving and burn injury to her right hand and forearm resulting in amputation at the elbow, when her hand and forearm were drawn into and trapped by the heated roller of a large industrial ironing machine. A second employee sustained burns to his fingers while attempting to rescue her.
The company failed to:
- adequately guard the machine
- maintain an effective interlock device on the machine
- ensure there were adequate safe operating procedures for the machine's operation
- prohibit employees moving the machine's guard or placing hands at any location beyond the guard during machine operation
- provide the second employee with information, instruction and training about the procedures to be adopted in the event of an emergency involving the machine
- ensure that appropriate steps were taken to identify all reasonably foreseeable hazards arising when using the machine.
Hillman v D'Vineripe Pty Ltd [2012] SAIRC 16
5/4/12 D'VINE RIPE PTY LTD (ACN 120 312 049) was convicted and fined $80 000 plus costs after pleading guilty to a breach of s19(1) following a notifiable workplace incident on 4 September 2009 where a 20-year-old and 33-year-old employee sustained serious injuries when a scissor lift trolley from which one employee was working at a height of about 2.5 metres, tipped and hit an adjacent trolley that the other employee was standing on.
The company failed to:
- provide and maintain plant in a safe condition [the pipe rails along where the scissor lift trolleys ran were not attached to the support brackets where they sat]
- develop and implement a procedure for periodic inspection and maintenance of the pipe rail system
- develop and implement a procedure for inspection of the pipe rail system following a clean-out of its glasshouses.
Hillman v CMT (SA) Pty Ltd [2012] SAIRC 15
2/4/12 CMT (SA) PTY LTD (ACN 129 502 503) was convicted and fined $30 000 plus costs after pleading guilty to a breach of s19(1) following a workplace notifiable incident on 10 July 2009 when a 48-year-old employee sustained a partial amputation of the tip of his little finger and lacerations to his index and ring fingers when his left hand was drawn towards the blade of the table saw he was operating.
The company failed to:
- ensure there was a safe operating procedure for the use of the saw which required employees to adjust the top guard of the saw, so that it was positioned no more than 15mm above the height of the top edge of the timber to be cut.
Symons v HF & RG Betts Pty Ltd [2012] SAIRC 14
2/4/12 HF & RG BETTS PTY LTD (ACN 059 769 729): was convicted and fined $105,000 plus costs after pleading guilty to a breach of s19(1). On 5 August 2009, an employee became caught in the unguarded tail drum of a conveyor and his right arm was amputated at the shoulder by the force of the machine.
The company failed to:
- fit guarding to prevent or minimise access to the tail drum of the hydraulic conveyor
- ensure the hydraulic conveyor was fitted with a control to stop the conveyor in an emergency.
- ensure the employee was supervised when he was working with the hydraulic conveyor and the Finlay Screening Unit.
Quin Investments Pand Anor v Markos ty Ltd [2012] SAIRC 11
20/3/12 QUIN INVESTMENTS PTY LTD (ACN 064 014 802): was convicted and fined $75,000 plus costs plus $20,000 compensation after being found guilty of a breach of s19(1). On 9 May 2006, three employees died and two others were injured in an explosion at an explosives manufacturing facility.
Although these factors were not proven beyond reasonable doubt to have caused the explosion, the company failed to:
- undertake proper and sufficient maintenance and repair of the critical items of plant in the factory, including a powder blending machine known as the ribbon blender,
- provide and maintain adequate design details, drawings or manufacturer's instructions in relation to the critical items of plant,
- keep adequate records of maintenance in relation to critical items of plant, and
- provide and maintain a safe working environment, in that it, while explosives were being manufactured in the factory:
- stored approximately 4,500 kg of cast TNT explosives product in close proximity to the factory,
- stored approximately 20,000 litres of caustic methanol or 'methoxide' in close proximity to the factory,
- stored approximately 20,000 litres of methanol in close proximity to the factory,
- was cooling a cast of molten TNT on the loading platform of the factory,
- was melting cast TNT in the factory, and
- permitted the use of a critical item of plant, namely the ribbon blender, to be operated while it was in a state of disrepair.
Quin Investments Pty Ltd and Anor v Markos [2012] SAIRC 11
20/3/12 NIKOLAI KUZUB: was convicted and fined $60,000 plus costs plus $20,000 compensation, after being found guilty of a breach of s61(3). Mr Kuzub failed to take reasonable steps to ensure compliance by the Quin Investments Pty Ltd with its obligations under s19(1).
Hillman v McDonnell Industries Pty Ltd (t/as NF McDonnell & Sons) and Ian McDonnell [2012] SAIRC 10
15/3/12 MCDONNELL INDUSTRIES PTY LTD (ACN 007 746 536): was convicted and fined $49,500 plus costs after pleading guilty to a breach of s19(1). On 8 August 2007, an employee sustained a crushing injury of the left upper arm, skin injury of the axilla and injury to the left side of his chest when he became entangled in the moving parts of the traverser section of the six-saw docking saw.
The company failed to:
- adequately guard the traverser section of the saw to prevent entanglement in the moving parts by fitting a fixed physical barrier which covered those parts and could only be removed with the use of a tool, and
- undertake an adequate hazard identification and risk assessment process in relation to the clearing of blockages on the traverser section of the saw.
Hillman v McDonnell Industries Pty Ltd (t/as NF McDonnell & Sons) and Ian McDonnell [2012] SAIRC 10
15/3/12 IAN LESLIE MCDONNELL: was convicted and fined $5,400 plus costs after pleading guilty to a breach of s61(3). On 8 August 2007, an employee of McDonnell Industries Pty Ltd sustained a crushing injury of the left upper arm, skin injury of the axilla and injury to the left side of his chest when he became entangled in the moving parts of the traverser section of the six-saw docking saw.
Mr McDonnell failed to:
- ensure McDonnell Industries Pty Ltd conducted a proper hazard identification and risk assessment in relation to alterations to the saw in accordance with Regulations 3.2.1,
- ensure McDonnell Industries Pty Ltd ensured that risks associated with the alterations were appropriately controlled in accordance with Regulations 3.2.2,
- ensure McDonnell Industries Pty Ltd had the saw inspected and tested by a competent person, having regard to any relevant design specification, prior to the saw being returned to service.
Symons v Cedar College Inc [2012] SAIRC 1
19/1/12 CEDAR COLLEGE INCORPORATED: was convicted and fined $108,750 plus costs after pleading guilty to a breach of s22(2)(a). On 11 September 2009, one student and two parents of students sustained serious injuries when part of a tree trunk collapsed on them in high winds during a school sports day.
The school failed to:
- ensure the tree was removed as had been recommended prior to the sports day, and
- ensure that activities were not scheduled under or near the tree, given the windy conditions on the day.
Hillman v Whiteheads Timber Sales Pty Ltd [2012] SAIRC 2
19/1/12 WHITEHEADS TIMBER SALES PTY LTD (ACN 055 540 611): was convicted and fined $26,250 plus costs after pleading guilty to a breach of s19(1). On 14 December 2010, a 34-year-old employee was injured when his fingers and hand were caught between a jammed piece of timber and the roller of a moulder machine, as he attempted to clear the timber.
The company failed to:
- provide adequate guarding around the rollers of the "in-feed" area of the machine, and
- prevent access by employees to the "in-feed" area of the machine while it was in operation and in particular, by means of an interlocked gate.
