Damage limitation

Proper maintenance of all equipment in the workplace can be time consuming and costly, but that pales in comparison to the potential cost of what could happen if this is not carried out.

Two recent prosecutions by the HSE bear this fact out and all firms should take heed.

On July 2, 2013, a 28 year old man suffered a broken leg when he was forced to steer his ride-on cleaning machine into a balustrade at Stansted airport, to avoid hitting pedestrians after its brakes failed.

The HSE’s investigation revealed the scrubber drier machine had a worn and ineffective brake that had been poorly maintained. A second machine was also found to have similar defects.

As a result, the worker’s employer ISS Facility Services, of Genesis Business Park, Albert Drive, Woking, Surrey, was fined £30,000 and ordered to pay £5490 after pleading guilty to health and safety breaches in February. Maintenance contractor Michael Laryea, trading as Lamick Floor Machines, of Elmer Gardens, Isleworth, Middlesex, also pleaded guilty, and was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay £5490 in costs.

In the second case, a 28 year old man had to have two fingers amputated after an incident with an unguarded cutting blade. He can no longer play the guitar, use a keyboard or tie his shoelaces as a result.

Following an investigation by the HSE, it was found that the machine had three sections, each enclosed by an interlocked hood. The hoods should have been lowered, forming a guard, but according to the company the interlocks were disconnected and replaced with locks and keys. These keys were left in the hoods, meaning the machine was able to run with the hood guards open.

In 2010, around a year after these changes had been made, a risk assessment failed to identify that the machine was unguarded, and no steps were taken to resolve the issue.

As a result, following a court hearing in January, Worktop Fabrications, of Wingate Close, Nottingham, pleaded guilty to breaching the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations, and was fined £20,000, with an order to pay costs of £4574.

The terrible consequences of both of these failures of maintenance of equipment are plain to see. Two men have been badly injured, with serious life changes to one as a result.

From a corporate point of view, the financial impact on all companies involved has been huge, and may not stop at just the fines – the names of all of those involved has been splashed across the local and trade press and websites, with a potential loss to revenue. The reputational damage is incalculable.

And all of that stems from a simple lack of maintenance.

The Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 (PUWER) state that work equipment must be maintained so that it is safe, and that maintenance operations are carried out safely.

PUWER regulations apply to work activities throughout the whole of Great Britain and also to offshore installations such as oil rigs and gas supply platforms.

Whether large corporation or self-employed, you have a legal obligation to protect yourself and your workers when using machinery or equipment.

This should be done by carrying out a risk assessment, including: identifying hazards and making a note of anything that can cause harm; assessing risks by considering the chance of harm actually being done; eliminating alls risks or, if this is not possible, listing ways to reduce them and identifying the precautions to take.

Adhering to PUWER is not rocket science but unfortunately we do still see instances in which simple maintenance is sadly lacking, and the results can be devastating and deadly.