Staffordshire firm prosecuted for guarding failure
Company fined after worker suffers fractured ring finger and loss of the tip of his little finger
BATHGATE Slate Technologies Ltd have been fined for safety failings after a worker sustained hand injuries and lost the tip of a finger using a poorly-guarded machine.
The employee fractured his ring finger and lost the tip of his little finger following the incident on 6 January 2012.
Stafford Magistrates’ Court heard that the Staffordshire-based company, which produces building products from recycled slate material, was trialling a new machine that forms and sand-coats bricks.
The worker was taking bricks from the end of the machine’s conveyer belt. As he tried to keep up with the supply of bricks his hand became trapped between the conveyor belt and the roller underneath.
He was taken to North Staffordshire Hospital where his little finger was amputated at the tip and his fractured ring finger pinned. He was unable to work for three weeks as a result of the injury.
An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) established that the machine was missing suitable guarding, although the intention was to install guarding when trialling was complete. Had a guard been fitted the incident would have been avoided.
Bathgate Slate Technologies Ltd were fined £4,000 and ordered to pay £5,464 in costs after pleading guilty to breaching Regulation 11(1) of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations.
After the hearing, HSE Inspector Simon Hall said: ‘The employee’s painful injury should not and need not have happened. It was easily preventable had Bathgate Slate Technologies fitted appropriate guarding to prevent access to the rollers.
‘Guards and safety systems are there for a reason, and companies have a legal duty of care to ensure they are properly fitted and working effectively at all times. Being drawn into machines because of inadequate guarding or – as in this case – a total absence of guarding, happens far too regularly.
‘The importance of robust safeguards to protect workers gaining access to dangerous moving machinery cannot be overstated.’
