Boral Masonry Limited

Incident description:

On 24 February 2009, a 31 year old male worker sustained injuries when his right thumb was amputated at a sheer point on a concrete paving press.

The court acknowledged Boral Masonry Limited conducted an undertaking manufacturing concrete pavers and landscaping products. The court accepted the company employed the injured worker as a general labourer in a work area known as the Cassani Press Mould.

The court found the defendant held obligations under s.28(1) of the Workplace health and Safety Act 1995 being a person who conducts a business or undertaking.

The worker was injured while manually spreading concrete mix into paver moulds on the Cassani Press. 

The investigation findings presented to the court revealed:

• the defendant owned the press
• the work activity required workers to work on the moving press where they were exposed to nip and sheer points
• the defendant identified in April 2008 there was a risk to workers and had put in barrier fencing
• the workers continued to remove and replace the fencing to undertake work activities on the press
• a safety manager had identified the risk to workers performing the manual spreading task one week before the incident, however only put in administrative controls
• the work continued with supervisors instructing workers in the task
• the injured person was shown how to undertake this task
• the injured person had been working for the defendant for six weeks.

Court result:

The defendant pleaded guilty in the Richlands Industrial Magistrates Court on 12 July 2010 to breaching s.24(1) of the Workplace Health and Safety Act 1995, having failed to meet its workplace health and safety obligations and was sentenced with no conviction recorded.

Industrial Magistrate Mr Phillip Austin fined the defendant $47 000 as well as ordering investigation, professional and court costs totalling $2951.90.

In reaching a decision the industrial magistrate acknowledged the defendant failed to control a significant hazard identified one week prior, and that the work activity of workers being in proximity to the hazard on the press was allowed to continue.

In deciding the penalty imposed the industrial magistrate took into account the defendant had not been prosecuted previously for any workplace health and safety breach, cooperated with the investigation and entered an early plea of guilty. The court also noted the defendant was a good corporate citizen.

Considerations for prevention:

When working in the manufacturing industry where there is exposure to risks from unguarded plant, obligation holders should apply a risk management approach to ensure the selection of suitable control measures.

Risk management involves evaluating the consequences and likelihood of harm that may result from the hazard, deciding on and implementing control measures to prevent or minimise the level of the risk from the hazard and monitoring the effectiveness of the control measures to ensure they remain working correctly.

When deciding on and implementing appropriate control measures associated with the risk of nip and sheer points on plant, obligation holders should ensure:

• tasks are supervised or undertaken by suitably qualified and experienced workers
• a risk assessment of the task has been completed, documented and evaluated.

Control measures that may be considered include:

• the use of guarding that effectively separates workers from such hazardous zones
• following manufacturer's instructions and intended use of such plant
• seeking approval from the manufacturer for any design modification or obtaining an engineer's certification.

Visit the Workplace Health and Safety Queensland website for more information on:

• Health and safety information for manufacturing  
• Managing risk
• Employer training options
• Training staff
• Plant, machinery and equipment
• Guide to safeguarding common machinery and plant
• Plant Code of Practice 2005
• Risk Management Code of Practice 2007
• Workplace Health and Safety Act 1995.