Austral Masonry Pty Ltd

Incident description:

On 16 March 2010 a 24 year old worker sustained injuries when he came into contact with the exposed tail roller and first support roller on a sandbagging machine conveyor.

Austral Masonry (Qld) Pty Ltd operated a business of manufacturing and selling concrete blocks and supplying sand and cement products from its workplace at Ormeau. The company employed a number of workers, including the injured worker who undertook site supervisor duties. One of his duties involved bagging-up sand, using a sandbagging conveyor machine located in the yard.

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.

Workers, including the injured worker, would regularly use the sandbagging conveyor machine to bag-up sand, which would be sold to the public.

The investigation findings presented to the court revealed:

• the sandbagging conveyor machine was used approximately once a week for at least 18 months
• workers would load the hopper of the machine and strike the hopper with a stick to loosen the sand
• the tail roller and first support roller of the conveyor were unguarded and exposed
• there were no controls in place to prevent or minimise the risk of exposure to moving parts on the sandbagging machine
• workers were required to work in close proximity to the unguarded moving parts of the sandbagging conveyor
• the exposed tail roller was identified as a risk and a control strategy was proposed to have the tail roller and first support roller guarded
• at the time of the incident the tail roller and first support roller remained unguarded.

Court result:

The defendant pleaded guilty in the Beenleigh Industrial Magistrates Court on 12 August 2011 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 being recorded.

Industrial Magistrate Mr Trevor Morgan ordered the defendant pay a penalty of $50 000 as well as investigation and court costs totalling $1952.40.

In reaching his decision, the industrial magistrate acknowledged that the defendant, irrespective of having the hazard previously identified through an independent safety audit, ought to have known of the hazard and subsequent risks and should have implemented control measures as a matter of urgency. The industrial magistrate further found that the hazard was obvious and the risks foreseeable.

In deciding the penalty imposed, Industrial Magistrate Morgan 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.

Considerations for prevention:

(Commentary under this heading is not part of the Court's decision.)

When deciding on and implementing control measures associated with the risk of workers becoming entangled in plant such as conveyor belts, obligation holders should consider installing guarding that prevents workers from being able to make contact with the moving components of plant.

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

• health and safety for the manufacturing industry
• Guide to safeguarding common machinery and plant
• Guide to machinery and equipment safety 
• managing risk
• employer training options
• training staff
• Plant Code of Practice 2005
• Risk Management Code of Practice 2007
• Workplace Health and Safety Act 1995.