Health & Safety Sentencing Roundup

19/08/2016

The new Health & Safety Sentencing Guidelines have now been in place for six months. The guidelines set out a range of sentences for both organisations and individuals (aged 18 and over).

Back in February 2016, The Sentencing Council said that the new definitive guidelines for health and safety offences, corporate manslaughter and food safety & hygiene offences would increase penalties for serious offending. This was intended to ensure that fines are fair and proportionate to the seriousness of the offence and the financial means of offenders.

For both health and safety and corporate manslaughter offences, the guidelines set out that the court must first determine the offence category and this involves considering culpability and harm. The guidelines also set out a range of penalties for individuals who have breached health and safety law.

In this article, we examine some of the fines that have been levied since the new guidelines were released.

Crane company fined £750,000 after crane collapse kills operator and member of the public

In March 2016, Falcon Crane Hire Ltd was fined £750,000 and ordered to pay costs of £100,000 for breaching Sections 2 and 3 of the Health and Safety at Work Etc Act.  The sentence was in relation to the death of a 37-year-old crane operator and a 23-year-old member of the public were killed when 24 bolts failed due to metal fatigue.

The 24 bolts were a significant safety feature on the crane’s slew ring, which connected the mast (tower) to the slew turret. This allows the arms of the crane (jib) to rotate through 360 degrees. When the bolts failed, the slew turret and jib separated from the mast and fell to the ground.

When investigating the incident, which happened ten years ago, HSE inspectors discovered that found Falcon Crane Hire Ltd did not investigate a similar incident which happened nine weeks before, when the bolts failed on the same crane and had to be replaced.

HSE found the company had an inadequate system to manage the inspection and maintenance of their fleet of cranes. Their process to investigate the underlying cause of component failings was also inadequate. It told the court that the particular bolts were a safety critical part of the crane. The court also heard the bolts failing previously was an exceptional and significant occurrence, which should have been recognised and addressed by Falcon Crane Hire.

British Telecom (BT) fined £500,000 after worker breaks his back

In June 2015, a BT worker fell seven metres from a loft in London, breaking his back.  This incident earned BT a fine of £500,000 plus costs of nearly £100,000, in a clear example of how judges can use the new Sentencing Guidelines to impose high fines on large companies with high turnovers.

The Old Bailey heard how a BT engineer, David Spurgeon, was fixing a telephone fault in the roof void of a residential block of flats in Tower Hamlets, East London.  He was on his own when he lost his balance and fell through the ceiling, landing on a concrete stairwell, sustaining his serious injuries. 

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) into the incident which occurred in May 2011 found there were a number of health and safety failures by BT, including not having proper plans and safety checks for work being carried out on fragile surfaces.

But perhaps most damningly, the Judge criticised the company for attempting to blame its own engineers for the incident, describing their approach as being ‘not necessary, misplaced, and unfortunate’.

Fish company fined £500,00 after employee killed by falling frozen fish

Interfish Limited was fined £500,000 plus £24,800 in costs after an employee was fatally injured when a large number of boxes filled with frozen fish fell on him.

After the hearing at Plymouth Crown Court, Inspector Emma O’Hara said after the hearing, “Safe stacking of stock is a cross-industry necessity and can often be overlooked when considering safe systems of work. Duty holders need to ensure that they are stacking safely and that they have a plan for dealing with any unforeseen circumstances such as a fall of stock.”

Tata Steel fined £1.98 million for not having appropriate guards on machines

Tata Steel has received a whopping £1.98 million fine for two separate offences involving inadequate protection on machines and a failure to manage health and safety risks properly.

A 26-year-old employee lost two thirds of his left hand and his middle and ring fingers whilst trying to clear a blockage on a steel tube manufacturing line which had unsuitable guarding. In a separate incident, a 52-year-old team leader lost part of his little finger when his left hand was caught, again in an inadequately guarded machine, whilst he was receiving refresher training.

Concluding comments

The fines issued in these cases clearly show the Judges are using the Sentencing Guidelines to impose huge fines on companies found in breach of health and safety regulations.  Therefore, it is imperative that organisations protect themselves by having a health and safety lawyer audit their existing risk management policies and health and safety procedures to ensure they are adequate and up-to-date.  If an incident does occur, then engaging an experienced health and safety emergency incident response team is vital.  They will brief key staff, liaise with investigating authorities (the police or HSE) and put in place a communication network and sound response strategy.

Doing this right can have a crucial effect on the outcome if a prosecution is subsequently brought.