We are operating at reduced capacity due to COVID-19 Alert Level Three restrictions. Please only call our 0800 number if someone is at serious risk of harm or has been seriously injured, become seriously ill, or died as a result of work.
For other notifications please complete our online forms at Notify WorkSafe.
Two companies have been fined after an incident involving a machine used to cut firewood which ended in a worker suffering a significant hand injury.
Davies Tree Service Limited employed the worker and MMD Engineering Limited manufactured the machine and both were sentenced at the Christchurch District Court yesterday following the June 2017 incident.
MMD Engineering is the first designer and manufacturer of machinery to be sentenced under the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015.
During the incident, a worker was using the machine when a deformed log came to be processed. Suspecting the log would jam, the worker pressed a button to stop the machine.
The worker then placed their hand through the machine’s unguarded opening to reposition the log, when the log splitter continued to operate causing the amputation of four fingers. Three were later reattached in hospital.
A WorkSafe investigation found the machine was not designed and manufactured to meet the appropriate health and safety and industry standards.
The machine was not adequately guarded and did not have installed relevant safety features such as interlocks and a locking safety latch. Despite having been advised of these failures, MMD Engineering still allowed the machine to be installed at the Davies Tree Service Limited site.
The investigation found Davies Tree Service Limited had removed what guarding was installed (though not adequate) from the machine which allowed workers full access to the moving parts of the machinery.
In addition, Davies Tree Service Limited had failed to address issues relating to machinery blockages with MMD and instead had employed its own procedures for clearing blockages.
A starting point for the fine for MMD Engineering Limited was $500,000 and a fine of $60,000 was imposed to reflect the company’s circumstances.
A starting point for the fine for Davies Tree Service Limited was $700,000 and a fine of $75,000 was imposed after taking into account the company’s circumstances. Reparation of $35,000 was also ordered.
WorkSafe Chief Inspector Investigations Steve Kelly said the offending on the part of both companies was significant.
“MMD Engineering in accepting the work from Davies should have ensured that it knew and understood and implemented health and safety and industry standards for the safe design of machinery.
“Likewise, Davies should have ensured that the machine met guarding and safe use of machinery standards prior to being put into operation. When issues arose with the guard door, Davies should have addressed these matters with MMD rather than taking matters into its own hands and removing the guard.
“Had proper precautions been taken, this worker would not have suffered from injuries which will impact him for the rest of his life.”
Davies Tree Service Limited
- A fine of $75,000 was imposed.
- Reparation of $35,000 was ordered.
- Davies Tree Service was sentenced under sections 36(1)(a) and 48(1)(c) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015.
- Being a PCBU, failed to ensure, so far as was reasonably practicable, the health and safety of workers who worked for the PCBU, while the workers were at work in the business or undertaking, namely operating a firewood processor log splitter, and that failure exposed the workers to a risk of serious injury arising from exposure to a cutting hazard created by the rotating blades of a hydraulic circular saw and hydraulic ram which were not adequately guarded.
- The maximum fine is a penalty not exceeding $1,500,000.
MMD Engineering Limited
- A fine of $60,000 was imposed.
- MMD Engineering was charged under sections 40(1)(a), 40(2)(a) and 48(2)(c) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015.
- Being a PCBU who conducts a business that manufactures plant that is used or that could reasonably be expected to be used at a workplace, it failed to ensure so far as was reasonably practicable, that the plant, namely a firewood processor log splitter, was manufactured to be without risks to the health and safety of persons, who used the firewood processor log splitter, for its designed and manufactured purpose, and that failure exposed any individual to a risk of serious injury associated with the operation of the firewood processor log splitter.