Manufacturer fined over burn incident

A prominent maker of bathroom products has been fined in the South Australian Industrial Relations Court over an incident that led to a worker suffering burns to her hand.

SafeWork SA says the case highlights the need to prioritise the physical guarding of machinery as a key means of preventing workplace injury.

Following a two-day trial earlier this year, Caroma Industries was found guilty of breaching section 19(1) of the Occupational Health, Safety and Welfare Act 1986 in failing to provide and maintain plant in a safe condition; and on 7 August, received its penalty from Industrial Magistrate Michael Ardlie.

SafeWork SA prosecuted after investigating an incident at the company’s Norwood premises in 2006. A female employee was working on a heat-bag sealer, which is a machine that wraps and seals toilet seats. During her work, a toilet seat became jammed in the machine. Due to a delay in maintenance staff arriving, the woman then attempted to unjam the piece herself. In doing so, her right hand slid through a gap, resulting in three fingers being burned by the heat-sealing bar (estimated temperature 150 °C). The employee sustained full thickness burns to her three fingers along with nerve and tendon damage, but returned to work five weeks later.

SafeWork SA submitted to the court during the trial that an employer’s duty to keep employees safe must also take account of inadvertent or unexpected actions of the employee.

Magistrate Ardlie said that the control measures applied by this employer were not extensive enough: “Whilst there were guards … and despite … administrative controls (signs and procedures), the risk was that an employee’s fingers could be burnt by the heat bar if the fingers entered the gap via the conveyor belt.”

Despite an impressive safety record in its industry and no prior convictions, the company was convicted and fined $10,000. (No discount was applicable because the defendant chose to contest the matter at trial.) An appeal is pending.

SafeWork SA says that this verdict reinforces the view that physical guards and interlocks on machines comprise a worthwhile safety investment that helps eliminate the chance of accidental contact with dangerous parts.