Archive for the 'Work accidents' Category

The Health and Safety Executive’s recent statistics show that for 2007/2008 there has been a reduction in the number of people who have been killed, injured or made ill by accidents at work.

Figures suggest that the incidents of work accident injury have fallen by approximately 9% since 2000, and that this trend is continuing.  Fatal workplace accidents have also reduced by around 5%.  The number of reported work related diseases appears to have also fallen, however there has been an increase in asbestos related diseases, such as Mesothelioma.

Companies are failing to invest in inexpensive and simple measures that would prevent their workforce having work accidents while working at height.  Many accident work claims for personal injury compensation are as a result of poor management, broken or inadequate equipment, or structural failures.  Records indicate that incidents involving a fall from a height currently result in more workplace deaths than from any other type of work accident.

Some employers appear to believe that workplace height regulations apply only to sizeable heights.  This is wrong, as anything above one metre is classed as “working at height”.  Many work accidents result in injuries when there is a fall at “low height”, such as when truck drivers unload goods from HGVs.

In 2005 mechanic Robert Earl died of the asbestos related disease Mesothelioma.  In 1969 he had spent approximately 8 months working at a local garage, where he was exposed to asbestos in the brake linings of the commercial vehicles that he was repairing.  A claim was made against the garage by Mr Earl’s Executors, who were successful in recovering injury compensation for his family.

Although the exposure to asbestos in this case was relatively minor, the success of the Mesothelioma claim could set a precedent for others seeking personal injury compensation as a result of limited exposure to asbestos.

A manufacturer of industrial catering equipment, Lincat Ltd, has been fined £19,400 and ordered to pay substantial legal costs after being found in breach of health and safety regulations following an employee suffering an accident at work.

The employee, Rolf Cinavas, worked as an oven assembler and suffered a groin injury when he was required to move a pizza oven weighing 96kg without the use of any mechanical lifting gear.  He and his supervisor had to move 5 ovens from a waist high assembly bench and put them on pallets that were on the floor.  As a result of the accident he was unable to return to work for 9 weeks.

The company admitted being in breach of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 as they did not have a clear health and safety policy statement.  They were also in breach of the Manual Handling Operations Regulations 1992.

Published in Truckstop News - October 2008.

In this month’s issue Steven Hinchliffe of the specialist Personal Injury firm Hinchliffes Solicitors considers “LIFTING AND MANUAL HANDLING TASKS”.

Many truckers suffer with back pain caused by various factors, including the requirement to lift objects and perform general manual handling tasks.  The term “manual handling” is used to describe a wide variety of jobs, including lifting, lowering, pushing, pulling, carrying, moving and holding or restraining an object, animal or person.  It also covers activities that require the use of force, for example pulling a lever or operating power tools.

HSE records suggest that over 30% of all work accidents involve manual handling issues, with an estimated 300,000 people each year suffering the agonies of back pain.

Published in Truckstop News - August 2008.

In this month’s issue Steven Hinchliffe of the specialist Personal Injury firm Hinchliffes Solicitors considers the “DANGERS ASSOCIATED WITH FORKLIFT TRUCKS”.

The Health and Safety Executive estimates that each year there are around 8,000 forklift truck (”FLT”) accidents resulting in injury, about 10 of which are fatal.  Inadequate training appears to be a significant cause of these accidents, but other issues such as operator error, unsuitable premises, poor layout and design of the FLT operating areas, and poor maintenance are also contributory factors.

Published in Truckstop News - July 2008.

In this month’s issue Steven Hinchliffe of the specialist Personal Injury firm Hinchliffes Solicitors considers the “HAZARDS INVOLVED WHEN LOADING AND UNLOADING LORRIES”.

Recent evidence suggests that each year around 60 workers are killed and 5,000 seriously injured while working in haulage and distribution.  A further 23,000 sustain injuries severe enough to keep them off work for several days.

Many of these injuries are due to accidents during the loading and unloading process, often caused by:-

A recent study has discovered that two out of three employees suffer from work related repetitive strain injury (RSI).  This is thought to have cost employers more than £300m in lost working hours as well as leaving them wide open to work related personal injury compensation claims.

Computer giant Microsoft commissioned the research, which discovered that 68% of respondents were suffering or had suffered from back, wrist, hand or shoulder pain, all of which are key symptoms of repetitive strain injury.

Over the past 12 months cases have soared by 30%, with employers increasingly worried about additional overhead costs of temporary staff, lost man hours and injury compensation claims.

A firm has been prosecuted after a work accident in which one of its workers died.  The accident happened in January 2005 when a 60-year-old employee was crushed.

A forklift truck had been going round a corner when its driver performed an emergency stop in order to avoid hitting a staff member.  Due to the sudden braking, a steel coil situated on the forks became dislodged and fell on top of the man, pinning him to the ground.  He later died from his injuries.

As a result of this accident at work IP, a firm which is located in Uxbridge, was given a fine of £50,000 and ordered to pay £6,000 in costs at a hearing at Leeds Crown Court.  The company pleaded guilty to breaching health and safety regulations.

Employers’ misconceptions and general lack of knowledge about rehabilitation for injuries resulting from an accident at work or absence due to ill health could be costing them up to £610 million each year.

EEF (employers’ organisation) and Unum (disability insurer) have published “The Sickness Absence Report 2008″, which indicates that businesses actively providing rehabilitation for injured or sick employees have enjoyed a 0.7% lower absence rate as a result.

This equates to an extra 1.5 days’ work per employee each year, and in the manufacturing industry this means something in the region of 4.5 million working days.