Published in Truckstop News - March 2008.

In this month’s issue Steven Hinchliffe of the specialist Personal Injury firm Hinchliffes Solicitors considers the causes and consequences of “TRIPPING AND FALLING ACCIDENTS AT WORK”.   

Approximately 37% of all major accidents in the workplace are caused by slipping and tripping.  Of those, 95% result in broken bones or dislocated limbs.  A slip or trip could lead to even more serious consequences, such as falling from a height or colliding with a motor vehicle, and the possibility of falling into a machine or into a container of hot liquid or acid hardly bears thinking about.

Published in Truckstop News - October 2007.

This article deals with the basic elements that need to exist for a claim for personal injury compensation to be made following an accident.

The accident must have happened because of the negligence or fault of another party, by whom you were owed a “duty of care”.  This means that there must be a sufficiently close relationship between you and the other party for them to be aware that their actions (or lack of action) may have an impact upon you.  This is normally the case when the other party is your employer, a company to whom you are delivering or another road user.

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has issued a warning to Everest Ltd, after workers were repeatedly put at risk of falling while working at height.

The HSE inspected properties where roof refurbishment was being carried out by the company.  Its employees were working on mobile scaffolds and platforms without having suitable protection to prevent them from falling.  There was a lack of handrails and parts of the equipment were not properly set up.

At a hearing in the Luton Magistrates Court, the company pleaded guilty to breaching Health and Safety Law, including the Work at Height Regulations 2005, and was fined £6,000.  The company was also required to pay almost £16,000 in legal costs

In 2007 over half of the workers who died on construction sites were engaged in refurbishment work, with the number of fatal accidents increasing by 61%.  Also during that year working at height was a factor in the deaths of 23 construction workers.

A major insurer has recently carried out a study that revealed alarming statistics about the number of people whose jobs already involve an element of risk, but who go to work either drunk or with a hangover.  They do so in the full knowledge that this could increase the risk of a work accident being suffered by either them or their colleagues.

25% of construction workers and 15% of wholesale and agricultural workers admitted to working with a hangover at least once a week.

Of the people who took part in the study, 61% of those involved in manufacturing and 41% of construction workers indicated that it was harder to concentrate with a hangover.  With 25% and 33% respectively, admitting to making mistakes that needed to be rectified the following day.

The Health and Safety Executive have levied a fine of £10,500 against Weldex UK Ltd after their employee was blinded in one eye following an accident at work, which was caused by inadequate work equipment.

The work accident occurred when the employee was undertaking grinding tasks in August 2007.  The grinding disc he was using shattered, and fragments penetrated the visor he was wearing and entered his left eye.  He subsequently lost the sight in that eye because of the injury.

The company pleaded guilty to three breaches of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998.

The HSE has repeated its warnings to employers, concerning their need to properly maintain work equipment and to provide their employees with adequate training.

The Health and Safety Commission Report for 2006/7 shows that the provisional figure for the number of workers who were fatally injured in an accident at work during 2006/07 is 241.  This corresponds to a rate of 0.80 per 100,000 workers.  In 2005/06 the figure was 217, ie 0.72 per 100,000 workers, which was the lowest annual rate recorded.

Even though fatal accidents are generally decreasing, the rate of that decrease has slowed over the last 15 years, and in fact there has been very little change during the last 5 years.

The agricultural and construction industries account for around 46% of all fatal work accidents.

Falling from a height is the most common type of accident, and in 2006/7 resulted in 19% of the recorded fatalities.  However, over the last 10 years there has been a significant reduction in the severity of injuries in this area.

Ms Allison was employed by London Underground as a tube train driver and after using a newly designed traction brake control she developed tenosynovitis.  She had not received any specific training or instruction on the correct way to hold the new brake control and her employer therefore failed to minimise the risk of her suffering an injury.  As a result of this, London Underground was required to pay her personal injury compensation.

All employers are subject to regulations that impose a mandatory duty to provide adequate training.  Whether that training is adequate is assessed by what the employer ought to have known of the risks arising from the activities of its business, and not what the employer actually knew.

To ensure the safety of staff and authorised visitors, a workplace floor must not be slippery.  A recent claim for personal injury compensation made by an employee of Bristol City Council has highlighted that in claims of this type the Court will bear in mind the use to which the floor was put, including temporary circumstances that might often arise.  In this case the Court considered the frequency of any intermittently hazardous conditions, the chances of someone having an accident at work and suffering injury, and the severity of that injury.

It was found that the floor where the Council’s employee worked was frequently contaminated by urine, and when wet became slippery.  The Court found that the likelihood of a slipping accident occurring that might result in an injury was reasonably foreseeable during such times.  The employee had been warned of the potential hazard, but nevertheless the Council was held to be in breach of established Health and Safety Regulations.  However, the employee was also considered to be partly at fault and as a result his injury compensation was reduced by one third.

A review commissioned by the Government could spell the end for GP sick notes. National Director for Health and Work, Dame Carol Black, has advised that the current system of sick notes should be replaced by a “fit for work service” so that GPs do not have to give out multiple paper sick notes.

Her report stated that “GPs sign sick notes because they feel they have no alternative available.”

The scheme would not just apply to absence from work following an accident, for example the time taken to recover from a work accident or a road accident, but also absence due to everyday illnesses and diseases.

The recommendations have been welcomed by Dr Hamish Meldrum, Chairman of the British Medical Association, who said: