18.02.2014
The unnamed man was working for Northamptonshire engineering firm Alumasc Precision at a site in Bletchley, Milton Keynes when the incident occurred on May 18th 2012.
An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found the heavy load had not been properly supported as it was being hoisted around the facility.
Although it had been secured to the crane with eye bolts, the bottom of the die was only being supported by a G-clamp. When the load started to move, the bottom half fell away and hit the worker.
Milton Keynes Magistrates' Court heard how the accident could have been prevented if the company had planned the lift more carefully.
The HSE has clear rules and guidelines for lifting heavy items and firms must ensure they are complying with Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations 1998.
In this case, Alumasc Precision should have used robust straps across both halves of the die to ensure it did not become detached.
The firm - which is based in Kettering - was fined £6,500 and ordered to pay £9,554 in costs after pleading guilty to a single breach of the Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations 1998.
According to the HSE, the injured man was unable to work for several months as a result of the injuries to his left foot. He has since returned to work with the company.
Following the hearing, HSE inspector Karl Howes explained why it is so important for employers to take extra care when devising a method for completing potentially dangerous work.
"This employee has suffered a severe and needless injury that could have been avoided if the right accessories had been used," he commented.
"Companies must adequately plan and organise all lifting operations - including consideration of the lifting accessories that are being used, and assessments on how lifts are carried out."
Northamptonshire Firm Fined After Worker Suffers Serious Foot Injury
A worker had to have two toes amputated after he was struck by a 400 kg die that was being transported across a tool room.The unnamed man was working for Northamptonshire engineering firm Alumasc Precision at a site in Bletchley, Milton Keynes when the incident occurred on May 18th 2012.
An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found the heavy load had not been properly supported as it was being hoisted around the facility.
Although it had been secured to the crane with eye bolts, the bottom of the die was only being supported by a G-clamp. When the load started to move, the bottom half fell away and hit the worker.
Milton Keynes Magistrates' Court heard how the accident could have been prevented if the company had planned the lift more carefully.
The HSE has clear rules and guidelines for lifting heavy items and firms must ensure they are complying with Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations 1998.
In this case, Alumasc Precision should have used robust straps across both halves of the die to ensure it did not become detached.
The firm - which is based in Kettering - was fined £6,500 and ordered to pay £9,554 in costs after pleading guilty to a single breach of the Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations 1998.
According to the HSE, the injured man was unable to work for several months as a result of the injuries to his left foot. He has since returned to work with the company.
Following the hearing, HSE inspector Karl Howes explained why it is so important for employers to take extra care when devising a method for completing potentially dangerous work.
"This employee has suffered a severe and needless injury that could have been avoided if the right accessories had been used," he commented.
"Companies must adequately plan and organise all lifting operations - including consideration of the lifting accessories that are being used, and assessments on how lifts are carried out."
Our serious injury solicitors could help you claim compensation if you have suffered an injury at work that resulted in the amputation of a limb. See our Amputation Claims page or Workplace Accident Claims page for more information.
Expert Opinion
This worker suffered horrific, unnecessary injuries as a result of his employers failing to take the time to carefully plan the die lift. <br/> <br/>“The Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations 1998 Act was introduced for a reason – to keep workers safe – and this case shows the devastating consequences that can occur when it is not followed. <br/> <br/>“Sadly, this case is not a rare occurrence as we are instructed to help hundreds of workers every year who have been seriously injured in the workplace as a result of simple guidelines not being followed. <br/> <br/>“We hope lessons are learnt from this prosecution across the engineering industry about the importance of protecting staff whose work involves the lifting of heavy items.” <br/>
Press Contact
