A migrant worker narrowly avoided death after falling into a shredder at a factory that manufactures animal bedding.

The Polish man had been living in the UK for just over six months when the incident took place on 23 January 2007. He was working as a process operator for Snowflake Animal Bedding Ltd at the firm’s factory in Boston, Lincolnshire.

At the time of the incident he was loading bales of hay on to a conveyor, which led to a shredder, where the produce is bagged and sold as bedding for pets, such as rabbits. The worker was standing on the conveyor and cutting away the string that was holding the bales together. He should have been standing on a platform, which was adjacent to the conveyor, but it had become common practice for workers to stand on the conveyor when cutting the strings.

As he was removing the strings from one of the bales he lost his balance, and fell off the edge of the conveyor, landing feet-first in the shredder. Miraculously he managed to pull himself out of the shredder but had sustained deep lacerations to his feet, legs, hips and hands. He required multiple skin grafts and was unable to return to work for four months. Subsequently, the HSE has lost contact with him and it is believed he has returned to his home country, and it is unknown if he is still suffering from his injuries.

Prior to the accident the HSE had received an anonymous tip-off that a number of forklift truck operators at the factory had not received any training. When an inspector visited the site to investigate the shredder incident, she also asked the firm to provide evidence that staff had been trained to use forklifts. It became apparent that the staff had not been trained, so the inspector issued an Improvement Notice, ordering training to be provided.

The inspector also issued a Prohibition Notice ordering the factory to introduce a safe system of work for operating the shredder. A separate Improvement Notice requiring the company to carry out a risk assessment on the machine was also issued.

Snowflake Animal Bedding Ltd appeared at Boston Magistrates’ Court on 22 June and pleaded guilty to breaching s2(1) of the HSWA 1974 – fine £13,300, and reg.9(1) of PUWER 1998, for failure to ensure employees received adequate training for driving forklifts – fine £3400. It was also ordered to pay full costs of £8655.

In mitigation, the firm said it had no previous convictions and deeply regretted the incident. It has fully complied with all Enforcement Notices and has now revamped the system of work used to operate the shredder. It has introduced lock-off procedures to prevent workers from accessing the conveyor and the platform, and bales are now lifted from ground level by a forklift. Staff have also been trained in how to operate the vehicles.

HSE inspector Judith McNulty-Green said: “The sad thing is that these injuries could have been so easily prevented. The employee should have been standing on a platform to carry out his work, not on the conveyor belt. However, during our investigation it became evident that even if employees did stand on the platform to cut the string, there would be occasions when the hay got tangled, and standing on the conveyor to resolve such problems became custom and practice.

“It was unacceptable for the company to allow this practice to become commonplace and I hope that other companies can learn from this incident and ensure their responsibility to staff safety is of paramount importance.”

She concluded: “Although not directly related to this incident, it became apparent during our investigation that many staff, including the injured man, were not given enough instruction for them to be able to drive and operate the forklifts safely. This is something that should have been done as a matter of course to ensure the safe operation of the factory.”

Reader's Comments Michael Taylor 04/07/2009 You Quote "Subsequently, the HSE has lost contact with him and it is believed he has returned to his home country, and it is unknown if he is still suffering from his injuries." I would just like to make it aware that the person involved in this accident has not returned home to Poland and once able he continued working for the company up until Jan 2009 until he was made redundant. He still lives in England and still has ailments relating to the injury.   Mick 01/07/2009 How many times do we have to see the words ''In mitigation, the firm said it had no previous convictions and deeply regretted the incident.'' Whats the point in that? It would have been better to properly guard the thing and implement effective SSW to operate it safely. How can saying ''We have been lucky in the past and we are sorry'' mean anything at all? That is no mitigation. Having a decent risk assessment, SSW and proper training would be mitigation, not apologising afterwards!
	PRINT  < BACK | TOP ^

Comment on this Story
To comment on this story, please enter your name and email address, and start typing. All comments require approval from the editorial team before going live, so please be patient. We will try and get all comments approved or rejected within 24 working hours of you posting. More details about the code of conduct for our comments function can be found here.
Name: (required)	Email: (will not be shown)
Comment:
Characters left : 500
Please enter the coded above to help us avoid spam
*I have read, understood and consent to your Privacy Policy