An 11-year-old pupil suffered serious injuries when his hand was trapped in a bench sanding machine during a class at a school in Solihull.
On 6 October last year, the boy was using the machine during a design and technology lesson at Alderbrook School. He was sanding the edges of a piece of acrylic material as part of a project to create a wind chime.
While he was using the machine, his left hand became trapped between the rotating face of the sanding disc and the machine’s table edge. He required specialist surgery to repair tendon damage to his fingers and was off school for several weeks owing to his injuries. He still suffers pain in cold weather and doesn’t have full range of movement in his fingers.
An HSE investigation found the machine had guarding in place, but it was designed for use by adults. The gap between the disc face and the table edge was 6mm, which was large enough to trap the student’s hand.
The company carried out a generic risk assessment when the machine was installed in 2000 but this failed to identify the potential entrapment hazard. The machine’s manual recommended the gap should be set to 1.5mm and the school failed to adapt the machine to make it safe for use by young students.
The HSE issued an Improvement Notice on 7 November last year, which required the school to put measures in place to prevent students from being able to access the dangerous area on the machine.
HSE inspector Karl Raw said: “Health and safety management for design and technology within Alderbrook School was not of the expected standard. Guidance was out of date, risk assessments were generic, and concerns raised in a 2010 audit by Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council relating to this had not been addressed.
“This prosecution is not about schools abandoning or being stopped from allowing pupils to use machines. It is about sensible assessment of risk, given the age and maturity of school pupils.”
Alderbrook School appeared at Solihull Magistrates’ Court on 5 November and pleaded guilty to breaching s3(1) of the HSWA 1974. It was fined £3500 and ordered to pay £5000 in costs.
In mitigation, the school said it had no previous safety convictions and cooperated with the enforcement notice by immediately removing the machine and another identical machine from use. It has subsequently purchased replacements, which have suitable guards in place.
The Safety Conversation with SHP (previously the Safety and Health Podcast) aims to bring you the latest news, insights and legislation updates in the form of interviews, discussions and panel debates from leading figures within the profession.
Find us on Apple Podcasts, Spotify and Google Podcasts, subscribe and join the conversation today!
Mick,
You haven’t been near a school lately. They are H&S mad! Well they’re H&S paperwork mad, but I guess the 2 aren’t the same.
At my son’s school, an outdoor climbing frame was put OOB immediately when an inspection discovered a minor defect. After 6 weeks of questioning – and a FOI request – I found out the nature of the defect and effected a compliant repair. It took 9 months for the inspector to re-inspect, whereupon he condemned it for a major defect that had somehow appeared.
Is this not a wood work incident?
I seem to remember undertaking school work when at school, and we definately participated in wood work, or was misslead? The english language is a wonderful thing.
I remember a lad trying to dill a hole in his tie with a bench mounted drill, the tie snagged on the drill bit and pulled him face first into the drill housing, breaking his nose.
Oh what fun we had. The good old days?
And if I recall correctly the master clipped him as well.
As a school governor I was told that there must be DSE assessments for staff using their lap-tops even if it is only for a few minutes but not to consider DSE assessments for pupils who might spend hours in front of display screens as they are not at work.
I have been assured that from a H&S point of view, pupils get no more protection than HASWA 3 as they themselves are not “At Work”
It’s a strange old world eh?
“The machine’s manual recommended the gap should be set to 1.5mm and the school ”
Forget about risk assessment and get back to basics -Read the Manual.
This is a prime example of why schools have to carry out risk assessments.
John R
It has always galled me that we place so much effort on ensuring the health and safety of people at work, whilst so little effort is made to ensure the health and safety of young people in our schools.
Why is the improvement notice issued over a month after the incident, and is it only then that the school take the equipment out of use?
Who do schools employ as technology teachers these days? Textile and food tech specialists in a workshop does not equal competent supervision of young persons
Andrew, I have, and all you have done is confirm my point – over zealous reactions on minor issues and ignoring serious problems. And 9 months to reinspect?
I rest my case.
Also bear in mind that if the state starts teaching H&S, who will be teaching it?
(…..now where’s that hand cart gone that bloke used to carp on about years ago……?)
Mick is so right of course, indeed isn’t this further proof that Safety management should be on the national curriculum! In our schools we are supposed to be preparing our children for work, yet what we are actually doing is setting the worst possible example and increasing the burden on employers to provide a re-education after bad practice has been instilled and bad habits have been developed.
Why oh why don’t we start at the beginning?
Dear school governor. Your adviser is misinformed. Even if such laptop use is more extensive, it is a doddle to comply with the DSE regs – simple systems for a simple ‘risk’.
The duty to pupils is slightly different as you say, but S3 says the school must ‘not create a risk’ by the way it runs it’s business. If pupils spend hours in front of screens I would question this as a technique, but there are simple ways to manage that risk too, and educate too! Ignore the ‘regs’, and apply real world.
I hate to think about the school’s laboratories – or are “chemicals” dangerous whereas “craft” isn’t?