BAM Nuttall and McNealy Brown were fined £900,000 and £65,000 respectively after they admitted failing to put proper procedures and safeguards in place to prevent painter Paul Welstead falling through the waiting room’s ceiling.
Mr Welstead, aged 31 at the time of the accident, suffered severe ligament damage and has been unable to return to work as an industrial painter since falling around 10 feet while working at East Croydon railway station on 7 January 2015.
Not briefed
Croydon Crown Court heard that the two companies agreed the £12million contract with Network Rail to undertake the replacement of station floor surfaces, canopy roofs and cladding.
BAM Nuttall started work in January 2014 and later that year a third company, DRH, was asked by the existing contractors to supply industrial painters to undertake specialist tasks.
Mr Welstead and a colleague were given a site induction when they arrived for work on 18 December, but crucially, they were not briefed on the risk assessment, which required work over the platforms to be undertaken at night, for workers to wear full body harnesses and for the waiting room below to be locked.
Returning to work on 7 January following the Christmas and New Year holiday, Mr Welstead and his colleague were not given another safety briefing, nor were they warned about fragile roofs, and at 9.40am he fell through the unguarded suspended ceiling into the waiting room below.
In a prosecution brought by the Office of Rail and Road (ORR), the companies were fined after admitting charges under S 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. Costs of £7,157 were also awarded.
Johnny Schute, Deputy Director, Policy, Strategy and Planning, said: “The fines handed out send a powerful message to the industry that the safety of workers on the railways is absolutely paramount, and proper risk assessments and briefings must be carried out and followed.
“The ORR is committed to protecting the safety of workers and passengers and will not hesitate to take enforcement action when and where it is necessary.”
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Just for the sake of discussion. What would have been the result had the injured worker been drug tested and found to be positive? That would not have changed the circumstances of the lack of safe practices, but would the claim still have been the same if the worker was deemed to have been impaired or under the influence?
Duncan/ all
The very basic rule is: if you can’t prove it, you haven’t done it. Drug testing could of proved negligence on the workers behalf, but i suspect the company wouldn’t factor in time or cost to complete drug testing, as they don’t even have the system or diligence (moral obligation) to ensure workers and contractors read and understand Risk Assesments?
This is a classic example of a wholesale systemic failure of the risk assessment process the fact is management did not have in place a strong red line culture of safety as if they did all aspects of their risk assessments would have been adhered to by all concerned. And the outcome would have in all probability been different this not the first case this company has been brought to book. Hence the HSE Inspectors thorough inspection raising the issue of whether there was an issue of a drink and drug problem smacks of whinging management trying to dilute their own failings and as it wasn’t raised by the company or the HSE has no basis or part of the final judgement.
Banged to rights