School fined after worker fell from height
A school in Brentwood has pleaded guilty to breaching health and safety regulations after a worker was injured as he fell from a roof.
Chelmsford Crown Court heard how in January 2014 a maintenance team at the school was working to replace components on a bay window of a residential flat within the school grounds. A 63-year-old employee was working on the roof of the bay window when his foot got caught and he fell approximately 2.6metres to the ground below. He was taken to hospital and was found to have suffered injuries including a broken collarbone and chipped vertebrae.
An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) into the incident found that there were no effective guardrails or any other means of protection to prevent workers from falling from the roof. There were no supervisory arrangements and the work was not carried out in a safe manner.
Brentwood School Charitable Incorporated Organisation, Brentwood, Essex, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 4(1) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005, and was fined £40,000 and ordered to pay £1,477 in costs.
[vc_row][vc_column width="2/3"][vc_column_text]
The Safety Conversation Podcast: Listen now!
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![/vc_column_text][vc_empty_space height="15px"][vc_btn title="Listen here!" color="success" link="url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.shponline.co.uk%2Fthe-safety-and-health-podcast%2F|target:_blank"][/vc_column][vc_column width="1/3"][vc_single_image image="91215" img_size="medium"][/vc_column][/vc_row]
School fined after worker fell from height
A school in Brentwood has pleaded guilty to breaching health and safety regulations after a worker was injured as he
Lauren Applebey
SHP - Health and Safety News, Legislation, PPE, CPD and Resources Related Topics
Company and director fined after workers exposed to asbestos
Company fined after agency worker injured using unguarded machine
Housing company fined more than £500k after worker suffers burns
Good leader article, researching deeper it would seem to be an independent fee paying boarded school.
Whilst undertaking my NeBosh studies a fellow student was the estates manager for a similar boarding school in Berkshire, and his description of having to fight just to hire in access equipment to access loft spaces over the main hall that his team were expected to enter from a 4 stage wooden ladder resting on the rim of the hatch frame by the Head seemed hard to believe at the time, but rings true with this.
That in that sector staff are expected to work without the necessary safety equipment and that RAMS are virtually unknown should be of concern to school governors, but like most they’re more focused on image, I wonder just how much damage has been done to that, probably very little given my experience of the average parent of children attending such schools attitude to others health, safety and wellbeing.
Little wonder those children are so willing to risk others safety at University, a sector I know only too well…
In response to Niel’s comments- Yes, the disregard for health and safety is completely unacceptable, but his comments about pupils from the independent sector are rather sweeping. In fact, I was educated at the school in question and left to go to University to study Health and Safety following on to Chartered practitioner status and a 20+ year career in Health and Safety in the public sector. I was never one of “those children” and my parents certainly are not “average” by Niel’s definition or any other!
So I have to wonder why my experience at independent school lead to a very different outcome to the experience Niel seems to be describing?
I know the law must be enforced, but that’s 40k less to educate the children. Nothing for the HSE to be proud of.
Why would anyone know of “RAMS”? It is a (fairly recent) invented term, used predominantly within construction / contracting industries, and is not common or indeed accepted as a legitimate H&S term generally. HSE website does not mention RAMS.
Despite my pedantry, the principle point is true – H&S generally, including the need for risk assessment, and, if necessary, method statements, is poorly understood and poorly managed in schools, even if still under LA control. Similar incidents over the years, in all types of schools, often involving fairly mature caretaker / site manager falling from heights.
As schools become academies, or free, they then are effectively in the same legal position as independents, and without all that H&S support previously available from the authority. Free to do as they wish.
Duty holders must also ensure the employment of capable and competent workers and that appropriate supervision of work at height operations is in place where a foreseeable risk is identified via risk assessment.