Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Manslaughter Convictions For Timber Yard Death: Stop Press
Manslaughter Convictions For Timber Yard Death: Stop Press
Manslaughter Convictions For Timber Yard Death: Stop Press
MANSLAUGHTER
CONVICTIONS FOR
TIMBER YARD DEATH
Teglgaard Hardwood (UK) Ltd and its Managing Regular readers will know we have previously highlighted
Director, John Horner, were sentenced on 28 February at the risks associated with poor stacking as a result of the
Hull Crown Court after they pleaded guilty to charges of research carried out by HSE, which underpins the guidance
corporate manslaughter and manslaughter respectively. given in Woodworking Information Sheet WIS2(rev) Safe
The company was fined £25 000 and John Horner given a stacking of sawn timber and board material.
custodial sentence of 15 months, suspended for two years.
Safety in the wood yard depends, not only on stacking, but
The charges followed the investigation of the death of 18- also on layout, traffic routes and lift-truck driver training.
year-old Christopher Longrigg at the company’s timber Put simply you need:
yard at Hessle Dock, Hessle, near Hull on 26 April 2000.
● safe sites;
Mr Longrigg was employed as a general labourer. He died when ● safe vehicles; and
a stack of hardwood timber packs collapsed on top of him. ● safe drivers.
Are you sure you are following best practice? Visit your
Humberside Police and Inspectors from the Health and
yard and check it out.
Safety Executive (HSE) carried out a joint investigation.
Neither the company nor its Managing Director were able
to demonstrate that even the most basic health and safety
precautions had been taken at Hessle Dock. Before Mr
Longrigg’s death, the company and Mr Horner had not
STOP PRESS
produced a health and safety policy, they had not assessed We have just received details of another stacking-
the risks to which their employees were exposed and they related fatality. Tragically, a 20-year-old employee
had failed to provide adequate health and safety training for of a bedroom furniture company in the north-west
their employees, particularly those driving fork-lift trucks. of England has died after a stack of chipboard
toppled over.
Among the factors which contributed to the collapse of the
Approximately 30 large sheets of veneered 18 mm
timber were:
chipboard had been stacked on edge next to a panel
saw. A sheet towards the back was needed, so several
● loose banding;
employees pulled two-thirds of the sheets to an upright
● stacks were built too high;
position to try to remove the one they wanted. The
● the practice of pushing stacks into the stack behind
sheets toppled over, trapping the young man against
which caused packs with loose banding to be pushed
the table of the panel saw.
out of shape.
1
Unsecured roof
trusses crush child
A Scottish roof truss company based near Falkirk has trusses had been secured. Risks to members of the public
recently been prosecuted following a serious accident to a must be properly assessed, and control measures have to
four-year-old child. The child, his two-year-old brother and be put in place. Previous HSE advice to carry out a risk
an older boy aged eight were playing on roof trusses in an assessment for stacking and storing had been ignored by
open yard approximately 60 m from their home. The the company.
unsecured trusses fell over, crushing him.
Approximately 50% of all stacking accidents investigated
The investigating HSE inspector found that roof trusses by HSE have resulted in the injured person suffering major
were stacked horizontally and unsecured at various points injuries (eg fractures, dislocations, amputations). Between
in the yard. The accident happened when one of the April 2000 and March 2002 there have been three fatal
children walked along the top of a bundle of eight trusses incidents involving the stacking and storage of timber.
(weighing over a tonne), causing them to fall forward, Roof trusses are heavy, so when accidents occur they tend
landing on top of the four-year-old. As the trusses fell, they to be very serious.
missed his head, but a cross member hit and trapped his
abdomen. It took five people, including the boy’s father, to The main legal requirements covering stacking and storage
lift the trusses off. The boy’s back, legs, wrist and feet are the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 (the HSW
were injured and he was in hospital for two days. Act), the Management of Health and Safety at Work
Regulations 1999 and the Workplace (Health, Safety and
The bundle of trusses that fell was leaning against a row Welfare) Regulations 1992.
of small trees, forming the boundary between the yard
and the pavement of a public road. The trusses were The company was prosecuted under section 3 of the HSW
unsecured and stacked near to a housing estate. The Act, which places a duty on employers to conduct their
inspector found this accident was foreseeable and could undertaking in such a way that people who are not
have been prevented if a gate or fencing had been employed by them but who are affected by what they do
erected to stop children playing in the area and the are not exposed to risks to their health or safety.
2
NUISANCE DUST MASKS
As part of HSE’s campaign to reduce the incidence contact between the skin and the mask for their effectiveness,
of work-related asthma we are emphasising the need but many are available in one size only and cannot be expected
to select the correct dust mask. HSE inspectors commonly to fit all the working population. You should obtain a selection
find workers using the wrong type of mask, providing little of different respirators so that they can be chosen to give the
or no protection from the risks of breathing in wood dust. best fit for individual wearers. For those who wear glasses or
have facial hair, ensuring a good fit can be difficult with a dust-
Many of the so-called ‘nuisance’ or ‘comfort’ masks that are mask style respirator, so you should consider other types such
widely available do not give adequate protection against as an air stream helmet.
wood dust and can give the wearer a false sense of security.
They are often chosen because of their low price. They often Some general advice:
only have a single elastic band to secure them, which will not
be adjustable, hampering a good fit, and may not have a metal ● Using a mask (respirator) to protect workers from
band to help them fit across the wearer’s nose. Also they will health effects caused by breathing in wood dust
not be ‘CE’ marked. This mark shows that the piece complies should always be a last resort, when other means of
with the European Standard for respiratory protection. prevention are not practical. This includes using hand
tools and sanding.
For the majority of dust masks used in woodworking, the ● Make sure workers are shown how to adjust the mask
EU standard is EN 149. Within this standard a respirator to ensure a good fit.
will be designated as one of three classes - FFP1, FFP2 or ● Make sure enough masks are available to allow
FFP3, with the latter giving the highest degree of workers to change them when required.
protection. Your equipment supplier will be able to give ● Store the masks in a suitable container away from
advice on dust mask selection and fitting, but for work sources of dust.
activities involving exposure to fine wood dust a mask rated
to at least FFP2 should be used. Further information on the selection of respiratory protection
is available at www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/woodindx.htm. Also
Correct selection of a dust mask can be confusing due to the see WIS14 Selection of respiratory protective equipment
number of types on the market. Face masks depend on good suitable for use with wood dust.
WOODNIG NEWS is produced by the HSE’s Woodworking National Interest Group based at NAC, Stoneleigh
Park, Kenilworth, Warwickshire CV8 2LG.
4