Group Newsletter Issue 8 Volume 4 February 2013

1. Group Newsletter Issue 8 Volume 4 February 2013

2. Contents Group News Page 3 Maurice Adamson Award Winner Page 4 Members Pages Page 5 Exhibitions Information Page 7 Exhibitions report Page 9 SGUK News Page 10 Useful websites Page 11 HSE Information Page 12 Other stories/information Page 19

3. Group Info Please remember that if you are employed by an SME or are an individual wishing to do a NEBOSH Certificate then please contact us as some sponsorship may be available if you meet the criteria. Courses are provided either by SETA in Stockport or ACT Associates Please contact the Secretary for details cathy.nixon@mohsg.org.uk

4. Maurice Adamson Award Winner At the Safety Groups UK Alan Butler Awards Luncheon, not only were Manchester awarded a Silver Award, Mike Nixon, your treasurer was also presented with the Maurice Adamson Award for his unstinting dedication and service to the group over the last 18 years. Roger Bibbings, Occupational Safety Adviser for RoSPA and Secretary of Safety Groups UK, on announcing the award said: He [Mike Nixon] has been a member of the Manchester Group for more than 20 years and its treasurer since 1995. He was nominated by them for always being at the forefront of organising events, supporting fellow members and trying to obtain the best investments to maximise funds. His recent achievement was to set up the NEBOSH Scholarship Awards for his Group to improve standards of health, safety and welfare within a workplace. It allows a candidate from a small company or a self-funded individual to receive ultimately free training for the award of the NEBOSH National General Certificate or the NEBOSH Construction Certificate Mark Wait, Chairman of SOHSA, commented: Mike works tirelessly in the background as Treasurer for Safety Groups UK and attends all the conferences and exhibitions on our behalf - drumming up support for all of the Safety Groups in the UK. Without Mike and Cathy’s [Nixon] hard work Safety Groups UK would not have the recognition, image and visual impact that it has today. The Group wish to extend their sincere congratulations to Mike on this achievement, without his efforts the Group would be a little less successful. We hope he will be able to serve the Group in his role for many more years to come.

5. Members pages Health and Safety role in the investigation of road traffic accidents Craig McAdam, Partner, Slater and Gordon In the presentation by Maria O’Malley at the last members meeting in January 2013 we were presented with some thought provoking statistics relating to road traffic accidents. For example, a third of all road traffic accidents involve someone who is driving for work, resulting in an excess of 1000 fatalities and 13,000 serious injuries per year. This compared to workplace fatalities of 171 for the years 2010 – 2011, to my mind highlights one of the greatest risks for employees in the UK. The survey conducted by Maria tries to find some causes for work road traffic accidents and discovers that out of the sample surveyed only two thirds of large organisations informed employees of their driving related policies and only a quarter had received some form of training. Worryingly 36% of those surveyed felt obliged to take risks while driving due to pressure of work, fatigue, speeding, traffic addition and adverse weather. If these findings were discovered for people working at height or driving fork lifts you can imagine the response from the Health and Safety Executive! Health and Safety Legislation does not stop when employees leave work premises. The general duties of employers to their employees continues throughout the employees work duties and the duty to ensure an appropriate general policy with respect of the Health and Safety at work applies and should be brought to the notice of all employees.. If reasons such as tiredness, pressure, using mobile phones are the cause of road traffic accidents where third parties are injured then there may also be breaches of the general duty of employers and self employed to persons other than their employees, Health and Safety legislation is therefore capable of being applied ‘on the road’. The HSE’s policy and enforcement of Health and Safety in relation to work related traffic accidents is that legislation need not be enforced where public and worker safety is adequately protected by more specific and detailed laws enforced by another authority. In the cases of road traffic, those authorities are the Police and the Vehicle Operation Service Agency. However, Police investigating a road traffic accident will focus on the cause of the incident and the individual concerned, not on health and safety policies and management regulation so enforcement of road traffic policies often fall under the radar. There are obvious instances where that may change.

6. Feature continues In cases of fatalities on the road, if some of the factors highlighted in Maria’s presentation were contributory to a fatality then the Police will investigate and may well determine at an early stage the pressures of work use of mobile phone and tiredness necessitates the expansion of the investigation from one of careless or dangerous driving to one of potentially corporate manslaughter, and in those instances, it is foreseeable that the Health and Safety Executive would become involved in examining the company’s policies and work procedures to determine whether there has been a structural failure which has led to the fatality of an employee or member of the public. It cannot therefore be stressed enough that employees using fleet vehicles or their own private cars should be treated the same way as employees using machinery on site so far as risk assessments and method statements are concerned. The above instances are obvious examples of how the Health and Safety Executive could enforce Health and Safety legislation on the highway however it not need be so dramatic. If an employee is pulled over for having swerved across lanes due to tiredness the Police may establish the same contributory factors and the individual will be prosecuted. It is still open to the Police or Crown Prosecution Service to prosecute employees for having caused or committed the offence in either aiding, abetting or procuring the commission of an offence this can happen in many circumstances, for example; if journeys are scheduled to be completed in a specific time which would result in the employee speeding. There are therefore many reasons for employers to take the findings of Maria seriously and take action. For fuller information on the HSE’s role in the investigation into work related accidents can be found on the HSE website.

7. Exhibition Information Please add these dates to your diary and consider visiting the shows . These shows are supported by Safety Groups UK

8. Other Exhibitions etc. The following additional Exhibitions are to be supported by Safety Groups UK with Mike and Cathy manning the stand. April 23 – SHE Show South, Doubletree by Hilton, Milton Keynes May 14 – 16 Safety Expo, NEC, Birmingham June 25 – SHE Show North West, Hilton Hotel, Blackpool Other local events taking place, though not supported by Safety Groups UK include 18 September – North West Regional Association Conference, Barton Grange Hotel, Barton, nr. Preston Exhibition enquiries to Mike Nixon on exhibition@nwra.org.uk October South Cumbria Conference contact Martin Fishwick on mgfishwick@live.com

9. SGUKExhibitions report Mike and Cathy recently manned the stand at the IOSH Conference and Exhibition at London’s ExCeL. They had two reasonably successful days on the stand, obtaining in excess of 90 contacts for various Groups around the Country. They were also pleased to receive visits from members involved with other Groups around the Country. Thanks must be given to David Bishop and his team at UBM for facilitating the stand. Our next Exhibition will be Health and Safety South at Sandown Park in March, organised by Tim Else of Western Business Exhibitions.

10. SGUKInfo Discounts available through SGUK Please remember if you work for a small company, or Consultant, who perhaps do not receive a discount at Arco to request a Safety Groups UK card which gives 15% off in Arco shops only (not online). You must produce a card to obtain the discount. (only available to members). Members 15% Exclusive discount Safety Groups UK has negotiated corporate benefits for Group members. ACT is working with Safety Groups UK to provide an exclusive discount to all Safety Groups UK members. ACT offer an exclusive 15% discount off the list price of any product or service to all Safety Groups UK members. ACT is established as a high quality single point solutions provider of auditing, consultancy and training services. We have evolved into an integrated provider of all learning solutions including conventional, e-learning and blended learning options. Obtaining the 15% discount Call ACT on 01384 447915 E-mail – actsales@actassociates.co.uk Quote ACTSG12 For more info on our products and services go to www.actassociates.co.uk

11. Useful websites Some useful website I have come across via the RoSPA OSH Journal Office Health and Safety http://www.hse.gov.uk/office/ Flooring Selection Tool http://flooring.hse.gov.uk/ Back Care www.simplyhealth.co.uk/sh/pages/backcare Simply Health and Nuffield Health have launched a free online back care awareness guide for businesses. The website includes a range of factsheets which cover issues such as persistent back pain, desk exercises, back problems in pregnancy and ergonomics. There is also a selection of posters on lifting correctly, getting comfortable and general back awareness. The Awareness section of the site includes a managers checklist to help spot the signs of musculoskeletal issues in employees and a list of ‘red flags’, symptoms which may indicate a serious health problem

12. HSE Info Manual Handling Some good info from the HSE on this topic http://www.hse.gov.uk/toolbox/manual.htm?ebul=hsegen&cr=1/4-feb-13 Merseyside demolition firm fined after lives put at risk The lives of several workers were put at risk as they demolished an old office block in Liverpool, a court has heard. Workers' lives are put at risk as they clamber over rubble on a partially demolished building. An inspector from the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) issued an immediate Prohibition Notice ordering Total Demolition UK Ltd to stop work at the site on Blundell Street in the city centre until workers had protection against falling from height. Liverpool Magistrates' Court heard today (31 January 2013) that the inspector was called out to the demolition site on 6 August 2012 after receiving a complaint about the work being carried out by the firm. When she arrived, she saw most of the building above the second floor had already been demolished. Two of the workers were standing close to the edge of the second floor where the wall had been removed, and were throwing waste to the ground below. They were seen clambering over rubble but no safety measures were in place to stop them falling if they tripped and lost their balance. Total Demolition UK Ltd, of Maddock Street in Birkenhead, was fined £5,000 with £2,968 costs after pleading guilty to a breach of the Work at Height Regulations 2005.

13. Story continues Speaking after the hearing, HSE Inspector Jacqueline Western said: "When I arrived at the site, it was immediately obvious that workers were in danger of being seriously injured if they fell from the building. "Two of the employees were throwing waste materials from the edge of the second floor so could easily have fallen if they had tripped over the rubble. "The company installed a handrail around the open edge of the building after receiving the Prohibition Notice, but if that handrail had been in place at the time of my visit then lives would not have been put at risk.“ Information on preventing workplace falls is available at www.hse.gov.uk/falls.

14. Tree firm fined after teenage worker loses toes on wood chipper A teenage worker just three weeks into his first job sustained a serious foot injury while using a poorly maintained wood chipper without adequate supervision or training, a court has heard. Connor Harfield, from Bracknell, Berkshire, then aged just 16, lost all of the toes and most of the ball on his right foot in the incident at Auckland Close in Maidenhead on 23 September 2011. Now 18, he has been left with permanent impairment, ongoing pain and has been diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and depression. Reading Magistrates' Court heard today (5 February) that he was working to reduce shrubbery and stumps for Calibra Tree Surgeons Ltd using a mobile wood chipper that can be moved from site to site as a trailer. The teenager was feeding brushwood into the machine and had inserted his right foot into the chute to speed up the flow. His shoe snagged on the feed rollers and was drawn into the cutting blades. An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) identified that the chipper was poorly maintained and was missing a vital safety bar around the bottom of the feed chute. Calibra was fully aware of this defect and although a replacement part was on order the company knowingly kept it in interim use in an unsafe condition. HSE also established that the injured worker wasn't adequately trained or supervised. Although a more experienced colleague was present at the time of the incident he had essentially been left to his own devices and chose a method of work that posed clear risk. Calibra Tree Surgeons Ltd, of Moordale Avenue, Bracknell, was fined a total of £7,000 and ordered to pay £5,973 in costs after pleading guilty to single beaches of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974, the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 and the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998. After the hearing HSE Inspector Daniel Hilbourne said: "No responsible company would keep equipment with defective safety measures in use, especially a piece of equipment like a wood chipper that is known to be dangerous because of the very nature of what it does. "Neither would a responsible company leave a young, inexperienced worker to his own devices around such machinery without adequate training and supervision. "Yet that is precisely what Calibra Tree Surgeons allowed, and a teenager has been left with permanent impairment and psychological scarring as a result. "It is well known that young people in the workplace are often less risk averse, and they need to be closely and carefully monitored when using machinery. It is also imperative that machinery is well maintained and is pre-checked before use. Had that happened here, this serious incident could have been prevented." Videos and further information about how to safely use mobile hand-fed wood chippers can be online at http://www.hse.gov.uk/treework/resources/videos.htm

15. Trafford scaffolding firm caught on camera risking lives A Trafford firm has appeared in court after workers were spotted taking down scaffolding without safety measures to prevent them being injured in a fall. They were witnessed working on the outside of a row of terraced shops on Ripponden Road in Oldham on 4 September 2012 by a passing inspector from the Health and Safety Executive (HSE). Trafford Magistrates’ Court heard Stretford Scaffolding Ltd had been hired to dismantle the scaffolding after it had been used by another company for a roofing project. Neither of the two men standing on the scaffolding platforms were wearing harnesses, despite working up to six metres above the ground, and one of them was not a trained scaffolder. He should therefore not have been allowed to work on a partially dismantled section. The court was told there were also no guard rails on part of the scaffolding to prevent workers falling. The HSE inspector issued an immediate Prohibition Notice, ordering the men to come down from the scaffolding until they were given suitable safety equipment by their employer. Stretford Scaffolding Ltd, of Ciss Lane in Urmston, received a 12-month conditional discharge and was ordered to pay costs of £1,849 after admitting a breach of the Work at Height Regulations 2005. Speaking after the hearing, HSE Inspector Sandra Tomlinson said: "We are regularly called out to incidents where people have been seriously injured or even killed as a result of a fall from height. That’s why it’s vital scaffolding firms make sure safety is their top priority. "Stretford Scaffolding should never have allowed the scaffolding to be taken down without making sure workers could do the job safely. The most sensible way of achieving this would have been to use guard rails and harnesses. "The firm also put the life of one of the men at risk by allowing him to work on a partially dismantled section, despite the fact that he wasn’t a trained scaffolder. "The firm also put the life of one of the men at risk by allowing him to work on a partially dismantled section, despite the fact that he wasn’t a trained scaffolder. "This case should act as a warning to other scaffolding firms that they risk being prosecuted if they put lives at risk." Advice on how to prevent workplace falls is available at www.hse.gov.uk/falls.

16. Story continues After the hearing HSE Inspector Robert Meardon said: "Prior Scientific Instruments failed to ensure the health of its employees because it employed the wrong person to give it health and safety advice. "Mr. Whiting's background was in quality control and he did not have adequate knowledge of health and safety for the work going on in this company. He failed to make them aware of the 'do's and don'ts', regarding the use of hazardous chemicals. "In 2010, the Government commissioned Lord Young to review health and safety laws and among the findings, the inquiry recognised that there were a lot of people claiming to be health and safety experts, who were in fact, not. The national register of health and safety consultants has been set up as a result. All the consultants who are registered are members of a recognised professional body, and it is important that firms seeking to use a consultant choose one from the register.“ Adam Coventon's partner, who does not want to be named, said: "This whole thing has had a huge effect on our lives, as we have to constantly plan around Adam's symptoms. We all just wish that his remaining symptoms go so that he can once again be fit and strong. "This case highlights the important job the Health and Safety Executive do, and the need for companies to monitor and control chemicals they use so they do not wreck peoples lives in the way that ours has been.“ Further information and advice about working with chemicals can be found at www.hse.gov.uk/coshh

17. Manchester metal firm sentenced over worker's death A metal manufacturer in Manchester has been sentenced after an employee was killed when a machine weighing half-a-tonne fell from a forklift truck. Bruce Dempsey, 25, from Eccles, was walking alongside the forklift as it moved the machine at Applied Fusion Ltd in Patricroft when it fell and struck him on the head. He died at the scene. The company was prosecuted by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) after an investigation into the incident, on 2 December 2009, found it had not planned the work in advance so that the machine could be moved safely. Manchester Crown Court heard today (6 February) that Applied Fusion Ltd had been moving four of its machines into a bigger workshop at the factory. It was during the move of the fourth machine that it became unstable and fell, resulting in Mr Dempsey's death. The court was told the company had taken over the Fielding Street factory six weeks before the incident, but a health and safety audit had not been carried out at the company's new premises. The firm also failed to inform its own trained engineer responsible for overseeing lifting operations that it was planning to move the machines at the plant. The forklift operator who lifted the machine had attended a one-day driver training course in October 2006, but was not trained and competent to lift any complicated loads that were not on pallets. Applied Fusion Ltd, which went into administration in March 2011, was found guilty of breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 by failing to ensure the safety of its employees. The company received a nominal fine of £1. Speaking after the hearing, HSE Inspector Mike Lisle said: "Bruce Dempsey sadly lost his life because of the failings of his employer. It was important to bring this case to court to raise awareness of this issue so that similar tragic incidents can be prevented from happening again. "Workers at the factory were told to move heavy, bulky machinery using a forklift truck, and the company should have made sure the work was properly planned in advance. "If the machine had been strapped to the forks, and workers told to stay a safe distance away, then Mr Dempsey's death could have been avoided." Bruce Dempsey was one of 24 people to be killed while working in the manufacturing industry in Great Britain in 2009/10. Nearly 4,000 workers also suffered a major injury. Information on improving safety is available at www.hse.gov.uk/manufacturing

18. Court case highlights poor machine safety A food manufacturer has appeared in court for safety offences after one of its workers lost the tip of her finger using a badly-guarded machine in a Doncaster factory. Ms Junu Thapa, 37, of Flint Road, Doncaster, severed the end of the ring finger on her left hand as she tried to clear a blockage in a packing machine at King Asia Foods Ltd on 9 November 2010. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) investigated the incident and today (10 Jan) prosecuted the company for breaching regulations designed to safeguard workers using machinery. Doncaster Magistrates heard that Ms Thapa was in the production area at the firm's premises in Doncaster Carr industrial estate. A mobile screw conveyor was being used to fill a packing machine with powdered ingredients but the machine was known to block regularly. HSE found that the fixed guard over the top of the hopper, which prevented workers getting access to the dangerous screw part, had been modified. Instead of being fixed at all four corners, it was fixed at only two, allowing it to be lifted while the machine was running. Ms Thapa attempted to clear a blockage while the machine was operating and her hand slipped, hitting the screw mechanism. She was released from hospital after treatment the same day and has since found work with another firm. King Asia Foods Ltd, of Middlebank, Doncaster, was fined £5,000 and ordered to pay costs of £2,506 after admitting breaching the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998. After the hearing, HSE inspector Lincoln Marks said: "This incident would not have been possible had the fixed guard not been modified, and had a safe system of work for clearing blockages been established by King Asia Foods and understood by all employees. "The risks from screw conveyors are well understood in industry and yet poor controls against those risks continue to be a major cause of serious injury. "This case highlights the dangers of companies not properly safeguarding their employees, and the importance of robust management systems for the checking of guarding arrangements." The latest HSE figures show 28 people died while working in the manufacturing industry in Great Britain in 2010/11 and there were more than 3,800 injuries. Information on improving safety is available at www.hse.gov.uk/manufacturing.

19. The following stories courtesy of SHP Firm fined £1 for banksman fatality A metal manufacturer, which went into administration in March last year, has been fined £1, in relation to a lifting operation that resulted in a worker fatality.  Bruce Dempsey, 25, from Eccles, was killed at Applied Fusion Ltd’s factory in Patricroft, Manchester when a machine weighing half a tonne fell from a forklift truck and struck him on the head. He was working as a banksman when the incident occurred on 2 December 2009. He died at the scene.Manchester Crown Court heard that the company had been moving four lathes into a bigger workshop at the factory. The fourth machine was attached to a metal table, under which the truck’s forks were positioned, so it could be moved. However, as the forklift driver did so, the lathe became unstable and fell, resulting in Mr Dempsey’s death.The court was told the company had taken over the factory six weeks before the incident, but a general health and safety audit had not been carried out at the new premises. The HSE investigated the incident and found the company had not planned the work in advance, so that the machine could be moved safely. The firm had its own qualified and competent engineer, who was responsible for overseeing lifting operations, but it failed to inform him that it was planning to move the machines.The forklift operator, who lifted the machine, had attended a one-day driver’s training course in October 2006, but was not trained and competent to lift any complicated loads that were not on pallets.

20. Story continues HSE inspector Mike Lisle said the company could have placed the machine on a pallet first before carrying out the lift, or it could have strapped the machine to the forklift truck. The firm could also have ensured that banksmen were far enough out of the way when the task was being carried out.Sentenced on 6 February, Applied Fusion Ltd was found guilty of breaching s2(1) of the HSWA 1974. The court found the administration of the company to be above board. No mitigation was offered.Speaking after the hearing, inspector Lisle said the HSE pursued the case through the courts because the incident was such an obvious breach. He commented: “It was important to bring this case to court to raise awareness of this issue, so that similar tragic incidents can be prevented from happening again.“Workers at the factory were told to move heavy, bulky machinery using a forklift truck, and the company should have made sure the work was properly planned in advance. If the machine had been strapped to the forks, and workers told to stay a safe distance away, then Mr Dempsey’s death could have been avoided.”

21. Worker crushed to death by falling boxes A paper manufacturer has admitted failing to adequately maintain a racking system, which collapsed, resulting in a worker sustaining fatal injuries from falling stock.Northampton Crown Court heard the incident took place at Merley Paper Converters Ltd’s warehouse in Corby, on 16 March 2009. Desanka Todorovic, 44, asked a forklift-truck operator to retrieve some flat-pack boxes from racking inside the warehouse.In order to access the boxes, the forklift operator used his vehicle to lift a pallet, which was positioned on top of the boxes. As he was lowering the pallet, the racking collapsed and several boxes of till rolls fell and landed on Mrs Todorovic, partially burying her underneath. She died shortly afterwards from crush injuries.The HSE investigated the incident and found the racking was in a poor condition. The rack’s horizontal beams were not properly engaged in the uprights and hadn’t been secured with locking pins. The company was issued a Prohibition Notice, which ordered workers to stay out of the warehouse until the racking was made safe. HSE inspector Roger Amery told SHP: “Had Merley Paper Converters properly erected and then properly maintained its racking, this incident would never have happened. “Quite a few companies attend to their machinery and health risks quite diligently, but then take their racking storage systems for granted. They fail to subject these to the inspections and maintenance that are essential. This neglect is sometimes accompanied by a general failure to grasp that quite small defects within a loaded racking system can have a massive effect on overall stability.”Merley Paper Converters appeared in court on 13 February and pleaded guilty to breaching s2(1) of the HSWA 1974. It was fined £70,000 and ordered to pay £30,974 in costs.In mitigation, the company said it had engaged the services of a health and safety consultancy prior to the incident and feels it was let down by the advice it received. The firm also said it cooperated with the investigation and quickly complied with the enforcement notice.

22. Story courtesy of HSW Hydraulic ram crush victim found by brother Two companies have been handed penalties totalling more than £450,000 after a factory worker was fatally crushed by a hydraulic ram on a machine that did not meet European standards. Brian Miller was working on a large machine used to manufacture bridges for the military at bridge fabricator WFEL’s plant in Heaton Chapel, Stockport, when the accident happened. Manchester Crown Court heard that HSE investigators found the 38-year-old had been leaning over part of the machine to try and fix a fault with one of the switches when a hydraulic ram descended on him. He was discovered by his brother, who also worked at the factory. Netherlands-based firm Unisign Produktie Automatisering BV, which designed and manufactured the machine, was found to have supplied equipment which did not comply with the EU Machinery Directive, as access should not have been possible when the machine was running at full speed. It was fined £200,000 plus £28,313 in costs over the January 2008 incident after pleading guilty to breaching Section 6(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act. WFEL was prosecuted after failing to ensure a safe system was in place for workers using the machine. It also landed a £200,000 fine with costs of £28,074 after it admitted breaching Section 2(1) of the same Act. "Unisign should not have supplied a machine which fell below accepted standards and did not have suitable guards and safety systems installed to protect workers,” said HSE inspector Philip Strickland. “WFEL should have made sure its employees only fixed faults when the machine was in a safe state.” He added: "It simply should not have been possible to access dangerous parts of the machine while it was still operating, but both Unisign and WFEL allowed this to happen."

23. Story courtesy of BBC News Website Honda fined £10,000 over finger loss at Swindon plant Honda has pleaded guilty to health and safety failings after an employee lost two fingers at its Swindon plant. Mr Cesar Santos, 55, lost the index and middle fingers on his right hand whilst operating a lathe in February 2012. The Japanese car manufacturer was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay £5,959 in costs at Swindon Magistrates' Court. Ian Whittles, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) Inspector, said the firm had "failed to provide a safe system of work for him." According to Mr Whittles, who led the investigation, Mr Santos had been asked to polish a work piece that had been put on to a lathe. "He wrapped a piece of emery cloth around the work piece, rotating at high speed, whilst leaving a single glove on one hand," he said. "Unfortunately he was distracted by people, sitting around the machine, causing his hand to be drawn in losing two of his fingers on his main hand.“ 'A dangerous practice’ Mr Whittles said it was a "dangerous practice" and Honda had "failed in their assessment of the use of emery cloth and let him [Mr Santos] down". He said: "If an emery cloth is held by hand and wrapped round a work piece, there is a high risk of it becoming entangled. "Wearing gloves also increases the risk of entanglement and for these reasons hand application of emery cloth should be avoided." In a statement Honda said the "activity was contrary to our existing policy and procedure" but it "sincerely regrets the injuries which Mr Santos has suffered". The statement went on to say that the firm "accepted responsibility for the accident at the earliest opportunity" and has "fully co-operated with health and safety inspectors throughout the investigation". It is the company's first prosecution since Honda UK Manufacturing launched in 1985.

24. This story courtesy of Manchester Evening News Former gym owner fined after girl, 15, taken to hospital in sunbed burns agony A girl of 15 suffered severe burns all over her body and was left unable to walk or talk after she was illegally allowed to use a sunbed at a gym The schoolgirl spent 24 hours attached to a drip in hospital and missed three weeks of school with agonising blisters to her chest, back, legs and face. She was unable to walk or leave her bed for days afterwards during her recovery. Now the former gym owner has been hauled before the courts and fined in a landmark legal action. The case is one of the first successful prosecutions in the country under new government legislation on sunbed safety for under-18s. Father-of-two Stewart Hall, 43 – who has now sold Olympic Power Mill on Hornby Street, Bury – pleaded guilty to three charges under the Sunbeds (Regulation) Act 2010. The girl was not asked to prove her age or given protective goggles, Bury magistrates court was told. She also received no safety instructions from Hall. The teenager used the sunbed twice in two days – paying £10 for two 10-minute sessions. It was the first time she had ever used a sunbed. She was rushed to a burns unit at North Manchester General Hospital two days later after her skin blistered. She was treated with dressings. The Act, which came into force in April 2011, prevents businesses from allowing under-18s to use sunbeds. Bosses must also prevent youngsters from ‘restricted zones’ around them – and businesses face fines of up to £20,000 for breaching the act. The girl, who lives with her parents in Bury, but has asked not to be named, described the ‘excruciating’ pain from her burns.

25. Story continues She said: “The pain was 10 out of 10. It was unbearable and I could not walk or get out of bed. It was excruciating. “I asked to go on the sunbed and that was it.” Her mother, 40, added: “I do not want this to happen to another child. I want to raise awareness of the issue. She was in agony and could barely walk. It was horrible to see. “The law is there for a good reason. She told us that she was going to the gym and we did not think anything of it, until she came home looking so red.” The girl, a high school pupil in Bury, went to the gym on May 10 with a friend – another 15-year-old girl – and used the sunbed after both had exercised for an hour. Malcolm Hope, prosecuting, said she bought a token for the tube-style sunbed and was ‘told that a lie-down sunbed would be best for her’. Mr Hope said ‘no questions were asked’ over her age and no goggles or advice was issued. The girls returned to the gym the following day after school. The teenager’s friend sat in the same room as she used the sunbed – which constituted the third charge Hall faced as it was a ‘restricted zone’. The court heard that again he didn’t ask for proof of age. The other two charges were of letting an under-18 use a sunbed. The alarm was raised after the girl was rushed to hospital, leading to an investigation and prosecution by Bury council’s environmental health team. The court heard Hall, of Woodhill Road, Bury, has now sold the gym for £6,000. He was fined £500 and ordered to pay court costs of £1,500. His solicitor Chelsea Thomas said the teenager told him she was 18, but he didn’t ask for proof or issue guidance because he ‘thought she knew what to do’.

26. Story courtesy of BBC Health Website Fears that music volume limits 'could be ignored' A safety limit on volume levels which comes into force on all new personal music players this month could be ignored by 40% of young people, says a hearing loss charity. All personal music players and mobile phones sold in the EU must now have a sound limit of 85 decibels (dB), but users can increase it to 100dB. Action on Hearing Loss says overexposure to loud music can trigger tinnitus. Experts say the limit is "good news". Tinnitus is a medical term used to describe a ringing or buzzing noise that people can hear permanently in one ear, both ears or in the head. t is often caused by exposure to loud music and can be accompanied by hearing loss. Paul Breckell, chief executive of Action on Hearing Loss, said the new EU standard is important because increasing numbers of young people listen to music through a personal music player. t is often caused by exposure to loud music and can be accompanied by hearing loss. Paul Breckell, chief executive of Action on Hearing Loss, said the new EU standard is important because increasing numbers of young people listen to music through a personal music player. It is often caused by exposure to loud music and can be accompanied by hearing loss. Paul Breckell, chief executive of Action on Hearing Loss, said the new EU standard is important because increasing numbers of young people listen to music through a personal music player. Survey results "I urge music lovers to consider the long-term risks of overriding the safe setting as overexposure to loud music can trigger tinnitus, and remember that a good pair of noise cancelling headphones can make all the difference." A survey of more than 1,500 16 to 34-year-olds by Action on Hearing Loss suggests that 79% of young people are unaware of new standards coming into force this month. Although 70% of survey respondents said they would take steps to protect themselves against tinnitus, nearly 40% said they would override the new default setting on their music devices. In October 2008, the European Commission warned that listening to personal music players at a high volume over a sustained period could lead to permanent hearing damage.

27. Story continues As a result, the European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardisation (CENELEC) amended its safety standard for personal music players. Now all personal music players sold in the EU after February 2013 are expected to have a default sound limit of 85dB. The user can choose to override the limit so that the sound level can be increased up to maximum 100dB. If the user overrides the limit, warnings about the risks must be repeated every 20 hours of listening time. The European Commission's assessment said: "Listening to music at 80dB or less is considered safe, no matter for how long or how often personal music players are used. This sound level is roughly equivalent to someone shouting or traffic noise from a nearby road." But turning the volume control to 120dB, which is equivalent to an aeroplane taking off nearby, is exceeding safe limits, it said. The commission said an estimated 20% of young people are exposed to loud sounds during their leisure time - a figure which has tripled since the 1980s. An estimated 5-10% of of people in the EU are thought to be at risk of permanent hearing loss if exposed to unsafe noise limits for five years or more. Dr Michael Akeroyd, from the MRC Institute of Hearing Research in Glasgow, said of the new EU standard: "This is good news for the volumes of personal music players. The volumes they can give has been of concern for many years, going back to at least the advent of portable cassette players.“ He added that headphones can vary in quality and design. "Few designs of headphones remove background sounds, and indeed some designs remove none. But ear-defenders or ear-plugs can remove a substantial amount of noise. Earplug design has advanced greatly in recent years."

28. Story continues 'I felt very depressed' Marc Nicholson, 31, from Essex, is a DJ who has always loved loud music. He started playing drums at 10 and got decks at 20. "I used to go home after a night out and my ears would be ringing. It was the sign of a good night.“ But two years ago he woke up with ringing in his ears and a week later it was still there. He was diagnosed with chronic tinnitus in his right ear. "It gets worse when I'm stressed or tired. Sometimes I think 'How could I have done this to myself?‘ "It has affected my life. The ringing is the last thing I hear going to sleep and first thing I hear in the morning.“ Marc has returned to DJ-ing but now wears professional ear plugs. "I felt very depressed for a year but I'm coping with it. Doing charity work has helped me to come to terms with it.“

29. This story courtesy Safety Management (UK) Chemical manufacturing company fined more than £10,000 Atom Scientific Ltd was convicted under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 for putting the lives of its workers at risk at its chemical manufacturing and biological testing premises in Audenshaw. The prosecution followed an inspection by a Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service (GMFRS) Fire Protection Officer on 18th April 2012 at the company's premises at Arrow Trading Estate. The site is a large two storey industrial unit with a dispatch and packing warehouse on the ground floor and offices and laboratories on the first floor.During the inspection, a GMFRS officer found high quantities of flammable, hazardous and toxic chemicals in the ground floor warehouse, some of which are potentially explosive.The office and laboratories on the first floor were accessed by a single staircase designed to be a fire escape route, which had a fire exit door on the ground floor. The officer found that the fire doors between the warehouse and the corridor had a broken self-closing device and would not have stopped smoke, heat and fire breaking out onto the stairs and escape corridor. The company was storing chemicals on the escape route which could have caused a fire to spread rapidly and the fire exit door was locked inside and blocked, with a closed roller shutter on the outside. This meant the only way out of the building for anyone on the first floor was through the warehouse - the most likely source of a fire.Workers would have needed to travel 40 metres to get out of the building in a fire, which is unacceptable as the premises would quickly fill with smoke. There was a fire alarm fitted in the building but it didn't work, so if a fire had broken out on the ground floor, there would have been no way of people working in the offices or laboratory to be warned in order to escape quickly before the fire could develop and spread. One of the company's directors, Peter Keenan, admitted later that the door had been locked and the alarm not working since the company moved into the unit in January 2011.The company produced a fire risk assessment to the officer dated 17th April, which had no reference to the problems identified. It was later admitted that this had been completed on the day of the inspection.

30. Story continues Staff working in the premises had no formal training about what to do if a fire occurred or how to evacuate the premises safely. The risk assessment stated that there were 12 employees but there could be up to 25 people in the building at any one time. Prosecuting for GMFRA, Warren Spencer said: The fire service was concerned about the safety of people on the first floor. If a fire broke out in the warehouse smoke, flames and heat would trap people upstairs and their only way out would be through the fire. The company had clearly not given any thought to a fire occurring in the warehouse. It was aware the fire alarm had not been operative since January 2011 but did nothing to rectify it. Fining the company £1,500 for each offence, the Chair of the Bench Maria Bennett told the director present in court: Despite the mitigation put forward we are appalled at the extent of the company's breaches of the regulations. These are difficult times but products, premises and machinery can be replaced, human life cannot. You were responsible for the safety of employees and if a fire had occurred the impact on your workers' families cannot be described. Peter O'Reilly, GMFRS' Director of Protection and Prevention Services, said: There is no excuse for the risks this company took with the safety of their employees. The director knew the alarm wasn't working and the fire door was locked but did nothing about it. The company trades in chemicals which carry warning labels yet they did not bother to do a risk assessment or even think how staff would get out in a fire. Fortunately, a fire did not occur because if it had, it's likely that there could have been tragic consequences to their failure to act. This fine should be a warning to businesses to think about the consequences of a fire and make sure their workers are safe.