Lack of Adequate Supervision Cost $588,000
website Footer image Background

Terms and Conditions                Privacy Policy

website header image Courtenell Work Health & Safety Training and Consulting 02 9516 1499
Home About Us     Course Dates All Courses Online Learning Safety Articles Resources Bookings

Courtenell Pty Ltd

as Trustee for the Vowles Family Trust

WHS Training Specialists, Sydney, Australia ~ PO Box 622 Broadway NSW 2007

ABN: 42164393628 ~ ACN: 050109281

Lack of Adequate Supervision Cost $588,000

Other Articles

How and When to Review Your First Aid Arrangements

When is a Risk Assessment Not Necessary?

Providing and Maintaining Safe Systems of Work

First WHS Conviction For Not Consulting

Verifying Three Key First Aid Requirements in Your Workplace

Your First Aid Procedures: Do They Match the Code of Practice

WHS Winning Actions

Avoid WHS Prosecution by SafeWork NSW

A Manager's Actions to Achieve their WHS Duty of Care

Should Your Managers & Supervisors do WHS Consultation Training

$945,000 Undertaking Stops WHS Prosecution

Warning: A Possible Costly Consultation Error

A WHS Management Tool for Managers & Supervisors

You are welcome to download and distribute the article in your workplace if you feel it may be useful

Download Article     Download Training Calendar


For tailor made onsite training:

Call (02) 9516 1499

BackBasics Manual Handling Course

WHS Risk Management for Supervisors and Managers

Law for Officers and Managers

Responsibility for Supervisors and Managers

Health and Safety Representative Course

One Day Refresher Course

Understanding the Role of your HSRs

Effective Health and Safety Committee Training

Health and Safety Committee Chairperson Course

Health and Safety Committee Refresher Course

Provide First Aid

In July 2016 the NSW Court of Appeal awarded a worker $588,000 in damages for a disabling injury suffered at work.

This article explains why the PCBU was found liable, how the injury could have been easily avoided, and how you might use this case to review safety in your workplace.

Why the PCBU was Liable for the Injury

The worker was employed by a veterinary pharmaceutical company. Her job included regularly emptying a 25kg bag of powder into a hopper. The safe work procedure included a "lifter" that minimised the manual lifting needs of the job.

However the worker made a small but significant variation to the safe work procedure that she had been instructed to follow. The worker did not know that her variation could create a high risk of spinal deterioration over a period of time. And the worker already had a pre-existing disc degeneration in the spine.

In Dec 2011 after leaning forward at the waist, lifting the bag with her right arm, and twisting towards the hopper to empty the bag, the worker experienced pain in her back and was unable to continue work.

The Court agreed that the company had a safe work procedure but found that the PCBU was liable for the injury and had to pay damages to the worker because the worker had not been supervised or corrected on her incorrect application of that work procedure.

How the Injury Could Have Been Avoided

Adequate supervision and further instruction as needed are obviously actions that would have avoided this injury.

Also information, instruction or training about the manual handling risks involved in this job would have helped avoid this injury. The injured worker and the supervisor needed to know the how and why of minimising the risk of manual handling activities in their workplace.

Using This Case to Review Your Workplace

Even though you do not have the work activity involved in this injury you may like to consider the following points in the context of your workplace.

In your workplace, have all workers been instructed in safe work procedures that are relevant to their work activities?

Have all workers been instructed or trained in controlling the manual handling and other risks involved in their work activities?

Do Supervisors ensure that all workers are working in accordance with safe work procedures?

Do Supervisors provide supervision in their area of the workplace as needed to protect all persons from risks to their health and safety arising from work activities?  

Do Managers ensure that the Supervisors they manage take appropriate actions about health and safety in their area of the workplace?   


You can read the full judgement of this NSW Court of Appeal case by clicking this link Jurox Pty Ltd v Fullick [2016] NSWCA 180

Share on LinkedIn Share on Facebook Share on Google Bookmarks Share on Twitter Share on Reddit Share on Tumblr Share via e-mail Print