Why SafeWork NSW Prosecuted the Worker
website Footer image Background

Terms and Conditions                Privacy Policy

website header image train@courtenell.com.au 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  

train@courtenell.com.au ~ PO Box 622 Broadway NSW 2007

ABN: 42164393628 ~ ACN: 050109281

Why SafeWork NSW

Prosecuted the Worker

Other Articles


 Achieving WHS Targets


The Power of Surveying WHS in Your Workplace


SafeWork NSW Deserves Applause for WHS Roadmap


The “Adequate Number of Trained First Aiders”


Safe Work Procedures: Improving implementation


How to Demonstrate Compliance with WHS Consultation Requirements


Do PCBUs Have To Train Their Supervisors?


$1.5 million Enforceable Undertaking or Prosecution by SafeWork NSW?


"No Risk" Risk Assessment


A Fatal Lack of Officer Due Diligence


Who Needs Safe Work Procedures in Your Workplace?


Achieving Compliance with Section 19 WHS Act


Finance Approval for WHS Expenses



Recommended
Training:

For tailor made onsite training:

Call (02) 9516 1499


Effective Health and Safety Committee Training

(3 Days Public/Onsite Course or Specialised 1 Day Onsite Course)


One Day Specialised WHS Risk Management  For Supervisors & Managers Course


Health and Safety Committee Chairperson Course


Effective Health and Safety Committee Training


Health and Safety Committee Refresher Course


WHS Risk Management


WHS Risk Management for Supervisors and Managers


Law for Officers and Managers


WHS Responsibilities for Supervisors and Managers


Health and Safety Representative Course

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

A Worker was convicted in early October by the NSW District Court for not complying with his WHS duty under section 28 of the WHS Act. The Worker has been ordered to pay the prosecutor’s legal costs (SafeWork NSW) of $30,000.


The prosecution of a Worker by a Safety Regulator is not a common event and the circumstances of this case and the conclusions of the Judge may be a valuable case study for you in ensuring that workers in your workplace do not suffer a similar fate. The Judge’s finding about what training the PCBU should have provided to the Worker may also be of particular interest.   


What Happened

The Worker had 30 years experience as an employee with an engineering services company and his specialty was in quoting customers for the repair and maintenance of their plastic and rubber extrusion machines. He was the only such specialist in the company and worked with a significant amount of autonomy.


The Worker was called out to a customer’s premises about the need to clear a blockage in the customer’s extrusion machine. He was being assisted by 2 of the customer’s workers. He did not warn all the workers in the area to stand clear of the machine or to wear PPE to guard against the well known industry risk associated with a blocked machine, of chlorine fumes and being splashed by hot material. One of the customer’s workers was severely injured by a discharge of steam and molten metal from the machine hitting him in the face. He had to undergo a number of skin grafts, his eyesight is affected and he has some facial scarring.


The Judges’ Decision

The Judge concluded that the Worker had not complied with his obligations under section 28 of the WHS Act because he had adversely affected the health and safety of other people. The Judge said; “The steps required to eliminate or minimise the risk were simple” and the “risk was one of serious injury”.


The Penalty

In deciding not to impose a fine on the Worker the Judge took into account that;

  • the worker had “no previous convictions”;
  • he had “a solid work history”;
  • was “held in high regard as a competent tradesman”;
  • “a man of excellent character”;
  • accepted responsibility for his actions and demonstrated genuine remorse and contrition”;
  • had an “impeccable safety record of about 50 years without incident in a dangerous industry”;
  • he had pleaded guilty to the offence;
  • was 69 years of age and close to retirement;
  • he had ”very little, if any capacity to pay a fine” and had agreed to pay the prosecutor’s costs of $30,000. So the Judge did not impose a fine.


What the PCBU Failed to Do

The Judge also noted that the Worker’s employer did not provide him “with any of the following:

(a) occupational health and safety training,
(b) safe work methodology statement training or procedures, documenting

(c) safe work practice procedures,
(d) risk identification or management, or
(e) risk assessment”


The judge concluded that the fact that the PCBU did not train the Worker on “his obligations under the Act is the most significant causal factor in the incident.”

 

The Prosecution of the PCBU

In a separate prosecution by SafeWork NSW the PCBU was convicted and fined for not complying with section 19(2) of the WHS Act,  “A person conducting a business or undertaking must ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, that the health and safety of other persons is not put at risk from work carried out as part of the conduct of the business or undertaking”.

 


Note

You can download a transcript of the judgements in the above prosecutions from NSW Case Law at these links:


SafeWork NSW v Extrusion Machine Co


SafeWork NSW v Alejandro Bocaz  



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

Download Article