A Queensland materials manufacturing company and its director have faced significant fines after a worker was injured by getting caught in the rollers of a glue-spreading machine (WorkSafe Queensland v Ashden Trading Pty Ltd). The case reminds all directors of their exposure to personal liability if they fail to ensure that safe processes are implemented by their company and are followed by workers.
Case overview
The company, Ashden Trading Pty Ltd, manufactures pressed wooden panels. On 22 November 2021, one of the company's workers was tasked with cleaning the excess glue on the glue-spreading machine that had accumulated on the surface of the rollers used in the production of the panels. The company director instructed a worker to clean the glue rollers with a toothbrush while the machine was operational. While doing so, the worker's arm became entangled in the roller, leading to a fractured elbow and compartment syndrome in his forearm.
The company pleaded guilty to a charge under section 32 of the Workplace Health and Safety Act 2011 (Qld) for failing to ensure the health and safety of its workers.
The Magistrate found that the company disregarded the clear safety instructions provided by the machine's manufacturer, which warned that it should never be cleaned while the rollers are rotating. Furthermore, the Magistrate found that the company failed to provide a safe work plan or training to its workers on how to clean the machine safely.
During sentencing, the Magistrate had regard to the company's early guilty plea, clean safety record and good character as mitigating factors. However, given the gravity of the offending and the level of reckless indifference on the part of the company director, the Magistrate considered it necessary to ensure the fine was sufficiently large to punish the company, deter future offending and account for the impact on the victim.
The company was ordered to pay a $100,000 fine, plus legal costs.
The company director submitted that given the company was a closely held family business, the fine imposed on the director should be no more than $1,000, otherwise it would amount to punishing the director twice for essentially the same criminal conduct. The Magistrate rejected the submission and fined the director $30,000 for his failure to exercise an officer's duty of due diligence.
Key takeaways
This case highlights the personal liability that a director of a company faces if they fail to ensure that safe processes are implemented and followed by workers. The Court imposed a substantial personal fine on the director in this case given his reckless indifference to the safety of his workers.
This article was originally published in the Health & Safety Handbook by Tanda here.
This publication does not deal with every important topic or change in law and is not intended to be relied upon as a substitute for legal or other advice that may be relevant to the reader's specific circumstances. If you have found this publication of interest and would like to know more or wish to obtain legal advice relevant to your circumstances please contact one of the named individuals listed.