A Tauranga company has been fined $25,000 and ordered to pay $10,000 reparation after one of its workers suffered a dislocated and crushed right wrist in the clamp of a metal folding machine.
Roof Manufacturers Limited, trading as Roofman, was sentenced in Tauranga District Court yesterday, after earlier having pleaded guilty to a charge of being an employer which failed to take all practical steps to ensure the safety of its employee.
The breach of the Health and Safety in Employment Act attracts a fine of up to $250,000.
The injury to the male worker happened at Roof Manufacturers Limited's Birch Avenue premises on July 30 last year.
The court was told as a male worker operating a Hayes International MW Folder machine which is used to fold and cut sheet metal stopped it to talk to colleague, the victim standing at the other end of the machine placed his hand under the camp to clear out some debris.
As the operator pressed the foot pedal to reactivate the machine, the victim's right wrist was dislocated and tendons and ligaments crushed.
At the time of the accident although the machine was fitted with a second foot pedal, it had always been set up and operated as a one-person operation.
Since the accident, the machine has been reset to a two-person operation, requiring simultaneous operation of the two foot pedals and fitted with a sensor laser detection system.
The victim, who was left with a significant and long term injury and no longer works for the business, had undergone safety training, the court was told.
Judge Thomas Ingram said in setting the fine, he took into account the company's lack of prior convictions, early guilty plea and the immediate remedial steps it had taken.
He also allowed credit for the company's genuine remorse, reparation offer and significant assistance provided to the injured worker post the accident.
That included continuing to pay his full wages for a period of time, providing a driver to take him to and from medical appointments, giving him supermarket vouchers, and so on.
Judge Ingram said he was satisfied the company had identified the hazard as it provided training but had been unaware of the machine's operational boundaries and had taken all practical steps to resolve the problem to prevent a similar injury.
Outside court the company's general manager declined to comment.