*UPDATE* Aldi fined £1m after substituting shadowing for pallet truck training
Thursday 17th August 2017
From the archive: Just so you know, this article is more than 3 years old.
Bruce Hunterfox was in the second week of his new job as a delivery driver on 7 November 2013 when the accident happened. He was manoeuvring an electric-powered pallet truck into a tight space in the food chiller at the discount supermarket chain's Somercotes store in Alfreton, Derbyshire.
He was preparing to move pallets to create room for a new delivery when the truck rolled backwards over his foot, fracturing all his toes. He was off work for six months after having two toes surgically amputated and his foot restructured using pins.
The investigation by Amber Valley Borough Council (AVBC), which brought the prosecution, found that Aldi did not offer standardised training programmes to new pallet truck operators. Instead the workers were expected to shadow experienced members of the team for a week before working alone.
During the seven days when Hunterfox was observing another Aldi delivery driver, he did not visit the Somercotes store and had never operated the Jungheinrich EJD 220 electric pedestrian stacker he was using when the accident happened.
Natalie Osei, litigation solicitor at AVBC, said: "We established that there wasn't any formal training for dangerous items like pallet trucks.
"The model [Hunterfox] was using that day was larger, had a bigger turning circle, was able to go faster and took longer to stop."
She explained that the operator thought he had stopped the pallet truck when it rolled backwards, but it was still running.
Hunterfox has returned to work, but his injuries "have left him with pain that will have repercussions in years to come and can be considered life-changing", the council said.
Osei said Aldi has overhauled its training procedures and now provides all its agency workers and staff with structured guidance on operating electric pallet trucks.
During the sentencing at Derby Crown Court, Judge Peter Cooke noted that previous incidents should have prompted Aldi to improve operator training sooner.
Osei told IOSH Magazine there had been "a few others over a period of years" but the judge was referring specifically to an incident in February 2013 when a pallet truck operator fractured his foot at a store in Essex.
In May that year, a health and safety officer for the local authority issued Aldi with a warning and referred it to the HSE guide, Rider-operated Lift Trucks: operator training and safe use (bit.ly/2w3ENOl).
After the November incident, however, AVBC's investigation revealed that the company had failed to improve its training procedures and on 7 April 2014 served an improvement notice.
Aldi pleaded guilty to breaching ss 2(1) and 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act in December last year. It was sentenced on 14 July and fined £1m. (See table below for the judge's application of the sentencing guidelines.)
AVBC's portfolio holder for housing and public health, David Taylor, said: "The level of fine reflects the seriousness of the failings within the company.
"This investigation and outcome will hopefully result in a renewed focus by Aldi to ensure that standards are maintained to ensure employees receive adequate protection from risk of injury."
Last year the company was fined £100,000 after an unsecured smoking shelter at its Darlington distribution centre blew over and struck an employee who was on a break.
Application of the sentencing guidelines
Seriousness of harm risked:
Likelihood of harm:
Size of the organisation:
Very large but judge stayed within the large business category due to low profit margin (2.2%)
Starting point for fine:
One-third discount for early guilty plea
One previous conviction and other previous incidents
In his second week of a new job that involved using a powered pallet truck to transport goods to stores, the driver sustained fractures to all the toes on one foot. He was off work for six months after having two toes surgically amputated and his foot restructured using wires. The investigation by Amber Valley Borough Council, which brought the prosecution, found that Aldi did not have standardised training programmes for new drivers and equipment operators. The workers instead were expected to shadow experienced members of the team before working alone.
Ben Pallier-Singleton was driving the FLT down a sloping road in Vinyl Compounds’ Chinley yard in Derbyshire in the early hours of 10 February 2015 when it tipped over. He sustained fatal head and neck injuries, Manchester Crown Court on Minshull Street was told. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and Derbyshire Constabulary found that Vinyl Compounds had failed to adequately train Pallier-Singleton, who was not wearing a seatbelt at the time of the accident.
BFK, a joint venture between BAM Nuttall, Ferrovial Agroman (UK) and Kier Infrastructure and Overseas, was sentenced today (28 July) at Southwark Crown Court following the death of Rene Tkácik on 7 March 2014, severe leg injuries sustained by Terrence Hughes on 16 January 2015, and head injuries to Alex Vizitiu on 22 January 2015.The company pleaded guilty to three offences at a previous hearing at Westminster Magistrates’ Court.
Ben Pallier-Singleton had worked at the PVC manufacturer’s site in Chinley, Derbyshire, as a process operative for about 12 months when the accident happened on 10 February 2015. He was working the nightshift at the plant’s plastic extrusion department, where rolls of film are made. At 4.20 he drove a FLT down a sloping concrete roadway in the external yard to collect some pallets, but did not return, Manchester Crown Court was told.
There is a buzz in the world of safety and health clothing – and it was generated by the word “wearables”. Advances in technology could move personal protective equipment (PPE), customarily at the bottom of the hazard control hierarchy, upward as a means of reducing hazards.
A large quantity of benzole was released at an open site glass in the steel works on 17 June 2011. A flammable cloud developed and, had it ignited, the release could have led to serious injury or the death of the five workers. Two of the exposed workers experienced breathing difficulties. Both were sent to hospital but were discharged the next day. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that Tata Steel had ignored the risks of uncontrolled releases even though they had been identified previously.