HEALTH & SAFETY JUNE 2019
MAKING
MANUFACTURING SAFER
More than two years since the revised sentencing guidelines for health & safety
offences, are manufacturers keeping up with the changes to legislation?
BY NATALIE PUCE , HEALTH & SAFETY PARTNER, BLM
N ew health & safety guidelines,
introduced over two years ago, mean
that organisational safety has been
put into sharp focus, with hefty fines
in store for those companies failing to
protect employees against known and
preventable safety risks. Since then, fine values
have rocketed – in manufacturing, this has seen
some fines reach £3.8 million.
The guidelines require courts to consider
culpability, the seriousness and likelihood of
harm caused or posed together with turnover. A
business with a turnover in excess of £50 million
could face fines of up to £10 million for the most
serious offences, whilst corporate manslaughter
charges could incur fines reaching £20 million.
In the three years since the guidelines were
introduced, fines have seismically increased: the
ten most significant fines handed down total
£30.4 million.
One size does not fit all
Whilst large organisations have grabbed the
headlines for the huge fines, the majority of
prosecutions are brought against much smaller
businesses, which may
lack the manpower
or financial
resources to
adequately fund well-structured
safety management, and often
do not have the same access to
health and safety information,
resources or support. The
fines are commensurate with
turnover and whilst smaller
businesses rarely face seven
figure fines, they can be subject
to significant fines running into
the hundreds of thousands –
potentially catastrophic for
their organisation. No court
sets out to destroy a business
and its ability to remain viable
following a fine is taken into
consideration; however, this
does not mean the fine will not
be punitive and the impact must
be felt across the business.
Culpability can scale the
size of a fine considerably,
sometimes from seven figures
to a lower six-figure sum. If an
organisation admits guilt in the
event of a breach, but is able
to demonstrate and evidence
a progressive approach to
health & safety (such as regular
risk assessments, minutes for
meetings discussing existing
risks and how to solve them),
this can count in reducing
the level of culpability, and
therefore the size of the fine.
In addition, last summer
the Sentencing Council
announced increased
sentences for individuals
convicted of gross negligence
manslaughter (GNM). GNM
was initially excluded from
the 2016 guidelines, and
this new guidance adopts a
more punitive approach to
sentencing, with the most
serious cases seeing individuals
face up to 18 years in prison.
Current sentences for these
cases rarely breach the tenyear
period. Significantly, the
sentences are retrospective,
so will apply to all cases
heard before the courts after
November 2018, irrespective
of the date of offence.
Fine escalation
Fines for manufacturing health
and safety breaches have totalled
over £42 million since 2016. The
largest fines include £3.8 million
to Explore Manufacturing and
Select Plant Hire. The two
companies were found liable for
the death of an employee after
he was thrown from a mobile
elevating platform in 2017.
Fatalities and life-changing
injuries are a common feature
of manufacturing health &
safety fines: of the five highestvalue
fines, three involved
workplace deaths. Amputations
are also unfortunately very
common in the industry, and for
manufacturers classed as ‘very
large’ or ‘large’, this could result
in fines in the millions of pounds
if they are found in breach of
health & safety regulation.
For example, in 2016, Tata
UK was fined £1.98 million after
two employees lost fingers
and hands after a machine was
inadequately guarded, being
sentenced under Section 2 of the
Health and Safety At Work Act
1974. The fine was later reduced
by 25% after an appeal. Just
over a year later, the company
suffered another significant
36 www.manufacturingmanagement.co.uk
/www.manufacturingmanagement.co.uk