Introduction
The employees of an organization should be subjected to healthy working conditions. In the production companies that apply heavy machinery and equipments in their operations, the conditions of such tools need to be considered. The machines need to be regularly checked before and after use to ensure that they are in proper working conditions.
The faults that are identified during these assessments need to be fixed before the implements can be used. The employees should also be informed of the risks that are associated with a given operation in the organization to take the appropriate cautious measures.
Due to the need to ensure health and safety in the workplaces, policy makers in different countries have often intervened to enact legislation that advocate for the safety of the employees (Council of Europe, 2007, p.999; Stellman and International Labor Office, 1998, p.1645). The Victorian Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004 is one such legislation that is functional in Australia.
The legal provisions provide an outline of what the management of organizations should put in place to ensure safe and healthy working conditions. The provisions also define the legal measures that have to be taken against an organization that goes against the provisions.
Foster Australia is one organization that had found itself on the wrong side when a faulty machine caused an injury and subsequent death of an employee. The organization was then found guilty of two offences that subsequently caused the death of the employee and as such, it was fined. It has since made efforts to fix the faulty devices and increase risks awareness among the employees of the organization (Australian Food News, 2008).
The accident
The accident occurred at the Abbotsford premises of Fosters Australia, a company in Australia that produces and supplies beer within the country and its environs (VCC 902, 2008). The plant at this premise had two sets of bottling lines. One of the lines had two sets of depalletising machines consisting of conveyors that ferried empty bottles into the filling chamber through mechanized metal doors.
The conveyor as well as a series of photoelectric sensors controlled the movements of the metal doors. There are also straps that hold the bottles into position in the pallet during conveying into the filling chamber. Before the bottles are passed into the chamber, these straps are to be removed by an employee who operates from some safe position, the main control panel just above the conveyor.
However, there are instances in which the bottles or the cut straps can fall into the operating area of one of the depalletising machines. If these are allowed to accumulate, the plant cannot operate and production will be hindered. In such instances, the employees are required to get into the operating area of the conveyor and the metal doors (WorkSafe Victoria, 2008b). They are required to clear up the operating area and inspect the photoelectric sensors that control the movement of the metal doors.
The accident occurred in 2006 when one of the employees, Mr. Huynh, was working in the operating area of one of the depalletising machines. It is likely that the employee entered the area to check if the reflector of the photoelectric sensor was functional. Mr. Huynh was caught in between the opening door of the depalletising machine and the handrail (WorkSafe Victoria, 2008b). The system failed for some period during which the employee was held in this position.
The failure was caused by one of the photoelectric sensors that had a cracked reflector. The employee had breathing problems during the period, collapsed and became unconscious. He was then taken to a hospital where he later died due to health complications related to the respiratory system.
It is then obvious that several factors contributed to the accident that later claimed the life of Mr. Huynh. There are standard procedures designed for the operations and cleaning of the depalletising machines. However, the standard procedures did not include dealing with the jams that would occur during the production (WorkSafe Victoria, 2008b).
This implies that the employees were subjected to risks when getting into the operation area to clean the jam during the production. Besides, there was a standard operating procedure to detach the system in case such an incident is witnessed. Nevertheless, the operators have to be familiar with the procedures in time to be applied in case of an accident. Apparently, Mr. Huynh and the other employees were not informed on how the system can be detached in cases of such failures in order to prevent further damages.
The causal factors and recommendations
The incident that was witnessed at Fosters Australia could be avoided if certain measures. The measures could also reduce fatality of the incidence as was latter witnessed. It is necessary to identify each of the factors that contributed to the fatal accident and how they could be controlled. The precautious measures can then be adopted to prevent future occurrences of such incidences.
Firstly, getting into the operating area to clear the jams that occur during the production process is very risky. There was no standard procedure to clear the jam prompting for the manual procedure. This could be avoided by developing the standard procedures that did not involve getting into the risky zone. Secondly, the employee was caught and held between the metal doors and the handrail due to a failure of one of the photoelectric sensors.
The latter, in conjunction with the conveyors, controlled the movement of the metal door to open in order to receive new pallets of empty bottles (VCC 902, 2008). The cracked reflector of the sensors indicated that proper maintenance was not provided for the risky system. There is need to check the conditions of the machine each time it is to be used to ensure that all the parts of the system are functional. The processes should be monitored regularly to check for their effectiveness and efficiency.
Similarly, there are measures that could be taken immediately the failure was encountered to prevent the injuries that Mr. Huynh suffered. The failure by the management of the organization to provide adequate information to the employees on the standard operating procedures for isolating the machine in the event that some misfortune occurs led to the fatal situation that was observed.
Such programs need to be instituted so that every employee is conversant with procedures, in case of any negative event. The instructions are provided in some standard language like English. The employees need to have proper understanding of the English language in order to learn and adopt the procedures.
The conviction of Fosters Australia Limited
The working conditions that led to the injury and the subsequent death of one of the employees at Fosters Australia Limited were against the legal provisions. The company was convicted for failure to comply with some sections of the Victorian Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004. The company pleaded guilty of having committed two offences that were against the sections (The Australian, 2008).
Sections 21(1) and 2(a) of the Victorian OHS Act 2004 required that the companies should provide a working condition that is not risky to the health of the employees (WorkSafe Victoria, 2008a). The machines as well as the system of operation should not expose the employees to some health-related risks.
This section was breached by the company that failed to provide proper systems of operations and good machinery. Similarly, sections 21(1) and 2(e) required that in the event that the employees are working in risky conditions, they should be given proper guidance on how they can best manage the situation (WorkSafe Victoria, 2008a). This was also breached.
Having pleaded guilty for the two offences, the company was fined a total of $1.125 million (Australian Food News, 2008). This figure was reached at since the company had cooperated during the investigations and pleaded guilty of the offence. Otherwise, the fines would be higher, about $1.5m (The Australian, 2008).
The issue of punishment in monetary terms is acceptable. However, the verdict was not fair on the sides of those affected by the incident in terms of the amount of penalty fine charged on the company. Firstly, there was a loss life, the value of which cannot be evaluated in monetary terms.
The deceased had dependants that would now not get proper provision of the necessities. The fines imposed should be enough to compensate the family members the deceased. The fines should also be imposed depending on the overall value of the company. The company could later fix some machine parts worth about $4 million (WorkSafe Victoria, 2008b). This suggests that it has the capacity to pay more for the negative consequences caused.
Some compensation would also be extended to he employees that were traumatized by the fatal event that claimed the life of one of their members. The situation is also worsened by the fact that scenarios had been witnessed in the past but was not fixed until another incident was seen (WorkSafe Victoria, 2008b).
Some moral considerations can also be applied in examining the situation. Even if there are no legal provisions requiring healthy and safety working conditions, understanding the needs of the employees and providing such condition is an ethical consideration (Maierhofer and Colley, 2004, p.4).
The company should aim at improving the lives of its employees and their dependants like families, friends, and relatives. After the death of the employee, it would be of some moral value if the company assumed some if not all of the responsibilities the employee had to his family.
Conclusion
The health and safety of the employees of an organization should be a significant consideration in designing the strategies for the operation of the organization. Legal provisions are there to protect the rights of the employees. The legal measures should be taken depending on the fatality of the consequences that follow the breach of such legal provisions.
Thus, even though the company was cooperative and pleaded guilty and despite the submissions that proper measures had been instituted since the incidence, the company was supposed to be fined higher than the stated amount.
Reference List
Australian Food News. 2008. Fosters receives record fine for fatal safety breaches. Web.
Council of Europe. 2007. European Committee of Social Rights, European Social Charter Revised Conclusions 2007: Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Moldova, Norway, Romania, Slovenia, and Sweden. Strasbourg Cedex: Council of Europe.
Maierhofer, N. and Colley, S., 2004. Ethical considerations for using values to manage in the workplace. Web.
Stellman, J. and International Labor Office. 1998. Encyclopedia of occupational health and safety, Volume 1; Volume 5. Geneva: International Labor Organization.
The Australian. 2008. Foster’s fined $1.1m after a work death. Web.
VCC 902. 2008. R v Fosters Australia. Web.
Work Safe Victoria. 2008. Brewer pleads guilty of workplace safety charges. Web.
Work Safe Victoria. 2008. Fosters gets record $1.125m fine for fatal safety breaches. Web.