"Taking simple measures....(could have) easily prevented this serious accident”.

Out of all machinery that we view on our plant tours we always stop and talk about the dangers of pedestal drills. Our first introduction with pedestal drills was when an aluminium company asked us to visit one of their locations because that location was having a “number of amputations”. To say our visit was welcome by plant management would be an understatement. It was with a pedestal drill that plant management realized our knowledge of incidents in the industry. We were walking by a pedestal drill that did not have the latest safety mechanisms. When we pointed it out the plant manager said “Yeah, but how dangerous is it really?” We replied by discussing in rather graphic detail the hand amputation of one worker and the scalping (yes scalping!) of another worker. Both incidents were recent to our plant tour. The plant manager and department heads understood then that our observations were made not out mean spiritedness but love. Simply our love for workers and their families and our sincere desire that no one ever being injured while working. Enough said, here is a recent incident again showing the dangers of pedestal drills.

An architectural metalwork company has been fined during the second week of December 2019 after an employee suffered a serious hand injury on a pedestal drill.

A local Magistrates’ Court heard that in August 2018, an employee, who was an apprentice, at an engineering manufacturing company suffered an amputation injury to his right-hand middle finger whilst operating a pedestal drill at the company site in the United Kingdom. His gloved right hand became entangled on the rotating spade drill bit of the drilling machine resulting in his injuries.

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that employees were required, by the company’s written system of work, to wear gloves when operating the drill. It had become custom and practice to leave the drill running while repositioning workpieces, which is when the incident occurred.

The company was found guilty of breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. The company was fined, in its absence, £78,000 and ordered to pay costs of £3,914.48 with a victim surcharge charge of £170.

Speaking after the hearing HSE inspector said: “Taking simple measures, and monitoring systems of work, could have easily prevented this serious accident”.

We pray for the injured worker. All too often many will disregard the mental impact a finger amputation has on a worker. We have loved ones who have fingers that were amputated because of work injuries. We can assure you that the mental anguish is real and mental health counseling should be offered to any worker that suffers an amputation.

Regarding this incident, there are numerous items that the reader should take back to make their company and their plant(s) safer.

1^st. “employees were required, by the company’s written system of work, to wear gloves when operating the drill” we question what type of glove was worn by the worker. We assume it was a loose fitting glove. We have heard of some companies requiring their workers to either wear no gloves or thin vinyl gloves while operating a pedestal drill.

2^nd “It had become custom and practice to leave the drill running while repositioning workpieces”. This is an example of a false safety belief. Where overtime a practice or procedure is deemed safe because an incident had not occurred in the past. It is only when an incident occurs that after thorough investigation does the company realize that their practice was always dangerous and only by luck or countless near misses (that were never identified) an incident did not occur before.

Please comment.