E098:06 06 October 2006
Photo-Me International plc was fined a total of £100,000 and ordered to pay £30,000 costs at Bristol Crown Court on Thursday 28 September for health and safety offences. The company pleaded guilty on 16 August at Bristol Magistrates' Court and was committed to the Crown Court for sentence. Photo-Me was fined £30,000 for breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, and £10,000 for 6 separate breaches of the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH) Regulations for not making adequate risk assessments, not preventing or controlling exposure of employees to chemicals, and for not providing any 'health surveillance' of employees at-risk. They were also fined £10,000 for not reporting a case of the disease to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), and were ordered to pay £30,000 costs.
Speaking after the case, HSE investigating inspector Liam Osborne said: "This is a important case. Allergic dermatitis is a painful skin disease that employers need to manage as effectively as the general safety of their workers. Photo-Me knew of the risks to health that these chemicals posed, yet failed to assess those risks properly and provide proper systems of work and control measures, including correct personal protective equipment, to reduce the risk of harm. Controlling dermatitis is not difficult. It is as simple as A,P,C - Avoid contact with skin, by taking all the steps you can to modify the task or process; Protect the skin by implementing a good skin care regime; and Check for early signs of dermatitis to ensure that the control measures are working. The size of the penalty demonstrates the Court's approach to this type of failure in the workplace."
The case followed an HSE investigation that revealed significant failings in the company's management and control of exposure to chemicals. Its workers at its premises in Bristol were exposed to hazardous chemicals over a four-year period leading to the onset of a disease called 'allergic contact dermatitis'. Stuart White, 37 from Cheltenham, suffered four years of his skin blistering, cracking, splitting and weeping because of this allergic dermatitis. Two other employees, Derek Corcoran, from Crumlin in Gwent, South Wales, and Barry Woolford, from Ipsden in Oxfordshire, also suffered the symptoms of allergic dermatitis. Mr Woolford's fingers and hands became so badly swollen and blistered that he could not do up his shirt buttons without his fingers splitting open. All three employees had been working with photographic chemicals.
In his summing-up, His Honour Judge Simon Darwell-Smith said: "There was little or no consideration given to whether chemicals should or could have been pre-mixed to avoid engineers mixing photographic chemicals at home or inadequate places such as supermarket lavatories." He added that Photo-Me had "only the trappings of a health and safety policy and training documentation...which was insufficient." The Judge commented on the thoroughness of the HSE investigation.
| HSE -v- Photo-Me International PLC: Charge, Offence and Sentence Summary | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Made under: | Requirements: | Failings: | Fine | |
| 1 | HSWA 1974 2(1) | Ensure the health at work of its employees SFAIRP | Did not ensure there were adequate arrangements for the planning, organising, control, monitoring and review of the protective and preventative measures necessary to ensure the occupational health of its employees | £30k |
| 2a | COSHH 1999 6(1) | Employer shall not carry out any work until it has made a suitable and sufficient assessment of the risks to the health of its employees from substances hazardous to health | Failed to make an assessment of the health risks of photographic chemicals used by its employees between 1999 and 2002 | £10k |
| 2b | COSHH 2002 6(1) | As in 2a above | As in 2a, except between 2002 and 2004 | £10k |
| 3a | COSHH 1999 7(1) | Duty to adequately prevent or control exposure of substances hazardous to health | Failed to adequately prevent or control exposure of employees to photographic chemicals which were corrosive, skin irritants and skin sensitisers between 2000 and 2002 | £10k |
| 3b | COSHH 2002 7(1) | As in 3a above | As in 3a, except between 2002 and 2004 | £10k |
| 4a | COSHH 1999 11(1) | Duty to have a system of health surveillance when employees are exposed to skin irritants and skin sensitisers | Failed to have a system of health surveillance for employees exposed to photographic chemicals which are skin irritants and skin sensitisers, between 2000 and 2002 | £10k |
| 4b | COSHH 11(1) | As in 4a above | As in 4a, except between 2002 and 2004 | £10k |
| 5 | RIDDOR 5(1) | Duty to report forthwith to the enforcing authority a case of occupational disease, including [allergic] contact dermatitis, when diagnosed by, and notified in writing by a medical doctor. | Failed to report forthwith a case of occupational disease affecting employee Barry Woolford who was diagnosed with occupational dermatitis, and which was notified to the employer by a medical doctor | £10k |
| Costs: | £30,000 | |||
| Note: | Charges [2a + 2b], [3a +3b] & [4a + 4b] are twin charges, which for legal reasons had to be laid separately due to the COSHH 2002 replacing the 1999 Regulaitons. The judge imposed a sentence of £20,000 for each pair of those twinned charges, which, for the purposes of recording have been split into £10,000 per individual offence. | |||
All enquiries from journalists should be directed to the HSE Press Office
Social media
Javascript is required to use HSE website social media functionality.
Follow HSE on Twitter:
Follow @H_S_E