Builder Fined $80K for Fall Risk Management Failure

Schintta Building Group Pty Ltd was sentenced ex parte in the Ringwood Magistrates' Court on Thursday 13 February after being found guilty of five charges of failing to provide a safe workplace.

The company was fined $30,000 for three charges relating to safety failures at a site in McKenzie Street and a further $50,000 for two charges after it continued to put workers at risk at an Elizabeth Street townhouse development.

The company was also ordered to pay costs of $5068.

The court heard in October 2022, WorkSafe inspectors visiting the two-storey townhouse development on McKenzie Street observed, in addition to general housekeeping issues, subcontractors working more than three metres off the ground from a scaffold that was missing planks and guardrails.

Platforms across internal stair voids were found to be constructed of framing timber and particle board that could collapse under the weight of workers, while access to the second storey was via an unsecured ladder.

Workers also had to travel between the development's split-level slabs by climbing up and jumping down a height of about 1.5 metres, or via a makeshift ramp made of a plank of timber only about 25 centimetres wide.

In May 2023, WorkSafe inspectors visited the company's Elizabeth Street site where four double-storey townhouses were under construction and found similar issues regarding poor housekeeping and failure to manage the risk of falls.

Workers were observed about six metres off the ground working from a scaffold that was missing guardrails, planks and a scaffold tag, while the lap boards were unsecured and there were gaps greater than 225 millimetres between the scaffold and the townhouses.

Each townhouse had open, unprotected stair voids and access to the second storeys was via an unsecured A-frame extendable ladder that did not have a 900 millimetre overhang.

The court found Schintta Building Group should have reduced the risk of falls at both sites by providing a solid construction when working at heights, providing a passive fall protection device such as perimeter guardrails, or using a fall arrest system such as harnesses; and by installing a stair void fall protection system and a secured ladder.

It was also reasonably practicable for the company to have maintained a system of work for traversing the split-level slabs at McKenzie Street that did not allow workers to walk across an unsecured plank and provided workers with a secured plank and/or level stairs that incorporated a secure handrail and appropriately-sized treads.

WorkSafe Executive Director of Health and Safety Sam Jenkin said it was incredibly disappointing that workers had been repeatedly put in dangerous situations across both sites.

"Falls from height do not discriminate and sadly remain one of the biggest causes of death and serious injury in the Victorian construction industry, claiming 10 lives in the past three years alone," Mr Jenkin said.

"The ways to properly manage the risk of falls are no secret and readily available so employers have absolutely no excuses if they leave their workers at risk."

To prevent falls from height employers should implement the highest possible measures from the five levels in the hierarchy of controls:

  • Level 1 Eliminate the risk by, where practicable, doing all or some of the work on the ground or from a solid construction.
  • Level 2 Use a passive fall prevention device such as scaffolds, perimeter screens, guardrails, safety mesh or elevating work platforms.
  • Level 3 Use a positioning system, such as a travel-restraint system, to ensure employees work within a safe area.
  • Level 4 Use a fall arrest system, such as a harness, catch platform or safety nets, to limit the risk of injuries in the event of a fall.
  • Level 5 Use a fixed or portable ladder, or implement administrative controls.
/Public Release. This material from the originating organization/author(s) might be of the point-in-time nature, and edited for clarity, style and length. Mirage.News does not take institutional positions or sides, and all views, positions, and conclusions expressed herein are solely those of the author(s).View in full here.