Look and learn - Cases where CCTV evidence was critical in the prosecutions.

Closed-circuit television (CCTV) is widely used to control access, to safeguard lone workers and to provide out-of-hours surveillance. When there is a crime or a serious accident, the authorities will require all relevant CCTV images to be made available. In the case of accidents at work, the investigators might look not just at the events around the accident, but at the hours – or even weeks – leading up to the incident. Here are two cases where CCTV evidence was critical in the prosecutions.

Case study one

A loading shovel is a heavy piece of machinery used to move materials such as waste. Even at slow speed, any collision with the vehicle or its attachments could be serious.

Ashley Morris worked for a skip hire firm. In 2013 Ashley was operating the controls for a loading shovel from outside the cab. He was moving the vehicle towards himself, with the bucket raised above him. The hydraulics appear to have failed, and the bucket dropped onto him. The injuries to his head and spine were fatal.

The investigating team were puzzled as to why Ashley was moving the loader in this way. The senior managers and directors claimed to be unaware of the practice, stating that their health and safety record was “extremely good”, that they had a comprehensive training programme for all employees, and that Ashley was suitably qualified.

The investigation looked at CCTV film from the eight days before the event. They found over 200 examples of unsafe methods of working. This included people being lifted up in the bucket of the loader, workers jumping out of the way to avoid being hit as the loader turned, and people inside skips as they were loaded with rubbish.

The judge concluded that the poor behaviours on the CCTV were “indicative of practices which went on for a significant period of time” and that the court was entitled to conclude that there was a “culture of non-adherence” over a longer period. 

In 2016 Rainbow Waste Management pleaded guilty to failing to ensure the health, safety and welfare of the company’s employees, and charged with fines and prosecution costs of over £200,000.

Case study two 

In 2017 Stuart Towns, a worker at a scrap metal recycling firm, was found dead near a hopper which feeds scrap metal onto a conveyor belt for processing. He had suffered traumatic head injuries from the machinery.

CCTV film showed that he had walked into an area beneath the hopper. Areas like this should be interlocked so that no one can access them without the power being removed. But there was a broken gate allowing workers to be near dangerous machinery without it being switched off and isolated.

The Managing Director stated that he had previously warned Stuart not to work close to the hopper. So would the verdict be that Stuart had died while breaking the rules? CCTV showed in the weeks preceding the accident that there had been multiple examples of similar dangerous behaviours. Workers were seen to jump on metal in a hopper to clear blockages and to walk on moving conveyor belts. On one occasion, the MD used a forklift truck to lift Stuart over five metres in the air. Forty minutes before Stuart died, CCTV film showed him working close to the hopper with the director standing nearby. The director took no action. 

The scrap metal recycling firm pleaded guilty to corporate manslaughter and in 2022 was fined £2 million, with £105,514 prosecution costs. Two company directors and the health and safety manager admitted failing to ensure the health, safety and welfare of the company’s employees, and together paid fines and costs of around another £34,000.

Since the accident, the directors have committed to becoming “the safest metal recycling site in Europe.” But it’s too late for Stuart and his family.

Conclusion

CCTV is a great tool for safety. But it is also a tool for the prosecution if you don’t act on what can be seen in the CCTV images. Both these organisations were charged not just with failing to protect the men who died, but with failing to protect many other workers over an extended period.

It is unlikely your practice will be as poor as in these two case studies - but you could miss something which would indicate a need for improvements in training or safety management. Computer Vision could be the extra set of eyes you need to spot opportunities to improve health and safety practice in your organisation, and avoid tragedies such as these.

‍

To learn more about how Protex AI is using computer vision to help EHS teams gain visibility of their site and reduce workplace incidents, watch our 4-minute demo video here.

‍

‍