Riverland company fined for hand crush

Riverland Company Fined for Hand Crush Injury

A South Australian manufacturing business has been hit with a $60,000 fine after a worker suffered a serious hand injury in a workplace incident. The Riverland company was penalised following a SafeWork SA investigation into hazardous plant that lacked adequate machine guarding.

Below, we break down what happened, why the fine was issued, and what this case means for businesses managing similar risk exposure with welding plant and other hazardous tools.

What Happened at the Riverland Company

The worker was injured while working with a welding machine in May 2021. This piece of plant became the focus of a SafeWork SA probe into whether the business had met its safety obligations under state work health regulations.

The Riverland-based company faced charges under section 32 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2012 (the Act) over failure to ensure the worker had a safe workplace. Section 32 relates to health and safety duties owed to workers exposed to hazardous plant and equipment.

SafeWork SA Investigation and Fine

Following the SafeWork SA investigation, the company was recently fined by the South Australian Employment Tribunal. The $60,000 penalty reflects the seriousness with which regulators treat crush hazards linked to poorly guarded plant.

SafeWork SA Acting Executive Director Rob Templeton said crush injuries caused by poorly guarded machinery remain a serious problem across South Australian workplaces. His comments highlight ongoing concerns about businesses failing to identify hazards before someone gets hurt.

Why Machine Guarding Matters for Workplace Safety

Crush injuries linked to unguarded plant are among the most preventable incidents in manufacturing settings. Effective guarding reduces risk by physically separating operators from moving parts on welding machines and other tools.

Businesses operating hazardous plant should regularly assess:

• Whether machine guards meet current health and safety standards
• Whether tools and welding equipment are inspected on a routine schedule
• Whether risk assessments account for hand and limb crush points
• Whether workplace procedures reflect actual plant conditions on site

Companies that fail these checks face not only fines but reputational damage and potential harm to their people. For guidance on preventing similar outcomes, see our coverage of a Victorian engineering company fined for a worker's crush death and a Melbourne metal company fined for safety failures after a worker's crush death.

Lessons for Businesses Managing Hazardous Plant

This case reinforces why safety obligations under the Act cannot be treated as a box-ticking exercise. Regulators like SafeWork SA continue prosecuting businesses that expose staff to unaddressed hazards, particularly involving welding plant, presses, and other high-risk tools.

Reviewing procedures around equipment maintenance SOPs and ensuring documentation matches actual site conditions helps businesses close gaps before an incident occurs. Comparable failures have also driven penalties in unrelated sectors, such as the WA transport company fined for fatigue breaches, showing regulators apply consistent scrutiny across industries.

Read the original article on the SafeWork SA website.