Legal action 'likely' after Safi crane accident
The crane which crashed on the Dominican nuns' convent in Safi on Monday.
The Occupational Health and Safety Authority was likely to take legal action against people involved in the crane accident in Safi on Monday, CEO Mark Gauci said.
Preliminary investigations suggest there was negligence, he said, adding, however, it was still early to specify who the action would involve. It could be the developer, the contractor, the project coordinator and supervisor, the crane owner or its operator.
Establishing responsibility for crane use was not that clear cut. According to the different sets of regulations referring to cranes, issued under the OHSA Act 2000, legal responsibility could be shouldered by different people, depending on the circumstances, Dr Gauci explained.
Usually, this is determined on the basis of an employment contract, and the authority is determining that relationship in the Safi case.
Two nuns, a handyman and a workman escaped unhurt in the Safi incident when a tower crane toppled onto the Dominican convent in Salvu Gauci Street, crashing into the hallway that leads to the kitchen and causing the ceiling to cave in and rubble to come raining down.
A look at newspaper reports over the past five years reveals a number of crane accidents, even fatal. On average, four accidents a year occur, with some workers escaping injury but others ending up on the danger list.
Dr Gauci said that, while an employer was responsible for the crane's safety, if the operator was competent in terms of the law, he also had his own responsibilities to shoulder.
According to Legal Notice 281 of 2004, the project supervisor is also responsible for the safe operation of the crane, which has to cause "the least risk" to workers and third parties.
"Technically speaking, a risk can never be eliminated but only controlled. The regulations place the responsibility to control these risks on duty holders," Dr Gauci said.
The crane operator has to have the necessary training and experience and the OHSA has worked with the Chamber of Engineers to hold regular training courses for prospective crane operators.
If an insufficiently trained person was tasked by an employer to use a crane, then it would be the employer's responsibility, he explained.
Crane operations are also the subject of a Code of Practice but failure to comply with its provisions is not an offence. It was only justifiable, however, if the employer adopted measures offering a higher level of employee protection, Dr Gauci said.
Speaking about the construction industry, Dr Gauci said "it is inconceivable" that the authority would ever have the necessary manpower to physically check all the new building sites. The Malta Environment and Planning Authority issues 7,000 to 8,000 permits a year.
"Even if it did, the regular inspection of every workplace would not eliminate accidents, the majority of which are caused by unsafe work practices. Systems may be in place at sites but an accident can still occur through an act of sudden negligence," he said. The authority is proposing that no building permits are issued unless all obligations are met and the project supervisor should prepare a health and safety plan at design stage.
The appointment of a project supervisor was an important step in the control of risks at construction sites, having the legal responsibility to ensure compliance with the regulations and the health and safety plan, Dr Gauci said.
He noted that buildings were still being constructed without satisfying health and safety legislation.
"The architect should issue a declaration that the design conforms with the legal requirements before a permit is issued and another once the building is finished.
"Does it make sense for the OHSA to force an employer to provide emergency routes and exits in a newly-erected building? It is less costly to prevent than to take remedial action," he said.
11 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Mario Sammut
Feb 20th 2009, 04:44
I have a towering crane hovering over my house and I know from experience that it is near impossible to stop them from being erected and endangering third parties. My enquiries have had only worrying results. The police section is responsible for licensing cranes and thereby for their safety but is satisfied to give a licence if the necessary documents are provided. No safety inspection seems to have been made, and certainly no regular safety checks are made. The role played by other authorities is purely passive and/or does not relate to the safety of adjacent residents. The local counsel has no role other than to permit the blocking of the road while a crane is erected. In other words, in Malta one is at the mercy of developers when it comes to cranes, and when the authorities wake up, they only give lip service. No precautionary measures are taken! And all it would take to address safety for all concerned is using authorised surveyors and inspectors periodically to ensure that all regulations are stricktly adhered to.
D Vella
Feb 19th 2009, 16:54
Wow . . . the HSA has finally woken up . . . . a little late but there you go I guess!!!!
c.camilleri
Feb 19th 2009, 16:48
Many similar accidents on building sites some causing death or injuries have happened but the only thing we hear afterwards is "that an inquiry is being held'. We never hear about the results of the inquiries, perhaps because they are never finalised , and any action taken against those responsible for accidents. So if the authorities want to minimize these accidents they should take their responsibilities seriously by having more inspections on the site with drastic and immediate action against those who abuse the rules.
John Zammit
Feb 19th 2009, 16:11
I have a sister who is a nun living in a convent. I can well imagine what would be the experience of the relatives of the Safi nuns had a policeman called on them to inform them that their sister was killed because some developer contracted incompetents to make him realise his plan to make a fat profit. Please Dr. Gauci do not waste time splitting hairs; have the whole lot charged in Court and let them spend fortunes on lawyers to try to exculpate themselves. Think of the scenario I depicted and act, or do we have to lump a situation where not even nuns in convents are safe nowadays!
Anthony Briffa
Feb 19th 2009, 15:09
The statement by the CEO of the OH & SA regarding this incident is very strange. I don't remember such a statement from anybody at the authority regarding the collapse of the scaffolding in Bisazza Street Sliema, nearly a year ago. When I enquired about the status of the enquiry by the authority a few months ago I was told that although there investigation was nearly complete, they couldn't pronounce themselves until the magisterial enquiry is complete. What is the difference between the two incidents and why the CEO felt that this time he could make public the authority's possible intentions on this incident? What did the preliminary investigations suggest in the case of the collapse of the scaffolding?
Alexander Darmanin
Feb 19th 2009, 11:53
Well said Stephen.
This island will never change unless we elect a fresh young generated party that will truly transform this Sacred Island to what it deserves, without any interference from any internal or outside bodies.
Problem is that the majority of the public is divided between PN and PL , and the minority which feel a change for this country is imminent, is not enough to set up a fresh party to rule out the ancient beaurocracy that exist .
Unless we the young generation change this idea once and for all, accidents like this and young soldiers drowning, robberies occurring frequently, and illegal immigrants coming weekly, will remain with us forever, for neither parties have a diciplined vision in running this country.
We also have to learn, that as a citizen in Europe today, one has the right of speech, to say what he/she feels ,and should not be viewed as a threat to any of the parties that exist on this present Micky Mouse island.
It is time we come out in the open and speak out that what we do not like and unless the situation changes, we will see he worst coming at us.
Ave
EGauci
Feb 19th 2009, 11:33
Legal action 'likely' after Safi crane accident .....
yeah yeah yeah.... let's wait and see. Maybe our great grandchildren will read something about this in the future....
Words such as Action Legal Responsibility are all common jokes here..........
Joe Cordina
Feb 19th 2009, 11:15
Action afetr the fact. Yes OHSA is doing nothing and only acting when an accident happens if at all. This I can say because I had reported a blatant abuse some time ago, OHSA officers did not do anything about it but only tried to pass the buck to another corporation, which corporation inspected the site immediatly and reported back that it had nothing to do with them, so than it was too late by the time that OHSA could do anything as the abusive workers had finished and moved on. The abuse was rampant and took more than an hour so there is no excuse for OHSA they were informed very early in the procedure and could have easily dealt with the matter. I challenge OHSA to prove me wrong
Ewout Wierda
Feb 19th 2009, 10:14
Having had a large crane hover over my house I know from experience that it is near impossible to stop them from being erected. My enquiries at the time had some rather worrying results. The police is responsible for licensing cranes and thereby for their safety but is satisfied to give a licence if the necessary documents are provided. As far as I know no safety inspection is made, and no regular safety checks are made. The role played by other authorities is purely passive and/or does not relate to the safety of adjacent residents. The local counsel has no role other than to permit the blocking of the road while a crane is erected. In other words, in Malta one is at the mercy of one's neighbours when it comes to cranes, and when the authorities wake up, sich as in this case, they only have for the employees involved. And all it would take to address safety for all concerned is using authorised surveyors like in the maritime world.
Joe Vassallo
Feb 19th 2009, 09:19
I think we should decide once and for all whether we really care about H&S issues, or whether we only want to pretend that we care.
If we seriously care for the well-being of workers all over Malta, we need:
1. Updated, modern legislation which covers all areas of H&S – including standard contract terms (compulsory) between the parties involved, hence solving the issue of responsibility once and for all;
2. Such legislation should allow for heavy penalties – not only financial but also imprisonment in cases of repeat offenders and/or in cases resulting in death. More importantly, these penalties should be made mandatory as it is clear that our Courts are not up to it;
3. OHSA should be given the powers to ask the police authorities to stop works at any workplace if it does not meet its obligations under H&S legislation – ignorance of the law should not be an excuse.
If necessary there should be a 6 month period of grace before such tough laws are enacted, to make sure that everyone has the opportunity to put his house in order, but once the grace period is over, offenders should be dealt with immediately.
Stephen Spiteri
Feb 19th 2009, 08:46
First we have OHSA fast asleep, allowing the mushrooming of unchecked cranes all over Malta. Then they wake up when an accident happens.
Wara kulhadd gharef