In a recent prosecution in Victoria, a dim-sim and dumplings food manufacturing business was fined $100,000 and ordered to pay more than $20,000 in legal costs when it was convicted of failing to properly guard machinery, one of several similar offences in its history of operations (WorkSafe Victoria v Makmur Enterprises Pty Ltd). 

In 2021, the business employed a worker as a food mixer and machine operator who managed the operation and cleaning of food production machines. One of these machines was a large ribbon mixer, which mixed ingredients for the production of various food products. 

The ribbon mixer needed to be cleaned at the end of each day, which involved hosing it with water to remove any residual food particles, the application of sanitiser, and then a final rinse. 

The ribbon mixer was constructed with access gates to restrict contact with hazardous areas of the machine, and it was fitted with interlock guards to stop the machine running when a gate to a hazardous area was opened. 

A part of the machine was called the “discharge area”. In this area, the mixed food was discharged from the mixing chamber, which contained blades, into metal bins. 

A month prior to the incident, the interlock failed when the access gate to the discharge area of the machine was opened by the worker while they were cleaning. Management was informed of the mechanical failure and the machine was promptly inspected by an electrician who determined that the interlock was in fact working correctly. 

On the day of the incident, the worker was cleaning the ribbon mixer and opened the interlocked gate to clean the discharge area of the mixer. Unfortunately, the interlock failed to stop the machine from running and the worker had two fingers severed when they reached into the mixing chamber. 

In imposing the penalty, the Court noted a serious history of prosecutions relating to “guarding offences” and the simple remedial step that could have been implemented of checking each day that the interlock was operational.