Avocado farm pleads guilty following Work Health and Safety incident
3 mins reading time
On 23 February 2023, Mapua Avocados Ltd was sentenced at the North Shore District Court in New Zealand following a work, health and safety incident. The same circumstances could easily arise on most Australian farms, therefore the prosecution of the incident is of great interest to farmers operating on local soil.
What happened
Mapua Avocados Ltd is an avocado business operating in the far north of New Zealand. A worker employed by Mapua was working with their supervisor to repair orchard fencing, when a high-tensile wire snapped. The wire flicked out, hitting the worker in the eye. Notwithstanding two surgeries on the eye, the 20-year-old was left with permanent vision impairment. At the time of the incident, neither worker was wearing safety glasses. Mapua had no formal process in place to ensure workers wore safety glasses, and the injured worker had observed other supervisors not wearing safety glasses as well.
Safety obligations on farms
The New Zealand legislation is very similar to the Australian legislation. Farms must ensure the safety of workers so far as is reasonably practicable. This is managed by first identifying all hazards and then either eliminating the risks arising from those hazards or minimise them as far as is reasonably practicable. In minimising risks, farms should consider several control measures, the last of which is personal protective equipment. Even though personal protective equipment is a low-order control measure, it is commonplace on all worksites. For example, many workers will wear some form of high-vis clothing and steel-cap boots.
The prosecution
In the prosecution of Mapua, the farm pleaded guilty to the charge. A consequence of pleading guilty is that the Court accepts that the legislation has been breached without a more detailed analysis. In theory, requiring workers to wear safety glasses is not the only way that the risk of eye injury can be managed, however, as demonstrated by the Mapua case, it is one that the Court will potentially penalise over.
After accepting Mapua plea of guilty, the Court ordered Mapua to make reparations of $62,185 to the injured worker, and an initial fine of $240,000 was reduced to $0. Orders for reparations in Australia are unusual, and whilst prosecutions in Australia can involve discounted penalties, the discounting of a fine to $0 is extraordinary. Such an extraordinary result indicates that the District Court took a very compassionate approach to Mapua’s breach.
Penalties for safety breaches
Fines in Australia vary enormously and can be very hard to predict. However, monetary penalties may not be the only consideration. Jail sentences are becoming more common in Australia and prosecutions of directors of companies are routine. The mere finding of guilt and the stigma of a recorded conviction can also have both personal and business consequences.
In Mapua’s case, the conviction has obtained international recognition, potentially damaging the farm’s reputation – something no doubt that Mapua is disappointed in. Safety glasses sell from anywhere between $3 to $100. That is less than a couple hundred meters of barbed wire.
Farms should use the Mapua case as a cautionary tale. It is not worth the stigma of a conviction and potentially a large fine, to save a few dollars on improving the safety of workers.
Macpherson Kelley has specialist knowledge of the agriculture industry – with experts advising on a wide range of legal services. If you would advice on the Work, Health and Safety obligations of your business – don’t hesitate to reach out to Alan Girle or our Work, Health and Safety team.
The information contained in this article is general in nature and cannot be relied on as legal advice nor does it create an engagement. Please contact one of our lawyers listed above for advice about your specific situation.
more
insights
stay up to date with our news & insights
Avocado farm pleads guilty following Work Health and Safety incident
On 23 February 2023, Mapua Avocados Ltd was sentenced at the North Shore District Court in New Zealand following a work, health and safety incident. The same circumstances could easily arise on most Australian farms, therefore the prosecution of the incident is of great interest to farmers operating on local soil.
What happened
Mapua Avocados Ltd is an avocado business operating in the far north of New Zealand. A worker employed by Mapua was working with their supervisor to repair orchard fencing, when a high-tensile wire snapped. The wire flicked out, hitting the worker in the eye. Notwithstanding two surgeries on the eye, the 20-year-old was left with permanent vision impairment. At the time of the incident, neither worker was wearing safety glasses. Mapua had no formal process in place to ensure workers wore safety glasses, and the injured worker had observed other supervisors not wearing safety glasses as well.
Safety obligations on farms
The New Zealand legislation is very similar to the Australian legislation. Farms must ensure the safety of workers so far as is reasonably practicable. This is managed by first identifying all hazards and then either eliminating the risks arising from those hazards or minimise them as far as is reasonably practicable. In minimising risks, farms should consider several control measures, the last of which is personal protective equipment. Even though personal protective equipment is a low-order control measure, it is commonplace on all worksites. For example, many workers will wear some form of high-vis clothing and steel-cap boots.
The prosecution
In the prosecution of Mapua, the farm pleaded guilty to the charge. A consequence of pleading guilty is that the Court accepts that the legislation has been breached without a more detailed analysis. In theory, requiring workers to wear safety glasses is not the only way that the risk of eye injury can be managed, however, as demonstrated by the Mapua case, it is one that the Court will potentially penalise over.
After accepting Mapua plea of guilty, the Court ordered Mapua to make reparations of $62,185 to the injured worker, and an initial fine of $240,000 was reduced to $0. Orders for reparations in Australia are unusual, and whilst prosecutions in Australia can involve discounted penalties, the discounting of a fine to $0 is extraordinary. Such an extraordinary result indicates that the District Court took a very compassionate approach to Mapua’s breach.
Penalties for safety breaches
Fines in Australia vary enormously and can be very hard to predict. However, monetary penalties may not be the only consideration. Jail sentences are becoming more common in Australia and prosecutions of directors of companies are routine. The mere finding of guilt and the stigma of a recorded conviction can also have both personal and business consequences.
In Mapua’s case, the conviction has obtained international recognition, potentially damaging the farm’s reputation – something no doubt that Mapua is disappointed in. Safety glasses sell from anywhere between $3 to $100. That is less than a couple hundred meters of barbed wire.
Farms should use the Mapua case as a cautionary tale. It is not worth the stigma of a conviction and potentially a large fine, to save a few dollars on improving the safety of workers.
Macpherson Kelley has specialist knowledge of the agriculture industry – with experts advising on a wide range of legal services. If you would advice on the Work, Health and Safety obligations of your business – don’t hesitate to reach out to Alan Girle or our Work, Health and Safety team.