When a barrier fails, an $110,000 reminder soon follows: safety is non-negotiable.

On October 8, 2025, a concrete manufacturing business in Queensland was sentenced in the Office of the Work Health and Safety Prosecutor’s (OWHSP) report after a worker suffered amputation of his leg. The company was fined $110,000 for breaching its primary health and safety duty under the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (Qld) (WHS Act) by failing to control a clearly foreseeable risk.

This article unpacks what happened, why it matters, and the lessons companies must draw.

The facts: how it unfolded

According to the court report:

• The defendant ran a concrete manufacturing business in Bromelton, Queensland.

• The workplace housed two overhead gantry cranes, operated remotely and travelling along floor-mounted rails, inside a shed.

• A barrier that had once prevented workers from accessing the crane rails had fallen off years earlier and was never replaced. That created a hazard: workers could access the rail lines along which the cranes travelled.

• Large concrete bridge beams were often stored near the crane rails due to space constraints, which increased the risk of obstruction and reduced visibility for crane operators.

• On 24 February 2023, a worker was repairing a concrete beam near the rail line. A crane struck a ladder and pushed it into the worker, pinning his legs.

• On October 18, 2023, the injured worker was again working near the railway, standing on the tracks and using a jackhammer. A crane operator could not see him because of an obstructing beam. The crane wheel ran over the injured worker’s left foot, causing a crush injury, traumatic fracture, dislocation and degloving. The next day, his left leg was amputated below the knee. He subsequently underwent four further surgeries.

• The business had a Job Safety Analysis (JSA) that identified risks associated with crane operation, but it was not effectively implemented. Workers were insufficiently trained or supervised in accordance with the JSA.

• Reasonably practicable controls that should have been implemented included installing and maintaining physical barriers, enforcing safe procedures, supervising work activities, and conducting regular audits to ensure compliance. These were not adequately in place.

• The company pleaded guilty; the magistrate took into account the early plea but imposed a fine of $110,000. No conviction was recorded.

Why this matters

Foreseeable hazard

The risk here is obvious: overhead gantry cranes travelling on floor rails pose a crushing hazard if workers access the rail corridor. The barrier had failed years before and was never replaced. This failure allowed workers to access the rail zone, which is strictly prohibited. The storage of large beams near the rails further increased the risk by reducing visibility for crane operators. Because these factors were present, the hazard was foreseeable, and the duty holder should have taken more steps to eliminate or minimise the risk.

Duty of care and control

Under section 19(1) of the WHS Act, a person conducting a business or undertaking (PCBU) must ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health and safety of workers. A breach of this duty can lead to prosecution under Section 32. In this case, the company was found to have breached those duties by failing to act on the known barrier defect, failing to implement training and supervision, and failing to apply the JSA effectively.

Consequences

The injured worker suffered catastrophic injury: amputation below the knee, multiple surgeries, and major trauma. On the corporate side, the company received a significant fine (far less than the maximum $1.5 million available). Still, the reputational damage, internal disruption, and legal and regulatory scrutiny will likely have a lasting impact. The matter is not a minor “paperwork” issue. It’s about human life and significant business consequences.

Lessons for industry

Here are key takeaways for companies in manufacturing, heavy industry, material handling, and similar sectors.

1. Fix barriers and guard systems promptly

When a barrier fails or is removed (in this case, the rail-line barrier), it must be replaced immediately, or an interim control (e.g., an exclusion zone or a stoppage of work) must be applied. Allowing the barrier to remain absent for years is unacceptable.

2. Storage and housekeeping matter

Storing large beams near crane rails reduced the crane operator’s visibility. Effective housekeeping and layout planning are critical. Risk doesn’t just come from the machine; it comes from the environment around the machine.

3. Training, supervision and procedural compliance are non‑negotiable

Having a JSA is only the start. It must be effectively implemented: workers trained, supervisors enforcing work rules, and audits ensuring compliance. In this case, despite the JSA, training and supervision were deficient.

4. Consider what happens when visibility is compromised

The incident on 18 October 2023 occurred because the crane operator was unable to see the worker due to a beam blocking their view. The risk escalates when a worker finds themself in the blind zone of a moving crane. Control measures should include visibility audits, exclusion zones, and perhaps proximity detection/alerts.

5. Early remediation doesn’t erase liability

While the firm pleaded guilty early and may have shown remorse, the court still imposed a meaningful fine. The lesson is that while corrective action is necessary, it cannot replace fulfilling the obligation in the first place.

6. Ongoing monitoring and maintenance are essential

A barrier “fell off years earlier” and was never replaced. This shows a failure of maintenance and monitoring. Safety systems must be regularly maintained, audited, and verified, rather than assumed to persist indefinitely.

Practical checklist for businesses

If you operate machinery or cranes or manage heavy‑materials handling, ask:

• Are all rail lines, crane tracks, and moving‑plant paths segregated from pedestrian access by practical physical barriers or exclusion zones?

• What happens when a barrier is damaged or removed? Is there an interim control, or is work stopped?

• Are storage areas planned to maintain visibility for moving plant operators?

• Do crane operators have complete visibility of the work zone, or are blind spots present? If blind spots exist, are additional controls in place (spotters, sensors, zone alarms, worker exclusion)?

• Do you have a current Job Safety Analysis (JSA) or other risk‑assessment document for crane operations and pedestrian access near crane rails? Are workers trained in it, and are supervisors enforcing it?

• Are safe‑work procedures executed in practice? Do you conduct audits to ensure compliance, and are workers continually monitored for adherence?

• Are regular inspections done of barriers, rails, plant tracks, signage, and safety devices? Are defects logged and fixed promptly?

• Are workers empowered and trained to stop work if they believe a safety barrier is missing, shielding is inadequate, or visibility is compromised?

• Is your workplace layout (storage, traffic path, plant path) regularly reviewed to ensure it remains safe as operations evolve?

• Is documentation up‑to‑date (training records, audits, incident reports, maintenance logs)? This helps demonstrate diligence to regulators and shows continuous safety improvement.

The legal framework: what the Act requires

The WHS Act stipulates that a PCBU must, so far as is reasonably practicable, ensure the health and safety of workers while they are at work. This entails providing safe plant, safe systems of work, information, training, supervision, monitoring, and maintenance. In this case, the company was found guilty of breaching section 32 by failing to comply with its duty (section 19(1)).

The maximum penalty for this type of breach was reportedly $1.5 million; however, the fine imposed was $110,000. This illustrates how factors such as early plea, cooperation, and lack of prior convictions influence sentencing—but do not eliminate it.

A cautionary tale: risk ignored becomes injury

This case exemplifies how simple, known safety hazards (a missing barrier, poor visibility, and storage near plant rails) can escalate into a life-changing injury. It wasn’t a complex conspiracy; instead, it was a failure to maintain a barrier, inadequate housekeeping, and a lack of adequate supervision and training. Companies often believe “nothing’s gone wrong so far”, so they don’t act. But just because something hasn’t yet resulted in an incident doesn’t mean the risk is tolerable. This case shows that regulators will act and courts will penalise when the risk is foreseeable and preventable.

Remember, the absence of incidents does not necessarily equal a safe workplace!