Bizarre series of events leaves worker seriously injured
January 24, 2011 by Fred HosierPosted in: Bizarre Accident of the Week, Falls, fire/explosion, In this week's e-newsletter, Latest News & Views
PDF Part of workplace safety is identifying risks. However, sometimes it’s difficult to imagine a series of events like this one that left a worker severely injured.
While raised on a boom, the worker was using a cutting torch to remove bolts from a sign on a Kroger store in Murfreesboro, TN. One of the hot bolts from the sign fell and melted through a hydraulic hose on the boom.
That caused pressurized hydraulic fluid to shoot out of the hose and into the path of the worker’s torch, setting the worker and Kroger sign on fire.
The man jumped out of the boom, injuring his legs and breaking his ankles. The boom was raised about 18 feet above ground level when he jumped.
The man, an employee of Jarvis Sign, wasn’t identified. An eyewitness said the worker was conscious and limping after the incident and had to ask others how badly burned his back was.
He was taken to a local hospital. There are no reports on his condition.
SafetyNewsAlert.com delivers the latest Safety news once a week to the inboxes of over 270,000 Safety professionals.
Click here to sign up and start your FREE subscription to SafetyNewsAlert!
Tags: bizarre series of events, boom, cutting torch, hydraulic hose
Loading ...
January 25th, 2011 at 12:52 pm
This is interesting and not something a normal person would necessarily plan for. I do wonder whether the worker was wearing fall protection when jumped though. It doesn’t sound like it, but it could have been disconnected prior to the jump.
February 1st, 2011 at 9:40 am
It sounds like he didn’t have a person doing fire watch. If he did than he would have known he was being caught on fire or his equipment was in danger. I don’t know the whole story but it seems to me these demo companies are trying to save a buck send one person to do the work of 2. Don’t sound like they saved any money here.
February 1st, 2011 at 11:46 am
This may be categorized as ‘Low probability’ of occurrence on a Risk Assessment Matrix and points to the option of asking people that aren’t directly involved/related to the job to participate in the Risk Assessment. If the Risk Assessment (was it performed? recorded?) was performed by people with their minds on ‘getting the job done’ in the name of timeliness and revenue, well, they’d tend to think ‘inside the box’ in an effort to ‘check the box’; however, if this Risk Assessment involved at least one other person (from, say, Accounting or Legal) I tend to think they may have cited the possibility of ‘fire’ as a potential hazard and thus forced a mitigation strategy.
February 4th, 2011 at 11:33 am
Talk about a weird series of events! Let’s see, now in such situations:
1 - the worker will have to install a metal catch bucket underneath where the bolts are being cut
2 - the worker will have to wear a full fire-protective suit
3 - all hydraulic lines will have to be encased in flexible coiled metal
February 24th, 2011 at 4:31 am
i gueess a proper risk assessment was not done-certinly working at heights should of require fall protection-consideration of a water hammock below the area of the work activity -could another means of severing the bolts be used?