On 29 February 2024, a Tinana pineapple farm was found guilty after trial and sentenced in the Maryborough Magistrates Court for breaching section 32 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (Qld) (‘the Act’), having failed to comply with its primary health and safety duty. The two Directors were charged alongside the company and were found guilty after trial and sentenced for their failure to comply with the duty owed as an officer and to exercise due diligence.

The defendant managed and harvested a pineapple farm. The defendants employed at least seven workers at the farm, including the 19-year-old injured worker. The company directors were husband and wife.

The defendant Directors had an active presence at the farm, both working and supervising workers on the farm.

The defendants owned and operated a:

1. Kioti RX8030 tractor (‘the tractor’); and
2. a pineapple harvester on a trailer (‘the trailer’).

The work included picking and stacking pineapples.  Workers would pick pineapples, place them on the boom of the harvester that had a conveyor, the conveyor would then transfer the pineapples to the trailer where another worker would stack them into a bin within the trailer. The trailer could accommodate three bins.

As part of their work duties workers were permitted to get onto the trailer to move between locations at the workplace. At some stage during their 8 months employment, the injured worker was instructed by one of the Directors not to travel on the trailer with his legs dangling and to “sit where you can”.

On 1 August 2022, the injured worker and six other workers were engaged in the work activity of picking and stacking pineapples. The team leader in charge was driving the tractor with the trailer attached. He decided to move to another patch to continue picking pineapples to fill the bins on the trailer. The team leader invited them to get onto the trailer or walk over to the next patch. All workers, apart from one who stood on the sidestep of the tractor, got onto the trailer to go to the new location.  The team leader drove the tractor with the trailer at a speed of approximately 5-8 kilometres per hour.

There was not a lot of space on the trailer for the workers as it had the three bins of pineapples on it. Some workers stood, some squatted and some sat. The injured worker positioned himself sitting with his legs over the side of the trailer on the right side, about 50 centimetres in front of the trailer’s wheel guard, under the conveyor. His feet kept continuous contact with the ground, and his right foot came into contact with something pushing it underneath the dual wheels of the trailer. The injured worker was pulled off the trailer and went underneath the dual wheels beneath it. He saw and felt the wheels going over the side of his body and head.

The weight of trailer at that time was approximately 3 tonnes. The team leader was alerted to what happened by the other workers and stopped the tractor. The injured worker suffered a high-grade liver laceration, bilateral hemopneumothoraxes, right scapula fracture, left humeral shaft fracture, left infraorbital haematoma, and preorbital and premaxillary soft tissue swelling. He required surgery and was discharged from hospital 21 days later.

Post the incident, workers were prohibited from riding on the trailer.

In finding the defendant guilty after trial, the Magistrate remarked that this case was not about the acts of the worker per se – while his acts were the materialisation of the risk – his Honour:

• found there was evidence of overcrowding;
• formed the view there were many more ways the defendant could have made the activity safe and failed in that duty; and
• found that the defendant and co-defendants collectively failed to discharge that duty.

In sentencing the defendant, his Honour had regard to references tendered behalf of the Directors advising of the active role and positive contribution they make to the community, and that there was evidence of some consideration of safety issues at the workplace.

In all the circumstances, his Honour convicted the defendants and ordered a fine of $65,000 for the company, and a fine of $5,000 for each Director. His Honour exercised his discretion to not record a conviction.

OWHSP contact: enquiries@owhsp.qld.gov.au