Tom Davis, 18, of Looseleigh, Plymouth, suffered a fractured pelvis in the incident which happened in August 2009 while Mr Davis and his colleague were employed by Plymouth based CL Electrical Solutions Ltd.
Plymouth Crown Court heard both trainees were working at the premises of HT Gardner Distribution Ltd in Plympton when instructed to change a number of lightbulbs on the warehouse ceiling.
HT Gardner Distribution Ltd provided a forklift truck for which neither man had received any training, though the firm's own instructions stated only trained drivers should use forklifts. It also provided a cage that was strapped to the forklift that was unsuitable for the task.
While his colleague drove the fork lift around the warehouse, Mr Davis was positioned inside the cage, changing bulbs in any roof lights not working.
-- Advertisement --
During one of these manoeuvres, the forklift toppled over onto its side, narrowly missing crashing into a pillar and slamming the cage into the floor.
Inside the cage, Mr Davis fractured his pelvis in two places, suffered facial injuries that required stitches, a broken front tooth and lacerations to his elbow.
Both firms were prosecuted by HSE. At a hearing at Plymouth Magistrates Court in April, CL Electrical Solutions Ltd pleaded guilty to a breach of Section 2 (1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and H T Gardner pleaded guilty to a breach of Section 3 (1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. The Magistrates' committed the defendants to crown court for sentencing after stating that there had been "a catalogue of breaches on the part of individuals in both Defendant companies" and having taking on board the serious injuries sustained by Tom Davis.
HT Gardner Distribution Ltd was fined a total of £20,000 and ordered to pay costs of £11,300 and CL Electrical was fined a total of £7,000 with £5,000 costs.
HSE Inspector, Helena Allum, said: "Changing light bulbs is such a common job the safety implications can be overlooked, but in high roofed workplaces, falls from height are a very real and serious risk.
"This job was not properly risk assessed and as a result both companies chose the wrong equipment for the job and came up with a loose system of work. The two young trainees, inexperienced in work at height and not trained to use a forklift, were then left to get on with it.
"Any work at height needs to properly planned, the right equipment chosen and workers given sufficient training to do the job correctly and properly supervised."
(CD)
