Furniture worker not guilty of negligently causing death of 17-year-old employee in 2015

A furniture factory worker has been declared not guilty of failing to take the necessary measures to ensure the health and safety of a worker who died in a horrific accident in 2015.

17-year-old Matthew Bartolo died in 2015 after getting trapped between two moving parts of a machine used to manufacture doors at Construct Furniture, which he had been assisting in operating. 

51-year-old Peter Blundell, who had been supervising the new employee, had been charged with failing to take reasonable health and safety measures at the Luqa factory.

Blundell, a carpenter with decades of experience, had helped Bartolo place a sheet of wood on the machine, in preparation for cutting, before returning to his place behind the machine’s control console. Once started, the machine would automatically follow a programmed route around the wood, cutting it into the desired shape - in this case a door.

There was no further user input after starting the process, which could, however, be stopped if an emergency toggle was pulled - as Blundell had in fact done.

The machine had a barrier extending along its front and sides, but not behind it, noted the court. 

The victim suffered horrific injuries and multiple fractures before the machine could be stopped. Bartolo was rushed to hospital, where staff had tried to restart his heart for over an hour, but their efforts were in vain. Bartolo was declared dead at 1:30pm that afternoon.

Blundell had said that after the wood had been placed on the machine, Bartolo had gone to activate a suction mechanism, which was on the outside of the protective barrier.  He had seen the victim close the gate behind him and step on the pedal to activate the vacuum, twice asking Bartolo whether everything was OK and receiving the reply that it was.

The second time, the victim had also made a thumbs up signal to indicate that everything was in order.

Seeing that Bartolo was on the outside of the barrier, he pressed a button to start the machine’s programmed cutting operation.

Another worker who had been present at the factory had testified to having heard Blundell ask Bartolo whether he was OK, and the victim replying that he was, before the machine was switched on.

A few seconds later, he heard Blundell shout in alarm, telling him to activate the emergency stop, which Blundell had then toggled himself after reaching it before the other worker.

Magistrate Leonard Caruana observed that the magisterial inquiry and the testimony of the two men who had been working with the victim at the time provided no evidence that the victim was inside the safety barriers at the time the workplace tragedy occurred.

The responsibility of the operator of automated machinery is greatest in the moments leading up to the machinery being started, said the court, adding that the operator must ensure that there is no danger to anyone in the vicinity before turning it on.

“In the opinion of the court that the defendant fulfilled this obligation by ascertaining, both visually with the victim as well as asking him directly on two occasions whether everything was in order, before starting the machine.”

What was certain was that the victim managed to go beside the machine without opening the gate in the seconds between the machine being started and the incident, said the magistrate.

“Had the gate been opened, the machine would have stopped operating,” noted the court, pointing out that the barrier did not fully encircle the machine, leaving the back portion of it accessible, even during its operation.

“This is why the court, whilst expressing its sorrow for this tragic and unfortunate incident, does not find that the defendant failed to carry out his obligations imposed on him by [the law.]”

Lawyers Arthur Azzopardi and Jacob Magri represented Blundell as defence counsel.