When "We Fixed It" Isn't the Same as Fixed: A $525,000 Lesson in Machine Guarding

A Victorian food manufacturer has just been fined $180,000 (plus costs) for inadequate machine guarding. On its own, that's a serious but not unusual WorkSafe prosecution. What makes it worth every manufacturer's attention is this: it's the sixth prosecution against the same business for the same type of failure since 2014, bringing the total to $525,000 in fines.

The failure, repeated

The most recent incident involved a worker's finger being lacerated in a dough-mixing machine when a metal scraper struck the rotating agitator blade. A metal grill was in place — but it had gaps large enough that a hand or arm could reach behind it into the danger area. WorkSafe found that proper protection required a combination of fixed and openable guarding connected to an interlock, so the machine physically cannot run while the guard is open.

Across the business's five prior incidents, all involving inadequate guarding on similar equipment, the injuries ranged from lacerations and crush injuries to degloving and amputation.

Why this keeps happening

A guard failing once is a gap. A guard failing the same way six times over a decade is a pattern — and the pattern is instructive. It's very unlikely that nothing was ever done after the first, second, or third incident. Far more likely: a fix was made, it looked adequate at the time, and nobody went back to properly verify it against the actual standard — a genuinely interlocked guard that prevents access during operation, not just a physical barrier that reduces it.

"We put a guard on it" and "the guard actually meets the required standard and still does after months of wear, adjustment and workarounds" are two different claims. Only the second one holds up when an inspector — or an incident — tests it.

What adequate guarding actually requires

For any machine with a rotating, reciprocating or otherwise dangerous moving part:

• Fixed guarding should physically prevent access to the danger area during normal operation.
• Openable guarding must be interlocked, so the machine cannot operate while it's open — not just discouraged from being opened.
• Guards need periodic verification, not a one-time install-and-forget. Gaps develop through wear, adjustment, and informal workarounds introduced by whoever's actually running the machine.

How Ardmor helps

This is the exact failure mode Ardmor's close-out process exists to prevent. An action isn't marked resolved because someone said it's done — it's verified closed, with photo or documentary evidence attached to the specific piece of equipment in your register. If a guarding fix was made six months ago, Ardmor's equipment register is where you'd go to confirm it's still in the state it was verified in, not hope that it is.

We're offering a free walk-through this month where we'll show you, plainly, what's actually closed on your site versus what's just been noted as done. Book a free walk-through.