A WorkSafe investigation into an accident that killed a kiwifruit contractor in a quad bike accident while she was on a kiwifruit orchard last May found Zespri liable.
The woman was working for AgFirst, sampling kiwifruit as required by Zespri.
Zespri had accepted an enforceable undertaking as a penalty under the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015, as one of the parties connected to the incident.
The enforceable undertaking required Zespri to contribute to improved health and safety in future and means the company will not appear in court for the incident.
Brokenshire, a health and safety expert at Rangiriri Consultants, said it was now impossible for corporate entities to stand behind their own health and safety rules and they needed to look well beyond them to what contractors and associated parties had in place, to take full responsibility under the new regulations.
Many in the primary sector might be surprised how far-reaching the new Health and Safety at Work Act was.
The case should also give many farmers pause for thought about how their farm businesses managed the new rules.
“And there will be more to come once the new hazardous substances regulations come into force on December 1.”
While Zespri was not directly involved in the sample collection, it recognised that as the contractual party requiring samples before harvest it had an important role to play in contributing to health and safety requirements.
The decision that Zespri was a related party should not surprise anyone familiar with the far-reaching effects of the new rules.
But Zespri had managed to get over a big hurdle by having the enforceable undertaking accepted in lieu of a prosecution.
“They would have had to put up a very, very strong case for it and have hit a number of points that satisfied WorkSafe.”
In this case it had been an acceptance Zespri could use its scale and resources to fund continuing education on orchard health and safety, implement health and safety reviews of contractors who contracted directly with Zespri for orchard visits and initiate campaigns relating to health and safety.
It has also agreed establish a tertiary scholarship for accredited health and safety studies.
“I have to add, though, that just because a company has been able to have an enforceable undertaking accepted it is not necessarily a cheaper option to prosecution.”
A Zespri spokesman said the initiatives would cost about $250,000.
Other changes made by Zespri included establishing key performance indicators for health and safety and external audits to review its health and safety protocols.
Zespri was now in the process of appointing a health and safety manager to cover an expanded area of responsibility that accompanied the new regulations.
“Very clearly, our own direct relationship with contractors means we have to scrutinise how things are done and it is complicated when multiple parties are involved.”
The enforceable undertaking on Zespri was the fourth since the new regulations came into force this year and was viewed by WorkSafe as a most positive alterative to prosecution.
The case was the first multi-party prosecution by WorkSafe, with court cases continuing against other related parties.
WorkSafe technical programmes manager Simon Humphries said an enforceable undertaking was not usually an accepted alternative to prosecution when it had resulted in a fatality.
“However, in this case the failures alleged of Zespri were not directly causative of the worker’s death.
“The activities outlined in the enforceable undertaking will provide long-term sustainable health and safety improvements in the workplace, industry and wider community.”
Zespri chief operating officer Simon Limmer said the interdependent nature of the industry meant there were overlapping duties between orchard owners, contractors, post-harvest workers and Zespri for health and safety.
“Our undertaking aims to deliver benefit for workers in the kiwifruit industry and the communities in which we operate.”
