Jump to content

Proof of Adelaide Reporting incompetence

Recommended Posts

As if it were ever in doubt, incomptence in our newsroom in South Australia (SA) is here exposed in all its glory.

A serious mishap on a work-site has been described in less than happy tones.

Skip through the article to the sentence I have high-lighted below.

There are other errors, but this one is classic.

INDEPENDANT experts may be brought in to help investigate why a two-tonne metal cage fell 10 storeys at a city building site.

The large metal cage hit the side of Murray Chambers in Coglin St, tearing off some of the rear guttering after it plummeted down yesterday afternoon.

A number of lawyers and staff heard the crash as it hit the ground, with one lawyer meeting with a client one metre from where the cage came to rest.

There were no injuries but a SafeWork SA spokesman said inspectors had seized the crane, its hook and cable, the work box and relevant documents as part of their inquiries.

The incident led to a walk-out by workers on the construction site over safety concerns.

SafeWork SA said it was still too early to establish the cause of the incident, but the site would be secured while the investigation continued.

Inspectors would take further photographs and measurements today, as well as interview witnesses and officials.

Safework SA spokesperson Peter Adams said "we have seized the crane and the dogbox, the crane is out of action".

"We have got it all sealed off," he said.

"It is now an investigation, it's not a work site."

Mr Adams said that "the unions has made a few comments on what they thought of safety on the site, so we will be sorting that out with them."While Safework SA had a number of inspectors on site, Mr Adams said independant expertise may be sought "to help us examine it".

SafeWork SA executive director Michele Patterson said it was "extremely fortunate" that workers or members of the public were killed or injured.

"Following our investigations, we will consider where responsibility lies with regard to workplace safety laws."

Don't you just love these types of errors? :wink:

Original article, but it may have been corrected by now. :sad:

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Create New...