Health, Safety and Environment

BT Cleared Over Death of Engineer Tara Whelan

13 November 2006

CWU member Tara Whelan, a BT Engineer, died after falling from a telegraph pole near Trowbridge on Friday May 25, 2001. Tara died eight days later at Hospital in Bristol from skull injuries.

The Health and Safety Executive, brought a prosecution against her employer, BT, and after a four-week trial at Bristol Crown Court BT was acquitted of a single charge of failing to ensure the safety of their employees. After deliberating for eight-and-a-half hours, a reduced jury of ten people returned the not guilty verdict.

A CWU spokesperson said "We are of the view that the HSE were right to bring the prosecution in view of the weight of evidence and don't think anything more could have been done in respect of presenting the evidence to the court. Of course we are more than a little surprised at the verdict particularly in view of the previous the Coroners Inquest but the technical nature of the case may have made it difficult for the jury to reach a verdict as they were out for an unusually long time of over 8 and a half hours. However the court has made its decision and everyone must accept it. We will continue working with BT and the HSE to keep working at height as safe as we can for our members and of course our deepest sympathy remains with Tara's family, friends and work colleagues."

Tara Whelan - Coroner's Inquest Outcome

7 March 2003

Tara Whelan was involved in an accident in Trowbridge, Wiltshire on Friday 25 May 2001, whilst working on a BT pole.

The trailer of an articulated lorry snagged an aerial cable that was attached to the pole Tara was working on. As the aerial cable pulled taut the force caused the pole to break and Tara was thrown to the ground sustaining head injuries. On 2 June 2001 at Frenchay Hospital, Bristol, Tara died from these injuries.

The first two days of the inquest into Tara’s death took place in March 2002 in Chippenham, Wiltshire. The inquest was adjourned as the Coroner asked the Police to investigate certain aspects of the accident and the inquest resumed on March 5 2003, concluding in the late evening of Thursday March 6 2003.

The verdict of the inquest was Accidental Death.

The police found there was not enough evidence to form a case for Corporate Manslaughter, as it was not possible to identify an individual with sole responsibility, who acted with gross negligence. The police investigation concluded with a list of recommendations that they requested the Coroner and the Jury to take into consideration. Under Rule 43 of the Coroner’s Proceedings, the Jury found that there were matters arising from the accident that required reporting. The Jury unanimously requested that a report be undertaken into further aspects of BT procedures:

1. The Jury requested that in relation to the D Notices Procedures that these needed to be investigated, in particular with reference to the timeframes for dealing with the poles.
2. The Jury asked the Coroner to raise, with the Department of Transport, the issue of maximum height for vehicles. The Coroner promised to take up this issue with the Transport Research Laboratory in the first instance.
3. The Jury expressed anxiety about the training of BT Customer Service Engineers and interpreting what may be written on a A1024 Notice attached to a pole.
4. The Jury said that Customer Service Engineers should have a greater understanding of information on A1024’s.
5. The Jury wanted an investigation to establish whether there was a case for Corporate Responsibility for the death. On this issue the Coroner ruled that as the CPS had already ruled on a prosecution for Corporate Manslaughter not being possible, he was unable to take forward this recommendation.
6. The Coroner also recommended that BT should look again at the parameters on aerial cables and drop wires and noted that the target times on A1024’s needed to be reviewed, along with the ethicacy of the A1024 reporting system.

Also the Coroner asked the police to further investigate the issue of the lost A1024’s that were on the pole that Tara was climbing when she had the accident and fell.

At the close of the inquest CWU approached Doctor Paul Litchfield, Head of Health and Safety for BT, to request an immediate review of all A1024 procedures. This is in line with Proposition 204 passed at 2002 TIC Annual Conference that the T&FSE Health Safety and Environment Sub Committee had been unable to pursue fully until the conclusion of the inquest.

Further representations were made to the Health and Safety Executive to ascertain their views on proceeding with a prosecution under Section II of the Health and Safety At Work Act.