Story Highlight
– Worker suffered burns from molten glass spill incident.
– O-I Glass fined £600,000 for safety violations.
– Protective door missing from shovel loader for two years.
– HSE guidance emphasizes need for workplace safety measures.
– Employee recovered fully after serious injuries incurred.
Full Story
A major glass bottle manufacturing firm has been penalised £600,000 following an incident in which an employee sustained serious burns from molten glass. O-I Glass Limited admitted guilt to a single charge related to the event at its site on Glasshouse Loan in Alloa, which occurred on 3 February 2024. The 32-year-old victim experienced scalding injuries to 8% of his body but has since fully recovered.
The Alloa facility, which employs around 500 workers, operates furnaces continuously to transform raw materials into glass bottles. Above two glass reject basements containing large, movable skips, the furnaces and production lines generate molten glass, which is discarded into these skips via chutes. The process also involves coolant water, leading to the creation of very hot water and steam, which can overflow from the filled skips onto the basement floor.
On the day of the incident, the worker was using a shovel loader to clear spilled molten glass and hot water. However, due to the absence of a protective door on the loader’s cab—missing since March 2022 after being damaged—some of the material spilled onto him.
An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) revealed that despite awareness of the protective door’s absence, which had been reported to the site engineer, no actions were taken to replace it. During the nearly two years the door was missing, other workers had reported incidents involving molten glass entering the cab, leading to injuries.
According to HSE guidelines, workplace transport safety requires that vehicles in hazardous environments, especially where falling objects pose a risk, be equipped with falling-object protective structures (FOPS). Following the incident, O-I Glass removed the loader from operation, ultimately returning it to service in June 2024, equipped with a new steel front door, reinforced with a protective mesh.
O-I Glass Limited pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 5(1) of The Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 and section 33(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974, pertaining to the failure to keep the loader in safe working condition. The company faced sentencing at Stirling Sheriff Court on 23 September 2025.
HSE inspector Kathy Gostick stated, “This was an avoidable ordeal for a young worker. It is sheer luck he has been able to recover from his serious injuries. This company’s employees worked in this environment with a safety-critical part of the loader missing for a period of almost two years.” She emphasised the importance of risk assessments when selecting work equipment and noted that had the proper door been in place, the incident could have been entirely prevented.
The HSE continues to serve as the UK’s primary workplace health and safety regulator, dedicated to enhancing safety standards across various industries.
This is a stark reminder that failing to address known safety deficiencies can have severe consequences. Leaving a protective door off equipment for an extended period in a high hazard area was an unacceptable risk. Companies must act promptly on safety warnings, maintain effective inspection and maintenance routines and ensure management oversight so that hazards are not tolerated. The fine reflects the seriousness of the lapse and the need for stronger controls to prevent similar incidents.
This is a stark reminder that small or longstanding omissions in safety controls can have catastrophic consequences. Leaving a protective door off a shovel loader for such a prolonged period, despite previous warnings, shows a failure of routine inspection, risk assessment and proactive maintenance. Employers must ensure engineering safeguards are in place and tracked, that near misses and audit findings are closed out promptly, and that safe systems of work are reinforced through supervision and competency checks. The fine reflects the seriousness of the breach, but the real priority should always be preventing harm through effective oversight and a strong safety culture.
This is a stark reminder that safety cannot be treated as optional. Leaving a protective door missing for almost two years after warnings shows failures in risk assessment, maintenance and oversight. Controls that rely on single barriers must be inspected and restored promptly and supervisors and owners must act on safety reports. Regular audits, clear ownership of corrective actions, and worker empowerment to stop unsafe work are essential to prevent such avoidable injuries.