He suffered burns on a large part of his body and had to be transferred to the burn unit of the hospital in Seville, where he remained in the ICU for 45 days. Having skin grafts, he has lost mobility and sensitivity. He still has "a buzzing in his ear", which he says is driving him "crazy". These are some of the consequences of an accident suffered by an Inalsa worker in 2005, who has not been able to return to work.
This Wednesday, the Criminal Court Number 1 of Arrecife held the trial against three people who were heads of Inalsa, for whom the prosecutor and the private prosecution are asking for 2 years in prison. The oral hearing will have to continue another day, due to the lack of a key witness, requested by the defense of the accused.
The accident occurred on July 28, 2005, at the Lanzarote IV plant. The injured employee was working in a compartment next to an operator who had come from an external electricity company. He lowered a lever, a circuit breaker, when an explosion occurred. "I felt a heat and tried to take off my shirt and shoes, because they were burning," he explained during the trial. "At 45 years old, my working life ended," he stated.
During the oral hearing, the safety and protection measures for Inalsa workers were discussed. In this regard, the victim has stated that at the time of the accident he was not wearing "insulating" shoes, but "normal" ones, nor a fireproof suit, which Inalsa ended up buying after this incident.
This worker explained that the external operator came to repair a fault and his bosses asked him to accompany him "to show him the job", but they did not give him "a catalog to know what he had to do". "The order was to make myself available to this person," he insisted, while saying that he was the one who manipulated that circuit breaker by "inertia, because he was closer".
He also indicated that he "believes there were gloves" for protection in the compartment where the explosion occurred, but no "pole or mask" and no fireproof suit either. In the workshop there were "gloves and a pole", but he assured that in the mobile unit in which he traveled to different plants on the island "there were only gloves and, sometimes, they were not there".
"He was very prepared"
However, the version of the then plant managers on security has been different. One of the accused, Antonio S.R., head of production when the accident happened, has stated that he met with another of the accused because he knew that an external operator was coming and wanted to "put a support man". They decided that it should be Nicolás A., because "he was very prepared and knew the facilities perfectly", but his function was to "guide, he was never given the order to solve the fault".
Antonio S.R. heard the explosion and ran towards the compartment, about 20 square meters. Asked during the trial about the protection of workers, he stated that the victim did not have to wear safety elements because he was not going to manipulate anything. "I don't know if the shoes were for electricity because the mutual insurance company sent them," he indicated, while acknowledging that there were no fireproof suits, although "they were bought later".
The second defendant, Domingo B., in charge of the electrical workshop, was with Antonio S.R. when Nicolás A. had the serious accident in Inalsa. "When I saw him go outside, his clothes were burning," he stated. What he did not see is that the worker was wearing personal protective equipment, although he assured that "they were always forced to put on the protective elements" or else they were "imposed sanctions". However, he admitted that he never imposed any sanctions. He also defended that very close to the compartment there was personal protective equipment.
"He had no individual protection"
The third defendant, Juan Manuel J.B., was the production director of Inalsa and provided the protective equipment, after the company acquired it. During the trial, he admitted that they did not consider buying fireproof suits, since until the accident in 2005 "the case had not been presented".
After the defendants and the victim, several witnesses testified during the trial, who at that time worked in Inalsa. The first was the one who helped the injured employee to take off "his shirt and socks, because they had fire". This witness, like the next to testify, has assured that all Inalsa workers wore "the same footwear", although he does not know if it was "insulating". However, the second witness does not remember "complaints about lack or deterioration of protective material" in Inalsa.
The third witness insisted on this matter and stated that in the area of the accident "there was no personal protective equipment". After him, a labor inspector testified, who made a report on the accident, and who assured that the injured worker "had no individual protection, such as gloves, footwear or mask".
During the trial, the electrician who was with the victim in the same compartment where the accident occurred also testified by videoconference. "Nicolás was close and he was the one who lowered the circuit breaker. He had already done tasks with us," he stated.
A person who belonged to the company's medical service and who was a security coordinator defended "the ease of going to the warehouse to ask for the equipment that was needed" for the worker's safety. "No objections were raised to the protective material of the workers," he said, while another witness, head of administration at that time, also assured that visits were made to the facilities, in which there were "means of protection".
The trial should continue another day due to the lack of a witness from the mutual insurance company that advised Inalsa on security matters. Although the judge has indicated that this witness was correctly summoned, he has not appeared to testify in the trial.
