The chief executive and the former health and safety manager of Nelson-based marine engineering firm Aimex have admitted lying about a workplace accident that occurred a few days before a similar accident left a worker seriously injured. Photo / Tracy Neal
The chief executive and the former health and safety manager of Nelson-based marine engineering firm Aimex have admitted lying about a workplace accident that occurred a few days before a similar accident left a worker seriously injured. Photo / Tracy Neal
Two men who lied about a workplace accident that occurred a week before a similar accident left a worker with brain damage, are the head of the marine engineering company and its former health and safety manager, it can be revealed.
Steven Patrick John Sullivan, the managing director and one-third shareholder of Nelson-based firm Aimex, and his brother William Mansfield Trevor Sullivan, the former health and safety manager, were each charged with attempting to pervert the course of justice following a police investigation into the company’s mishandling of a workplace incident.
William Sullivan, known as Bill, was also charged with intentionally misleading WorkSafe investigators but last month he pleaded guilty to an amended single charge of making a false statement.
Today, Steve Sullivan appeared in Nelson District Court where he admitted a charge of wilfully attempting to pervert the course of justice.
The charges were in relation to evidence that came to light about a workplace incident that had occurred only days before a similar accident on July 29, 2019, which left a young employee brain-damaged after he was found unconscious in the hull of a boat.
The worker, known as Employee A, was overcome by toxic fumes while using a brake cleaner in the engine bay.
For this, Aimex was sentenced in July 2021. It received a fine of $250,000 and was ordered to pay $65,000 in reparation and $1434 in costs after admitting a charge under sections of the Health and Safety at Work Act.
But it was during the investigation into this accident that WorkSafe became aware of a similar incident involving another employee, named Employee X, which had occurred on July 24, 2019.
Employee X had been cleaning the engine room of the same vessel with brake cleaner when he became overcome with fumes.
Suppression lapsed for the pair when they appeared in Nelson District Court today. Photo / Tracy Neal
Fortunately, he recognised the symptoms and was able to get himself out of the situation immediately.
During the investigation into the incident involving Employee A, the other worker told WorkSafe about his close call.
Employee X told investigators he had recorded the incident on his timesheet for that day and that he had notified William Sullivan, who had created an incident report.
But despite repeated requests from WorkSafe for records, including the incident form the worker insisted had been lodged, William Sullivan denied any knowledge of Employee X’s incident.
On March 5, 2020, the lawyers acting for Aimex contacted WorkSafe to say the company’s records had been reviewed and it “did not hold an incident/near miss report or similar paperwork referencing the incident which Employee X included in his timesheet on the 24th of July 2019″.
In further communication, Aimex maintained its stance on the documents which WorkSafe continued to request.
Several months after Employee A’s accident and while the WorkSafe investigation was in progress, Steve Sullivan was informed of Employee X’s incident and the creation of his incident report.
But because there was no evidence disclosed, WorkSafe was unable to prove Employee X’s incident when it prosecuted Aimex in 2021.
At the sentencing, lawyers for Aimex said the company did not accept that his incident was reported in a manner that could reasonably have been followed up on.
According to their submissions, this was because it had been reported on a timesheet rather than the expected incident reporting channel.
Aimex’s lawyers argued it could not be concluded the company should have, or reasonably could have, known about the previous incident by the time of Employee A’s accident.
In relation to the recent police charges, the Crown has argued that the company was given a lesser penalty at its 2021 sentencing than what it might have, had the full facts been known.
The police investigation
The evidence which led to the charges being laid against the pair came to light following a police investigation, sparked by a person contracted in January 2021 to conduct a review of the company.
The man, known as “Mr B”, became aware of the incident involving Employee X during the preparation for the sentencing hearing.
Steve Sullivan told Mr B he had found no record of the incident ever occurring, the summary of facts stated.
He went on to tell Mr B that he believed the comments recorded by Employee X on his timesheet about him becoming “lightheaded” were not actually recorded at the time of the incident, and that Employee X “had a history of recording his timesheets late”.
The summary of facts said that by this time, however, Steve Sullivan was fully aware of the existence of Employee X’s incident report.
During subsequent meetings, Steve Sullivan was asked by lawyers about the WorkSafe claims of Employee X.
He maintained Employee X had not filed a report, despite knowing he had, and that it had been “destroyed by an employee of the company during the WorkSafe investigation”.
Mr B was appointed to a senior position within Aimex after the sentencing in 2021, and then became aware of a “number of concerning circumstances around the destruction of the Employee X incident report and actions taken intending to cover up the incident in order not to disclose the matter to WorkSafe NZ”.
It was during a meeting with Mr B that William Sullivan became “very upset” and confirmed that Employee X had reported the incident to him and that he had filled out an incident report.
William Sullivan also admitted he had not told WorkSafe about the matter when interviewed even though he knew about it.
Mr B then asked Steve Sullivan why he had misled him.
Steve Sullivan responded by saying that as far as he was concerned “once the document was destroyed it never existed”.
Mr B was astounded, left the company immediately and sought legal advice on how best to proceed.
On July 15, 2021, Mr B submitted a Protected Disclosure Statement to WorkSafe, recording his inquiries and admissions made to him.
The following month, the police launched an investigation into the allegation under the operation code name Op Subak.
In November 2021, WorkSafe received a letter from Aimex’s lawyer stating that “most regrettably there had in fact been a prior incident report”, as had been initially asked for, but it was not disclosed and had been destroyed during the course of the investigation.
A police search in December 2021 of the home of a former company employee, who did not face charges, turned up a copy of Employee X’s incident report that he had saved.
The police also searched the Aimex head office at Port Nelson and seized the original copy of the employee’s timesheet.
Steve Sullivan reiterated he had found no record of the Employee X incident ever occurring, despite searching through records.
He subsequently handed police three incident reports saying they were the only records he could find for the date of July 24, 2019, but did not include the incident report of Employee X.
William Sullivan admitted to not telling WorkSafe about the incident report during his police interview.
He said it was because he didn’t think it was his job to tell WorkSafe, as he was “just an employee”, and because he no longer had the incident report he didn’t believe he had any supporting evidence.
The Sullivans have been remanded on bail ahead of their sentencing in July.
