Marlborough farmers have quad bike fines reduced

Three Marlborough farmers have successfully appealed the extent of their fines for not wearing safety helmets while riding quad bikes.
Phillip Jones and Maria Carlson were both found guilty under the Health and Safety in Employment Act in November for not wearing safety helmets while riding quad bikes on their Canvastown farm.
They were fined $20,000 each for the offences, which has been reduced to $15,000 each.
A third farmer Rangi Holmes was found guilty in May last year for the same offence and fined $15,000.
In a reserved judgement at the High Court in Nelson, released last month, Justice Dobson said the fines imposed on Holmes were "manifestly excessive" and reduced them to $12,000.
Justice Dobson said Jones and Carlson's financial circumstances had been affected by a reduced dairy payout.
"The reduced ability of the couple to fund substantial fines means that a reduction from the $40,000 total is appropriate," he said.
The pair, who were sharemilkers, had ignored verbal and written warnings by Worksafe New Zealand inspectors several times after being seen riding without helmets on their farm between 2012 and 2014. Both Jones and Carlson owned helmets.
Jones was charged and convicted with failing to take all practicable steps to ensure no other person was harmed at work while riding a quad bike.
Carlson was charged and convicted with failing to take all practicable steps to ensure her own safety by wearing a helmet, and of failing to take all practicable steps to ensure the safety of others.
Both Carlson and Jones were also seen by inspectors with children riding alongside them on the quad bikes without helmets.

                       

At the sentencing in November, Carlson, a former South Island regional farm manager of the year winner, said she disagreed with how the regulations were enforced, but not the requirement to wear a helmet.
Holmes was found guilty in May last year in what was believed to be the first time someone was convicted for carrying a passenger on a work quad bike.
All three appealed the level of their fines.
The maximum penalty for the offence is $250,000.
Last year, there were four farm fatalities related to quad bikes and more than 60 serious injuries.

Title Page

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Farming couples who are ignoring the safety requirements for

 riding a quad bike are being fined up to $40,000

 

Despite repeated warnings some farming couples continued to ignore the safety requirements

 

Farmers say $40,000 quad bike fine is unfair

$40k fine for no helmets a clear signal - WorkSafe

The plot summary of the whole article is explaining how many injuries are caused by quad bikes and

how helmets could reduce the risk.

To inform the public of the recent events.

People need to take responsibility for their own safety.

It is obvious that people don’t think they need to wear helmets but the truth is they need to, that’s what this article is trying to get across, and that’s why some farming couples are being made example of.

The author manipulates the readers by turning the article into a speech and presenting it over the radio, this gets people to listen as it’s in between songs and they have to listen through it in order to hear the next song.

"It's been reported that a quarter of quad bike injuries involve injuries to the head and a quarter of child quad bike hospitalisations involve head injuries."

The report - written for the Health Quality and Safety Commission, shows quad bikes, motorcycles and other 'off-road vehicles' accidents are the country's second largest cause of recreational deaths in children under 15.

 

WorkSafe is seeing a number of farmers changing their habits, and wearing a helmet.

 

I think people should be wearing helmets but I agree the fine is way too much and probably just a hoax for the government to get more money.

 

The fines amount is too much and needs to change.

The second key idea is simply stating what most people are saying about the quad bike fine.

 

The Author convinced the audience by talking in a very easy to understand manner.

 

“$40,000! What a disgraceful amount to charge for not wearing a helmet! Our pathetic judicial system will fine someone that and then give someone a rap over the knuckles for committing REALcrimes. Pathetic.”)

(“helmets art practical on farm. most of the time on farm you are on your bike for less than 5 min at a time. I think perhaps the work safe inspecter in the Nelson blenham are need to get a life. this is the second case in that area. it's like they are targeting the dairy farms up there. and when did helmets become compulsory?”)

 

My personal opinion is the fine is a ridiculous amount and targets big money earners for example dairy farmers, this fact is defiantly suspicious.

Farmers say $40k quad bike fine is unfair

This article briefly sums up what happened to the farming couple.

 

The purpose of this article is to inform us about the consequences of not wearing motorbike helmets whilst operating a quad bike and the potential fines you could receive, so we know not to make the same mistake.

The farming couple were made an example of by WorkSafe NZ

In order to get the message across someone has to be made an example of and this is what this article talks about

The author manipulates the reader my making the article very short and easy to read to make people not mind reading it because it’s not very long.

 

It says on average five people are killed each year while riding quad bikes and another 850 are injured.

("I totally see their point, that helmets have a place on a quad bike and I think everybody should be wearing it.")

(“It wasn't the requirement to wear helmets that we disagree with, but the way it was enforced”)

 

My personal opinion is I agree on what most people are saying, (It’s a ridiculous fine)

 

The farming couple were given repeated warnings they should have made actions.

 

The second key idea states that the farming couple should have been more responsible and then they wouldn’t have been fined in the first place.

The author wasn’t very convincing because his article was very short and didn’t have enough information to convince anyone of anything.

(“What's the fine for not wearing a push bike helmet? About $30? This is crazy.”)

 

(“would be interesting to know why the inspectors have target this particular couple, as there are heaps of farmers probably all over NZ doing it and are they all going to be fined 10000 ? or were these two an easy target for work safe to collect some money off or did they live close to where an inspector lived .

 

("And a drunk driver kills someone and gets 6 months home detention the fine seems excessive for the error in relation to other crimes.”)

 

My personal opinion is the farming couple shouldn’t be complaining when they were given repeated warnings to wear their helmets while operating a quad bike.

Quad bike helmet fine unfair - farmers

The quad bike helmet fine is too much and unfair

 

To inform New Zealand of the latest news and to keep us updated on all the latest stories.

A farming couple (Maria Carlson and Phillip Jones) have been fined $20,000 each for not wearing helmets while riding there quad bikes

The first key idea is a brief sentence to intrigue people to listen/watch the story, in this case the story starts with explaining what the story is about and later on explains why it happened.

The author manipulates the reader or viewer by making the story interesting by turning it into a presentation, adding more information than most websites/newspaper articles and displaying it on TV with both sides of the story and opinions from both parties, also showing pictures and video evidence of the story with commentary to make the presentation easier to understand, by doing this it makes the story more enjoyable to watch and easier to listen to as many people can’t read very well and can’t be bothered going on the pc to look at it up or read the newspaper.

 

WorkSafe New Zealand took the dairy farmers to court and won after the pair received numerous warnings.

 

Today a Government report went one step further – it's recommending banning children under 16 from riding on them at all after the death of 33 Kiwi kids on quad bikes over 10 years.

Ms Carlson and Mr Jones have learnt an expensive lesson, and are vowing to always wear their helmets on their quad bikes from now on.

My personal opinion on this story is showing it on TV is the best way to let the public know what’s going on and I think the fine definitely needs to be reconsidered as it seems a bit harsh and the warnings need to be clearer such as the farming couple said ( "It's been really confusing, and we just wish they had said the right things from the beginning and that they'd said, 'Look, if you don't wear the helmet you're going to get a big fine,”.) But I can’t lie the fine is getting the message across and making more people wear helmets.

 

The fine itself is way too much but the idea of making people wear helmets is very important.

 

The second key idea is to show another side to the story.

The Author did a good job at presenting the story but didn’t convince me of a side to take (for or against the fine) because he didn’t show both sides of the story.

 

(“So if you are an overseas driver and kill someone through dangerous driving you get banned for for 6 months and fined a couple of thousand !!! Our legal system must be the joke of the World!!”)

(“Funny how work safe can fine someone for not wearing a helmet yet get away Scott free from any wrong doing at pike river!go figure”)

 

My personal opinion is in an agreement with the second key idea I think the fine is to much but people need to be more work safe.

Why $40,000 fine for quad bike couple makes sense

The Plot summary of the whole article is pretty much about why the fine is so much and why it is also necessary in preventing farm like injuries.

 

The author’s purpose for this article is to explain why the fine is so much and why it is necessary

Many deaths are caused by quad bikes, therefore there needs to be some safety requirements to minimize the risk. Not just adults are at risk either many children are killed while operating quad bikes simply because they are not strong enough or skilful enough to control these machines. 33 children aged up to 15 died in accidents between 2002 and 2012 involving motorcycles.

The first key ideas point of view is people need to be wearing helmets while operating a quad bike and if a hefty fine is what it takes to make people wear their helmets, then that is what needs to be done.

The author manipulates the reader because he is very one sided (for helmets) which frustrates the reader and makes them want to read more to understand his point of view.

(“Yeah right as if you would be pleased if you received this over the top fine.”)

 

(“Yet the picture shows an officer riding a quad bike which has no roll protection, so that if it does roll over it will keep rolling and crush him. And the helmet won't save him from that.”)

(“Let’s not stop at quad bikes. It would be a safe bet that quad bike accidents on a number of hours ridden basis would be much less than the number of motorcycle accidents on the roads. We do not hear a lot about the disproportionate number of serious injury or death accidents involving motorcycles to cars (about 14/1), so why don't we concentrate on the real problem, and let farmers get on with their jobs?”)

I think there needs to be some safety precautions to prevent injury and death but that doesn’t mean the fine has to be so high, what’s the point in saving someone’s life with a helmet and then killing them with a $40,000 dollar fine.

 

few deaths are caused by quad bike accidents but many more are caused by motorbike accidents and car accidents yet the fine for not wearing a helmet on a motorbike is only $50 and only $150 for not wearing a seatbelt in a car.

The quad bike fine is way out of proportion to the fine for not wearing a helmet on a motorbike and not wearing a seatbelt in a car.

The Author was very good at convincing you the quad bike fine is necessary because he is very one sided.

(“While they need to comply with H&S legislation, the fine seems excessive to me. As others have already said, the fine seems entirely disproportionate to the "crime". They would probably be better off to kill a pedestrian as they text and drive an uwarranted and unregistered car without a drivers license while drunk and not wearing a seatbelt.”)

 

(“What a joke. $40,000.00 for not wearing a helmet you've got to be kidding me. As far as im concerned these people should go find a real job and stop handing out such absurd punishments to people for something that is clearly none of their business. You have to remember that as long as they are on private property, they are no threat to the public. Whereas as soon as they are on the road it becomes police business anyway. If farmers don't want to wear helmets then that is their own choice, it's their lives, so worksafe should just but out!”)

 

My personal opinion is if the fine for not wearing a helmet on a quad bike is going to be so high they might as well bring up the fine for not wearing a seatbelt in a car and no helmet on a motorbike.

$40,000 fine for no quad bike helmets

The A Marlborough farming couple has been fined $40,000 for not wearing helmets while riding their quad bikes.

 

The purpose of this article is to inform us about the consequences of not wearing motorbike helmets whilst operating a quad bike and the potential fines you could receive, so we know not to make the same mistake.

 

WorkSafe New Zealand inspector’s say wearing helmets while riding a quad bike is very important in preventing injuries which is why the fine is so high.

The WorkSafe New Zealand’s point of view is the higher the fine the less likely someone will be to break it therefore minimising the risk of injuries to New Zealand farming couples.

The words and the structure of the article influence readers to continue reading; He also gives both points of view on the article without sounding one sided so you can hear the full story for what it is.

("It's not rocket science, people should wear helmets to minimise the risk ... the message needs to go out to employers in the work place that they need to take basically all reasonable steps to prevent injury and potentially death.")

("I'm sure every farmer in New Zealand would identify themselves as a safe driver ... but still 35 farmers come off their quad bikes every day,")

(“A Marlborough couple fined $40,000 for riding quad bikes without helmets on a dairy farm say the penalty is ridiculous and out of proportion.”)

(“Helmets won’t stop the quad bike from rolling on us and crushing us to death.”)

My personal opinion on this idea and people’s reactions is I don’t think the fine should be so much for example you would only get fined up to $150 dollars for not wearing a seatbelt and only up to $50 for not wearing a helmet on a motorcycle.

The farming couples reason for not wearing a helmet whilst operating a quad bike was because it was a bit of a hassle and it was not necessary to wear helmets because they had identified areas of danger on the farm.

 

This is true to a certain extent but every farmer in New Zealand would identify themselves as a safe driver, but still 35 farmers come off their quad bikes every day.

The Author manipulates the readers by using people’s quotes inside the article, however the author did not convince me whether the fine is a good or bad thing because he hasn’t really taken a side he has just stated the facts.

(“Ever wonder why criminal fines are so low in comparison to laws that target people with money (ie workers). Its less about safety and more about revenue for government.”)

(“How absolutely and utterly pathetic and over the top. Sounds like the H&S department had it in for them. Perhaps they did deserve a fine or something but 40 grand!! Unbelievable.”)

My personal opinion on this idea is that allot of people seem to be complaining about the price of the fine but this didn’t stop them from breaking it in the first place.