A WA company has been fined for poisoning workers. 

A Western Australian court has revealed details of lead poisoning affecting workers at a Kalgoorlie mining assay laboratory. 

The most severely affected individual had lead levels in their blood exceeding recommended levels by over threefold, necessitating an emergency transfer to Perth for medical intervention.

The court heard four employees at a Kalgoorlie assay laboratory experienced lead poisoning between August 2020 and March 2022.

Jinning Ptd Ltd pleaded guilty to six charges on August 22, including two counts of failing to ensure biological monitoring in a lead-risk occupation. This marked the first prosecution of its kind in Western Australia.

Perth-based company Jinning Proprietary Limited was fined a total of $30,000 in the Kalgoorlie Magistrates Court on Monday after admitting guilt on four charges.

Each charge related to failures to provide biological monitoring to Jinning employees over a 20-month period from August 2020 to March 2022.

The prosecution was also granted court costs amounting to $5,647.41.

The court proceedings disclosed that one worker exhibited alarming lead levels of 97.5 micrograms per decilitre, prompting an investigation by WorkSafe. 

Subsequent testing revealed that the other three affected employees had lead readings of 91.2, 88.8, and 41.8, respectively.

Under Western Australian regulations, regular blood testing is mandated, and companies are obligated to remove male employees from lead-risk positions if their lead levels surpass 30 micrograms per decilitre. 

This threshold is set at 10 micrograms per decilitre for females, due to potential risks to unborn foetuses.

During the sentencing hearing, Magistrate Janie Gibbs acknowledged the company's early admissions of guilt and clean record. 

However, she characterised the situation as “negligence of a higher level” and stressed that there was an “obvious risk of harm” that materialised with one employee's hospitalisation.

In the company's defence, lawyer Nick van Hattem conceded negligence but denied deliberate wrongdoing, attributing the lapse in compliance to staffing challenges and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. He portrayed the situation as a “dereliction of duty” rather than a calculated action.

Prosecutor Tanya Hollaway argued that WorkSafe viewed the offence as being of “higher end of seriousness,” alleging a “lack of care” and “deliberate action by the accused”. 

Hollaway contended that Jinning was aware of the requirement for biological monitoring but failed to adequately address it.

Jinning faced a potential maximum penalty of $200,000, with each of the four charges carrying a maximum fine of $50,000. However, the actual fine imposed was $30,000.