On 26 February 2026 Drury Engineering Services was fined £44,000 after workers developed vibration-related nerve damage linked to unassessed exposure. The case reminds us that hand arm vibration hazards in manufacturing and fabrication are real, preventable and subject to legal duties under the Control of Vibration at Work Regulations 2005. Employers should treat HAVS risk the same way they treat noise or chemical risks: identify it, measure it and control it.

This article explains common failings that lead to enforcement, the practical steps employers must take under UK law and how a competent occupational hygiene partner supports measurement, interpretation and remedial planning.

Typical failures in HAVS cases

Prosecutions involving HAVS commonly follow a pattern: workers report numbness, tingling or loss of dexterity; there is no documented risk assessment; exposure has not been measured; and health surveillance is absent. These gaps leave employers unable to show compliance with the Control of Vibration at Work Regulations 2005 or with HSE guidance on managing hand-arm vibration.

Missing or inadequate risk assessment: assuming occasional use is low risk without measurement.
No exposure measurement: failure to assess daily vibration exposure in terms of A(8) (m/s2) and compare it with action and limit values.
Poor maintenance and tool selection: worn or inappropriate tools increasing vibration transmission.
Missing health surveillance: no baseline checks or follow-up to detect early HAVS.
Insufficient training and controls: workers not instructed on grip, posture, breaks or control measures.

HSE guidance and the Regulations require employers to assess risks, compare them with the exposure action values and put controls in place. For official guidance see the Control of Vibration at Work Regulations 2005 and HSE pages on hand-arm vibration.

Practical controls employers must use

Control measures should follow the prevention hierarchy: eliminate, substitute, engineer, administrate, then use PPE only where necessary. Typical interventions for fabrication and manufacturing include:

Eliminate or reduce use: remove processes that require high-vibration tools where possible.
Choose low-vibration tools: specify equipment with lower declared vibration values and replace worn tools promptly.
Engineering controls: fit vibration-damping handles, isolation mounts and bench-mounted fixtures where feasible.
Work organisation: reduce individual exposure by rotating tasks, scheduling breaks and limiting continuous tool use.
Tool maintenance: regular servicing reduces vibration output and improves performance.
Health surveillance: provide baseline checks and periodic monitoring to detect early symptoms, in line with HSE advice.
Training and instruction: teach correct grip, posture and tool use to minimise exposure.

Anti-vibration gloves are sometimes suggested, but HSE warns their protective value is limited; they should not be relied on as the primary control. Exposure must be assessed as A(8) daily vibration exposure in m/s2 and compared to the statutory action values.

How a specialist can help

Competent occupational hygiene support is often decisive in preventing harm and avoiding enforcement. A specialist can:

carry out a formal vibration risk assessment and measure worker daily vibration exposure using calibrated equipment;
interpret results against the Control of Vibration at Work Regulations 2005 and HSE guidance;
recommend practical, costed control measures such as tool replacement, engineering modifications and job rotation schedules;
design and document a health surveillance programme or advise on referral to occupational health;
produce a clear written report suitable for management records and, if necessary, for regulators.

If warning signs appear - persistent tingling, loss of grip, colour changes in fingers - start with a simple self-check of task frequency and tool condition, then arrange a formal assessment where daily use is regular or symptoms are present. Our team and laboratory provide evidence-led measurement with calibrated instruments, statutory comparison and clear reporting for management and regulatory records.

Key takeaways

The Drury Engineering Services fine shows HAVS prosecutions can follow unassessed exposure and worker harm.
Employers must assess hand arm vibration risks, measure exposure in m/s2 A(8) and act where action values are reached; see the Control of Vibration at Work Regulations 2005 and HSE guidance.
Controls should follow the hierarchy: eliminate, substitute, engineer, administrate, then PPE as a last resort.
Health surveillance and training are essential to detect early symptoms and prevent permanent damage.
Arrange competent assessment where workers use hand-held power tools regularly or where any worker reports symptoms suggestive of HAVS.