Sunraysia TAFE fined $20,000 after apprentice’s shirt catches fire during oxy-acetylene cutting, with leather jackets hanging in the classroom

Leather welding jackets were hanging on a coat rack in the classroom when a 19-year-old apprentice’s shirt caught fire during oxy-acetylene cutting at Sunraysia Institute of TAFE’s Mildura campus. Students had been trained and required to wear the jackets only for arc welding.

The Mildura Magistrates’ Court fined the TAFE $20,000 without conviction and ordered it to pay costs of $11,601, following a WorkSafe Victoria prosecution under the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004. The TAFE pleaded guilty.

On 27 June 2024, the third-year heavy diesel mechanic apprentice was at the campus for his block training, which he attended for a week, once every six weeks. He was using an oxy-acetylene cutting tool on a steel beam when the front of his 100% cotton shirt ignited. Unable to put the fire out, he took off his clothing. He was burned on the stomach, chest, neck, face and left hand.

The TAFE’s theory materials addressed protective equipment for oxy-acetylene work. Documents it gave students, which it produced during WorkSafe’s investigation, listed goggles, boots and overalls as “some” of the standard protective equipment for oxy-acetylene cutting, and stated that oxy-acetylene welding called for protective clothing, including a protective apron. A video in the materials told students that oxy-acetylene cutting involves extremely high temperatures and that operators should wear, among other items, “overalls that button to the neck and cuffs, and a protective apron”.

In pleading guilty, the TAFE accepted that requiring students to wear a leather jacket or leather apron during oxy-acetylene cutting was a reasonably practicable way to reduce the risk of serious injury or death from sparks or flames. Since the incident, leather welding jackets have been compulsory for all students using the oxy-acetylene cutting tool.

Under section 6AAA of the Sentencing Act 1991, the court said that without the guilty plea it would have imposed a fine of $30,000 with conviction.

The court said the plea had “particular significance”. The TAFE had a strong basis to contest the charge, it said, because current industry standards and practices do not make leather jackets or aprons mandatory and have not changed since the incident. Despite this, the TAFE accepted “that it should have operated at a higher standard”. The plea also meant the apprentice did not have to attend court to give evidence.

The court assessed the TAFE’s departure from its duty as low and the risk as moderate. It put the likelihood of the risk eventuating at the lower end, given how long the TAFE had run such activities without any prior incident, and rated the objective seriousness of the breach at the lower end. The court said the TAFE evidently takes safety seriously, as the incident happened in a classroom where students were given safety documents, videos and instructions, and that “there is no blatant disregard to safety”.

The court took the apprentice’s victim impact statement into account and acknowledged that the incident had serious and lasting effects on his physical, social and psychological wellbeing. It also considered the costs sought by WorkSafe.

The case concerns a control measure that, according to the court, current industry standards and practices do not mandate. The TAFE nonetheless accepted through its plea that leather protection for oxy-acetylene cutting was reasonably practicable.

Source: WorkSafe Victoria, 20 October 2026

General information only. OnNotice reports developments in Australian industrial relations, human resources and workplace law. This article is for education purposes only and is not intended to form professional advice. Always confirm against the primary source and seek specific advice relating to your circumstances.