Alexandra Trandafil Wiki – Alexandra Trandafil Biography
Alexandra Trandafil, 18, was working as a hairdresser when her hair became entangled in a machine at Nippy’s Waikerie packing and processing plant in South Australia in November 2020.
Ms Trandafil’s traumatized co-workers called an ambulance and she was rushed to the Royal Adelaide Hospital. Paramedics had to retrieve her scalp from the machine, but she was only able to reattach part of it during emergency surgery. “She thought she was going to die,” Katherine Eaton, vice president of the SA Employment Tribunal, wrote in her finding. In an instant, her hopeful young life was transformed into shock, trauma, ongoing pain and disfigurement.’ It was the teenager’s first full-time job, taken on a sabbatical to save money for a trip abroad. “Despite the best efforts of the first aid teams and doctors at the Royal Adelaide Hospital, attempts to reattach her scalp were only partially successful,” the ruling said.
Alexandra Trandafil is 18 years old.
Nippy’s Waikerie Producers Pty Ltd was fined $120,000
Three years later, Ms. Trandafil still requires treatment, which she will continue, and she suffered permanent hair loss and scar tissue. The court heard that factory managers called Ms Trandafil’s family, apologized and offered $60,000 in “reparation” and for the cost of travel to Adelaide for treatment. Nippy’s Waikerie Producers Pty Ltd was fined $120,000, despite pleading guilty to one count of breach of duty for health and safety. “She endured not only the pain and shock of her physical injury, but also the terror of looking up and seeing her hair and scalp dangling from the machine in front of her,” Ms Eaton wrote.
The company was warned about the risks to workers of similar equipment seven years before the accident. While the warning did not refer to the same piece of machinery that injured Ms Trandafil, the risks were “exactly the same”, the court said. Nippy’s immediately made safety improvements to the factory and machinery. But the court found that the injury was preventable and that Nippy’s failed to maintain a safe work environment and did not have signs warning of potential hazards. Nippy’s also did not provide training to Ms. Trandafil on the risks of working next to the conveyor belt. The company was also ordered to pay legal costs.;'[