A major barrier to change is that Australia, as a whole, has never subjected its occupational health and safety (OHS) laws to a detailed analysis to determine whether the legislation and the supportive documentation works. To be clearer, Australia has never subjected its laws to a “safety clutter” analysis. No one seems to have tried to determine if the laws have any positive benefit on operational safety?
Recently the Finance Sector Union (FSU) released a small study on ethics and capitalism. The report illustrates how poor corporate ethics and greed created a disregard for the mental health of the finance industry’s workers as well as the financial and mental health of its customers.
The report – “Justice Tempered – How the finance sector’s captivity to capitalist ethics violates workers’ ethical integrity and silences their claims for justice” – was written by John Bottomley, Brendan Byrne and John Flett. Although it is based on detailed interviews with only eight finance sector workers, the authors use these conversations as a catalyst for broader discussions of ethics with extensive cross referencing of relevant, books, publications and, especially, the findings and report of the Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry.
Business management, including safety management, talks about “step changes”, new paradigms and a lot of jargon. Part of the use of this language is an attempt to manage progress and change in small comprehensible chunks. But it can also expose business owners to short-term fads, giving rise to frustration and cynicism about occupational health and safety (OHS).
One example of the step change mindset was on display several years ago in LinkedIn where the image above was posted, sadly, with no context. The before/after structure of this graphic is often used in the management of workplace health and safety.
The Australian Institute of Safety and Health’s online national conference offered some big topics this year. One of the most anticipated was the discussion of sexual harassment in the workplace. Luckily the panel discussion included big hitters such as Sex Discrimination Commissioner Kate Jenkins whose week was about to get a lot busier with the revelations of sexual harassment by Australia’s High Court Justice Dyson Heydon.
The Dyson Heydon sexual harassment accusations, which he emphatically denies, were revealed in an independent investigation for the High Court of Australia. The Justice Heydon case has generated copious media attention for many reasons including his prominence in a politically-charged Royal Commission into Trade Union Governance and Corruption. His sexual harassment offences are awful, but the most startling revelations are not necessarily about one man’s inappropriate actions. Here was an organisational, maybe even a professional, culture that permitted this behaviour to continue unchallenged for many many years. It is this context that, I believe, offers the most significant lessons for the occupational health and safety (OHS) profession and where OHS skills can help others.
Honda, Yamaha, Suzuki and Polaris have previously announced that they will no longer be supplying quad bikes to the Australian market in response to the imposition of new safety standards. This has left a hole in the market for agricultural all-terrain vehicles (ATVs) that CFMOTO is happy to fill by including an Australian-made crush protection device (CPD) with the sale of some of its quad bikes.
Several Australian farmers continue to be unhappy about the removal of some models of quad bikes from the market. The Weekly Times reported on one disgruntled quad bike dealer, Craig Hartley. What the newspaper article failed to mention was that Hartley’s dealership is with Honda, Yamaha and KTM or that the dealership has been on the market since 2014 but it did include this quote from Hartley:
“Many rural motorcycle businesses, which support the ag industry throughout Australia, may have to close the doors as quad bikes are in many cases at least 40 per cent, if not more, of their turnover.”
Dr Tom Doig has continued to build on his earlier work about the Morwell mine fire, expanding his “The Coal Face” from 2015 into his new book “Hazelwood” (after court-related injunctions, now available on 18 June 2020).
SPECIAL OFFER: The first four (4) new Annual subscribers in the month of June 2020 will receive a copy of Hazelwood.
The Morwell mine fire created great distress to residents in Victoria’s Latrobe Valley, ongoing health problems, and a parliamentary inquiry, but can also be seen as a major case study of occupational health and safety (OHS) laws, enforcement, role and the obligation on employers to provide a safe and healthy working environment that does not provide risks to workers and “protect other people from risks arising from employer’s business”. The management of worker and public safety is present in almost every decision made in relation to the Morwell Mine fire. The overlay of an OHS perspective to Doig’s book is enlightening.
This week I found a research paper in my inbox called “How logical is safety? An institutional logics perspective on safety at work”. The Background and Objective were, respectively:
“Occupational incidents and accidents are still commonplace in the contemporary workplace, despite increased understandings of safety.”
“This article aims to yield new insights into safety-related thinking, decisions and behaviours through the application of an institutional logics perspective.”
As most readers do, I read something and try to link it with ideas, concepts and conversations we have been involved with in the past. My brain tried to fit the use of “institutional logics” with safety culture and then with organisational culture but it did not seem to fit, and I wondered whether I should bother with institutional logics.