Month: June 2010

Even more caffeine research

There is a lot of research going on at the moment into coffee and caffeine.  There seems to be no particular reason but perhaps the increasing sales of “energy drinks” may be relevant.

The latest caffeine-related research is reported in the online edition of Neuropsychopharmacology and is entitled –

“Association of the Anxiogenic and Alerting Effects of Caffeine with ADORA2A and ADORA1 Polymorphisms and Habitual Level of Caffeine Consumption”

(This paper is on my bedside table next to an Inspector Rebus book and the new book from Chris Morphew – not)

This quite complex article is mentioned here as some newspapers and websites are likely publish some of the content of a media release on 3 June 2010 in the context of “another coffee story”.  Research in this area can spark discussion in some media about the dangers and benefits of coffee, in a similar way to how people respond to reports of eating too many tomatoes that may turn you puce, for instance.  Below are parts of the media release that is easiest to understand and are likely for the media to cover:

“The sensation of alertness that comes from a cup of coffee may be an illusion. Continue reading “Even more caffeine research”

What can OHS professionals learn from government program failures?

Marcus Priest of the Australia Financial Review wrote a good article on 2 June 2010 (only available through subscription or hard copy) that illustrates the managerial deficiencies of the Australian Government by looking at the lessons from two governmental investigation reports concerning a large-scale construction program for existing schools and the home insulation scheme.  Priest identifies several issues that should be noted by those who are designing large projects and who need to deal with the government directly

Priest’s opening paragraph is:

“The decisions by the Rudd government to try pull (sic) the country out of a recession by spending billions on schools and free home roofing insulation have come to be regarded as worthy ideas that morphed into a disaster of public administration.”

Marcus says that these reports show an overworked public service, unreasonable government expectations, a disconnection between policy and its real-world application and poor assumptions. Continue reading “What can OHS professionals learn from government program failures?”

The contract for building safe trains is a “dud” according to CEO

The Australian business newspapers and websites are all reporting on the  “dud” contract that Downer EDI has been saddled with over the construction of 78 eight-car trains for New South Wales’ RailCorp.  Market analysts say that company has lost $A1.7 billion in value this year.

CEO Geoff Knox, a man in genuine risk of becoming unemployed, is quoted as saying:

“We do seem to be able to build trains successfully and make good money on other states in this country, but in this state we seem to not do well and others seem to not do well…”

Others can discuss the financial problems of Downer EDI but Knox seems to only look at the contract rather than the reasons behind the “time consuming” design requirements of the contract – The Waterfall rail disaster of January 2003, the commission of inquiry’s reports and the government’s promises.

Continue reading “The contract for building safe trains is a “dud” according to CEO”

Suicides in China – is this a Foxconn problem or an Apple problem?

Foxconn, a large technology manufacturer in China has a cluster of suicides.  This issue is getting more attention than normal in Western media because the company manufactures products for Apple and the Apple iPad went on sale around the world at the same time news about the suicides broke.

The question that must be asked is “is this a Foxconn problem or an Apple problem?” Continue reading “Suicides in China – is this a Foxconn problem or an Apple problem?”

A wicked OHS problem in more ways than one

A new survey on CEO attitudes to safety has been released by Peter Wagner & Associates entitled “Safety – A Wicked Problem, Leading CEOs discuss their views on OHS transformation“.

There is some interesting information in report but Wagner is being generous in the report’s title.  There are some CEOs who seem knowledgeable on safety management who may be “leading”, but there is at least one participant who would not know safety from clay. Continue reading “A wicked OHS problem in more ways than one”

Scissor lift pins worker to door frame

The Victorian Ambulance Service reported a serious and curious workplace incident that occurred on 26 May 2010.  According the Ambulance Service media statement workers found a the 25-year-old man was trapped “with his neck pinned between a door frame and the rails of a scissor lift machine..”.

The worker was not breathing and so workers  moved him to a safe area and commenced CPR. Paramedics needed to place the man in an induced coma in order to insert a breathing tube.  He was taken to hospital in a critical condition and no further details about the patient are publicly available.

WorkSafe advised SafetyAtWorkBlog that it is investigating and believes the incident occurred when the man was manoeuvring a scissor lift through a doorway, and was pinned between the bottom of the door frame and the scissor lift.

There are scant details available at the moment but the incident serves to remind companies about allowing some tasks to be undertaken without supervision and to take additional care with motorised plant.

Kevin Jones

What is the OHS “public interest”?

On 7 May 2010 Judge Lacava of the County Court of Victoria increased the $A25,000 fine applied to A Bending Company to $A75,000.

WorkSafe’s Acting Director for Health and Safety, Stan Krpan, said in a media release:

“The fact that the Director of Public Prosecutions [DPP] found the original penalty inadequate, and the increase in the fine on appeal, demonstrates the courts’ attitude towards health and safety offences.”

The DPP made the appeal to the County Court after a request for review of the original fine was made by WorkSafe Victoria.  According to the judge’s decision (not yet available online):

“The appeal by the Director is made pursuant to section 84 of the Magistrates’ Court Act 1989. The section gives the Director the power to appeal to this Court “if satisfied that an appeal should be brought in the public interest“.” [emphasis added]

So how was the public interest served by increasing the fine by $A50,000? Continue reading “What is the OHS “public interest”?”

© Workplace Safety Services P/L (ABN: 68091088621) and SafetyAtWorkBlog, 2008-2025. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Kevin Jones and SafetyAtWorkBlog with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Concatenate Web Development
© Designed and developed by Concatenate Aust Pty Ltd