The awarding of safety awards by government OHS authorities in Australia have needed reviewing for some time. There remains inconsistencies on the openness of the judging processes and differences in award categories. In 2009, John Holland’s award nomination was withdrawn and now, according to the a video report on TV program Today Tonight in Adelaide, another safety award has been withdrawn.
According to the Today Tonight (click on SafeWork story on the left of the screen or in archives) South Australian manufacturing company Harsco has had its award withdrawn because the company fudged its safety performance figures. The media release issued on 21 January 2011 by SafeWorkSA, the regulator managing the state-based awards, says:
“After careful consideration, the Panel has decided to rescind the award presented to Harsco Metals in the category of Private Sector Employer of the Year on the basis of anomalies in the interpretation and presentation of injury claims data made in the award entry.”
SafeworkSA is at pains to stress the ongoing integrity of the awards process but this action, emphasised by the attention given to the issue by Today Tonight, is a serious blow.
However, some good has come from the incident. SafeworkSA says:
“In order to avoid such confusion in future, the judging criteria will explicitly state the preferred means of interpreting and presenting injury claims data for all award entrants.”
“The award, given annually to the contractor who has made the greatest contribution to safety, health and the environment throughout SABIC’s global operations, recognizes Harsco’s exceptional safety performance at SABIC’s Geleen petrochemicals plant in the Netherlands. Harsco has worked at the site for more than three years without any EU-OSHA violations.”
“This award reaffirms the pre-eminent importance of safety to our customers, our employees and our entire Harsco organization,”
“All nominations for the annual awards are adjudicated by a team of SafeWork SA representatives and after review and assessment the process moves to auditing and interviewing nominees to determine the award winner.”
SafeWorkSA has advised SafetyAtWorkBlog that TodayTonight was provided with a list of the judging criteria for the category Harsco nominated for. These criteria are listed below.
The judging criteria was made available to all applicants as part of the \”Call for Entries\” booklet available at the time.
It is reasonable for government authorities to be wary when responding to or participating in some of the tabloid journalism coverage. For instance, many of the speed camera stories that are run have no participation or response from the camera authorities, road authorities or police. From personal experience, in relation to my own appearance on TodayTonight regarding the safety of roof insulation installers, one must be guarded in what one says, think before answering and resist the temptation to offer an opinion that is outside one\’s area of expertise. It would have been easy to provide an emotive comment on installers allowing children to roam about a roof but I was well aware that it was the emotive and not the professional comment that would have made it to air.
TodayTonight, in its own way and style, has brought attention to the actions of SafeWorkSA in relation to the OHS award for Harsco. This is a legitimate newsworthy issue but to accept TodayTonight\’s coverage of any issue as definitive is a mistake.
SafeWorkSA is still working through the ramifications of its decision of last week. There is much to do to regain credibility for its awards process and to re-establish trust and reliability with South Australian businesses and the community generally. After the Harsco incident, the reputational risk of the organisation is heightened. It could be argued this increased risk applies to all State OHS award processes. The challenge is to stop a recurrence and the challenge presents an opportunity for broader reform of the process.
The SAfeWork Awards panels do not have any injured worker representation on any of them.
The tragic thing is Tony is correct, there has not been any reduction in workplace incidents or workplace deaths or suicides as a result of the workplace regardless of all the money spent on promoting the SAfeWork Awards. Likewise the WorkCover Awards are just as \”pliable\” and have not had any impact on the wider workplace in regard to successful return to pre-injury employment.
Tha Awards are little more than a feel good for those who put them events together, but have no real meaning on the shopfloor.
Show me where there is one accident less as a result of \”Safety Awards\” based on submission without physical inspection by an independent panel not associated with either the promoter or the applicant.
The credibility of these awards has been in question for some considerable time and in the main, the application for for an award is based on the marketing requirements for the applying organization, usually a supplier to an industry such as the defense industry where the receipt of an OHSW award may provide an advantage over others in the quest for business.
On the basis of the foregoing, there is a real incentive to fudge the figures and from my experience in judging business awards, where an application is put to the test at the place of business, there is usually a propensity to some exaggeration which those with experience will \”sniff out\”, including those that are deliberately misleading.