UnionsWA looking for the WHS pot of gold

Recently WorkSafeWA released its annual workplace safety performance data. One of the most dramatic findings of the report was that

“Work fatalities average one death every 21 days…”

UnionsWA has used this finding to criticise the West Australian government for not signing up to the model Work Health and Safety laws. There is a logic jump that needs serious questioning.

The media release (not yet available online) states that:

“… the WA Government has refused to sign-up to national health and safety to make the system clearer and simpler for everyone.

“It has insisted on keeping weaker penalties for employers who fail to maintain safe workplace, has poorer protections for whistle-blowers and wants to make it harder to prosecute breaches of work safety laws.

“In 2012 the Barnett Government consulted around its proposed weaker safety laws.

“There has been no outcome from those consultations, no policy announcement, no legislation.

“With that record, and in the face of this latest crisis of serious work injuries, it’s hard to avoid the conclusion that the Barnett Government simply doesn’t rate work safety as a priority.”

As with most media statements it is essential to read the source document to see if the claims are substantiated. It is true that work fatalities average one death every 21 days but there has been a recent improvement, a variation acknowledged by UnionsWA but rarely mentioned or downplayed in media reports. The report notes that the fatality data is based on the most recent five-year data. By looking further back the perspective is that the fatality rate remains unacceptably high but that improvements in the rate have been occurring.

The WorkSafeWA key findings include other important data, such as:

“Around two workers are injured every hour seriously enough to take one or more days/shifts off work.”

Given that thousands more people are injured at work than die at work, it could be argued that these injuries have a greater or broader social impact than fatalities, although workplace deaths are likely to have a greater social intensity.

The longer term data for workplace injuries shows a decline in the Lost Time Injury Frequency Rate (LTIFR) over time. The 9.23 LTIFR for 2011-12 is a slight improvement on the previous year but represents an almost 11% improvement over the previous five years and a 73.8% increase since the most recent OHS laws were introduced in 1998/89.

UnionsWA’s criticism of the conservative Barnett Government stance towards WHS laws is harsh when one looks at the improvement over time of injury rates and the implication that the WHS laws will have an effect on fatalities and injury rates is unproven and dubious.

The problems and deficiencies identified by the unions imply that by introducing improvements in certain areas, workplace can be made safer. It infers that stronger penalties will cause employers to make workplaces safer. Maybe, but penalties result from prosecutions and prosecutions are conducted by well-resourced OHS regulators who have the will to prosecute. There are many steps between an OHS breach and a penalty. The model WHS laws do nothing to remove these steps.

The unions believe that whistleblowing on OHS matters needs to be made easier through legislation. The laws could achieve this but it takes a brave (of foolish, depending on one’s perspective) person to report OHS breaches in a workplace that sees such actions as traitorous or where such actions will result in the whistleblower’s dismissal. Changing the laws does not make the act any easier. A better strategy would be to educate companies on the economic benefits of changing their workplace cultures to one that embraces OHS principles instead of denying them. A change in law, alone, is unlikely to achieve the organisational change required.

Then unions also say that the new laws will make it easier to prosecute for OHS breaches. Perhaps, but only if the laws allow for organisations other than the OHS regulators to undertake such prosecutions. Such a process existed in New South Wales under the previous OHS laws to questionable effect. There were a couple of successful prosecutions but the result was also an intensification of conflict between unions and employers that has only recently settled, but will never go away. And, of course, there remains a question over whether prosecutions generate safer workplaces or simply penalise the perpetrator.

UnionsWA may be right in stating that

“… the Barnett Government simply doesn’t rate work safety as a priority.”

But introducing the model Work Health and Safety laws may not improve the safety of workplace in Western Australia. Safer workplaces could be achieved in other non-legislative ways but these options do not appear to be considered due to a fixation on the WHS laws.

Most businesses in Australia are not cross-jurisdictional so will have little direct benefit from harmonised national OHS laws. Perhaps safer workplaces can be created by focusing on the State-based economics, laws and relationships instead of waiting for the pot of gold at the end of the legislative rainbow. Just perhaps it is better the Devil you know.

Kevin Jones

Categories Barnett, government, hazards, industrial relations, law, OHS, politics, safety, Uncategorized, union

5 thoughts on “UnionsWA looking for the WHS pot of gold”

  1. Agree with Humphrey.
    Education is a weak solution at best with plenty of past failures in this sphere to prove that employers are not that interested. They still see OHS/ WHS as a burden. A better solution is to link OHS with workers comp and provide financial incentives (not grants) for incentivising the system.

    Also mining companies in WA are cross jurisdictional.

    1. A union bashing exercise does not save one life, I can tell incredible stories from the past of working under shocking conditions. I heard yesterday that the worst builder I ever encountered has just gone bust- good riddance.This may be one of the companies that Stephen talks of, its easy to blame OHS laws or the unions for owns own incompetance.
      The builder that I speak of was a shocker, so bad that I eventually got a call one night from the then minister, a disgrace to the Labor Party.
      I dobbed the builder in and what happened- NOTHING.
      Maybe its time I became a more effective whistle blower and tell the story- it wouldnt win me any brownie points though, I would no doubt go on some blacklist.This is why whistle blower protection is vital as are real financial penalties.At the moment a workers like is worth about 2/6.

  2. Agree with Humphrey – disagree that \”A better strategy would be to educate companies on the economic benefits of changing their workplace cultures to one that embraces OHS principles instead of denying them. A change in law, alone, is unlikely to achieve the organisational change required.\” Educating companies is not new and has had no demonstrable effect so far. Employers still see OHS/ WHS as a burden/ expense. Education is not nearly enough – there needs to be financial incentives (not grants) and links with workers comp legislation. Perhaps harmonisation with workers comp.

    Also mining companies in WA are cross jurisdictional.

  3. of course educating unions might also be an option given the hisotry over the last 20 years. Consider some of the admissions and findings out of the Cole commission about what members did on sites to sabotage and then make complaints. Consider also that since the federal harmonisation other states have been busy ever since amending teh WHS legislation to try and improve it further. this should have happed at the start – removing the glitches, not creating more. It was never about harmonisation but about rationalisation. It was never about safety but about productivity – people should read the reports of the last 20 years to get a full perspective, getting rid of reverse onus of proof, absolute liability, having an incident on your site being prime facie evidence of negligence, having certain organisations pay theirr members fines. I totally agree one death, one injury is one too many, especially if it is in your workplace, but when you see companies going into liquidiation and 60-70 persons (plus families) suddenly not having jobs, no income, impacts on social fabvbrics, housing, etc, that is also an equally devestating tragedy.
    Read some of the minutes from the meetings of the Sate government ministeres on the WHS, – talk about government backflips by the Feds.
    Lets\’ get it as right as we can before it is legislated – its not that we arent going there, its better to wait and do a better job rather than create more problems. South Australia recently enacted their new legislation – addressed many of the same issues that has been raised in WA to start with. dont talk about others such as unions being allowed to preosecute – just look how that worked in NSW. A joke.

  4. I dont think your argument holds much water, Kevin.You cant be serious about whistle blowers not being under threat, they always are.And trying to convince builders that better OHS is good for them is a joke, many of them are still cowboys.
    The stories I hear of safety breaches up north even on Rio and BHP sites are terrible, and this is 2013.Then we have the thousands of 457 visa holders who cant speak, read or write English- a clear breach.
    I have just done the Cert 1V and I cant believe that we still have this hodge podge of laws and regulations in one country.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.