Safe Work Australia has just published a summary report of its review into best practice. It is a curious document, essentially a summary of the perspectives of many organisations interested in occupational health and safety (OHS), particularly regarding OHS laws. It is an important distinction that this review was not about OHS but the laws that we use to provide safe and healthy work.
Australian occupational health and safety (OHS) is moving from a focus on interventions at the individual worker level to examination of the operational and managerial systems that may cause or encourage harm and incidents, especially in relation to psychological safety at work.
Although a new book from the United States does not address OHS specifically, its long title indicates its relevance – “It’s On You – How the Rich and Powerful Have Convinced Us That We’re to Blame for Society’s Deepest Problems”.
For the last few years in Australia, occupational health and safety (OHS) laws have required that the prevention of psychosocial hazards be given the same prominence as the prevention of physical hazards. The most effective recommendation for change is the redesign of work, but very few employers seem to be applying this control. Many employers are still asking (their Human Resources officer) what this psychosocial stuff is all about.
Examining organisational culture at one Australian institution that failed to prevent and may have generated psychological harm in the 1970s provides some context for contemporary OHS struggles.
Every company seems to have a Mission Statement, a Values Statement, or something similar that all employees are expected to follow and comply with. Largely, these are aspirational statements, but they are sometimes invoked when/if an employee needs to be disciplined or dismissed. The values are often vague and lend themselves to various interpretations, even though compliance is expected and is usually part of the employment contract.
At the moment, some conservative politicians, such as Angus Taylor, are emphasising the need for citizens and immigrants to commit to and comply with “Australian values”. How he plans to enforce them is unclear, but most of his proposed values have direct impacts on how occupational health and safety (OHS) is likely to be managed.
Lindsay Fitzclarence‘s travelogue “The Dirty Life of Mining in Australia” is a thought-provoking work that combines social, economic, industrial, indigenous, and environmental perspectives into a journey across Australia. Occupational health and safety (OHS) is one theme, but it is part of many, and the book is better for it.
Continue reading “Travelling Through Australia’s Beautiful and Broken Mining Country”The most popular solution to physical and psychological occupational health and safety (OHS) problems is leadership. Leadership is crucial to implementing changes to work processes and policies that can prevent harm, yet we often view leadership as executive benevolence, without really examining executive leadership in modern workplaces.
Looking at current leadership traits through a different lens may help us understand why it continues to be so difficult to improve worker health and safety.
Every summer in Australia, it seems we are in crisis. Somewhere there is a bushfire, and somewhere else there are cyclones and floods. Somewhere, there are places that experience these two extremes almost at the same time. In all these circumstances, Australians expect strong, effective and compassionate leaders. These expectations affect how corporate executives behave and employ their “soft skills”.
