Managing on luck is not managing safety

In December 2011, SafetyAtWorkBlog reported on a serious misreading of workplace safety by the President of the Australian Hotels Association in South Australia (AHA/SA), Peter Hurley.  The debate on new work health and safety laws in South Australia continues and on 7 September on radio station FIVEAA, according to an interview transcript (not available on-line), Peter Hurley continued to display his misunderstanding of OHS laws and principles even though SafeWorkSA responded at the time.   The broader significance of his comments is that they could provide an example of the way that OHS myths are created through anecdote and misunderstanding.

Hurley reportedly said:

“..last year one of our hotels was subjected to some very aggressive inspectorate activity and among a myriad of other nit-picking things that we were instructed that we had to comply with was an instruction that we had to deck out our bottle shop staff in high vis apparel so if someone wandered in and wanted to have a discussion about the nuances of one vintage of Grange against another, they were going to have stand there and talk to a bloke who looked like he was working on a building site … Continue reading “Managing on luck is not managing safety”

Economic opportunities in the need to comply

Standards Australia may have been going through difficult financial times but the company that sells the documents created by Standards Australia is doing very well.

The Australian Financial Review on 26 May 2010 (not available online) reported on the continuing growth of SAI Global and the increasingly important role it may play in the United States’s emphasise on compliance.  The AFR reports that the company receives 22% of its revenue from the US and growth in sales is tipped to reach 22% in 2009/10.  So it is a good investment option but its influence may also be important to note for those corporate OHS professionals who operate in a world of compliance, best practice and audits. Continue reading “Economic opportunities in the need to comply”

A personal insight into BP and the corporate approach to safety

Ross Macfarlane is a regular reader of SafetyAtWorkBlog and an active safety professional in Australia.  Below he provides his perspective on BP’s approach to safety as an ex-employee [links added]:

As an ex-BP employee I am again feeling a strong sense of dismay at what is occurring in the Gulf of Mexico.  The fact that BP appears to be deliberately distancing itself from Deepwater is a further shift from the radical openness policy that prevailed up until the Texas City disaster in 2005.

Prior to Texas City, BP was in the thrall of its charismatic CEO (then Sir John, now Lord Browne,) but since then, it seems to me, it struggles with its identity and its corporate culture.  In 2000, when I became a part of BP with Castrol, I was struck by what I saw as a “Cult of Lord Browne” – Continue reading “A personal insight into BP and the corporate approach to safety”

Government can do much better on level crossing safety

The Victorian Government is likely to say the Auditor-General’s report into “Management of Safety Risks at Level Crossings“, released on 24 March 2010, supports the government’s initiatives.  This is true but the report says much more than just describing the State Government’s efforts as “satisfactory”.  (If my child’s report card said satisfactory, I would be talking to the teacher about why the performance was only “satisfactory”)

The report summary says the following:

“The rate of progress in improving safety and reducing accidents has been satisfactory.  There are, however, elements of the risk management framework and its application that can be improved.”
These elements are specified as
  • “improving how the committee is informed of the views of the rail managers, who run train services and maintain the infrastructure, about their risks and priorities
  • assembling information that will allow the committee to effectively manage and monitor the delivery of the Towards Zero strategy
  • improving the understanding of what causes level crossing collisions.” [link added]

Clearly the Parliamentary committee is not getting the full risk story from the rail managers. Continue reading “Government can do much better on level crossing safety”

OHS due diligence and safety management

In the February 2010 newsletter for Australian law firm, DLAPhillips Fox, Andrew Ball and Donna Trembath wrote about one of the important elements of the model Work, Health & Safety Act – due diligence.   We look at how SafetyAtWorkBlog and other OHS information services can support due diligence on OHS matters.

Ball and Trembath list 6 elements in the definition of due diligence (in bold):

Acquire and have up to date knowledge of work OHS matters.

This first element is where business and OHS information sources are going to be crucial supporters.  OHS law in Australia has always supported the need for companies and safety professionals to maintain a current state of knowledge.  There have always been newsletters on OHS issues but it is very easy to fall into a habit of reading only the information that will assist one in their job rather than getting information that relates to safety throughout a workplace.  The use of Health & Safety representatives or OHS Committees can be important in maintaining a “corporate” state of knowledge.  Delegation of reading information can be very useful and HSRs and OHS Committees are probably the most neglected preventative tools in the safety professionals toolbox. Continue reading “OHS due diligence and safety management”

iPods, child labour and excessive working hours

A media report in The First Post on 1 March 2010 includes some good news and some bad news.

Apple has addressed some child labour concerns in several Chinese factories that manufacturer its products – the good news.  The bad news is that children were allowed to work in these factories in the first place.

This illustrates not only the importance of  policies on contractor management, supply chain responsibility and corporate social responsibility but the vital significance of auditing and enforcement.

Apple’s Supplier Responsibility 2010 Progress Report is available online.

A curiosity in the media report is the mention of maximum working hours.  Apple sets a maximum working week at 60 hours.  The Chinese Government applies a 49 hour week.  To which “law” does a company comply?  Should a supply company be in a position of choosing?  Should Apple even consider setting a working hour for its workers that exceeds the limit set by a country’s government?

Kevin Jones

Increasing demand on standards should cause the Australian Government to plan longterm

In August 2009, SafetyAtWorkBlog reported that Standards Australia had been hit hard by the global financial crisis.  To our knowledge, circumstances have not changed but a report in the Australian Financial Review (not available online) on 17 February talked positively about the future of the organisation that publishes the Australian Standards, SAI Global.  Australian Standards are widely used by business and safety professionals.

The report says the company, SAI-Global

“…posted a 33 per cent rise in first-half net profit to $13.7 million on the previous corresponding period, beating analysts’  forecasts by more than 10 per cent.” Continue reading “Increasing demand on standards should cause the Australian Government to plan longterm”

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