Last night SafetyAtWorkBlog interviewed Rex Hoy, Group Manager with Safe Work Australia, the national safety awards night in Canberra. A podcast of an exclusive interview with Rex is available now.
Safe Work Australia Awards – Interview with Rex Hoy
Category: business
Safe Work Australia Awards 2008
Safe Work Australia is a fairly new configuration for Australia’s OHS department but it’s awards have been going for some years. On 28 April 2009 the awards were held in Canberra. The timings don’t seem quite right but that is the scheduling of these sorts of things in Australia.
The award winners from the State events are nominated for national awards, usually, conducted six months later. SafetytWorkBlog has written elsewhere about the need to review this system.
The winners this evening were congratulated by the Workplace Relations Minister and Deputy Prime Minister, Julie Gillard and were
- ETSA Utilities(SA) for best OHS managemetn system
- The Dorsal Boutique Hotel(NSW) for best OHS solution
- WP Projects(NSW) for best OHS practice in small business
- Eraring Energy(NSW) for a leadership in injury management
- Viki Coad (SA) for best individual OHS contribution
The obvious peculiarity in the award winners is the absence of winners from Victoria, Western Australia and Queensland, states with large populations and/or large mining sectors.
The Dorsal Boutique Hotel gained considerable kudos in New South Wales’s awards in October 2008 with its bed elevator that reduces the need for housekeepers to bend when making the beds. It is a good example of thinking further into the problem and asking why beds are designed the way they are and why can’t we change it. It has a limited use but considerable appeal to the millions of hotels around the world. More information can be found on the solution at the NSW WorkCover Awards site.
It is always more gratifying to see successful things rather than successful programs as the things are often transferable to many workplaces and are visual solutions to problems, sometimes problems we weren’t aware of. Leadership and management awards are more a recognition that a company has taken safety seriously which has been a legislative requirement on business for decades. There is little innovation to show in these areas. More the award is for the fact that known techniques have been applied in difficult work situations or industry sectors or company configurations.
This is not to say the effort of the award winners is less valuable than tangible solutions but often these changes come from a changed management structure or a traumatic event or new focus from the board. It is easier to understand the significance of these OHS “agents for change” when focusing on an individual achievement. The award for Viki Coad is a great example of the difference one person can make. It is these achievements that should be more widely applauded.
Indeed readers could benefit greatly from looking at the State winners in this individual category for that is where inspiration can be found.
(Kevin was invited to attend the awards event by Safe Work Australia)
Vision statements = hypocrisy (mostly)
I have experienced two situations recently which made me question the value of corporate mission statements.
Recently the CEO of an Australian company spoke about how safety was a core value and how committed to safety she was. She is a recognised leader in safety and directly involves herself in safety management and meetings. However, her employees in the audience were shaking their heads because the safety culture she espoused was not as widespread through the company structure as she believed.
The other situation was a staff meeting I attended with a regional CEO and International CEO where they were unaware that employees in regional offices and undertaking shiftwork had not been integrated into the corporation. In fact the shiftworkers had not been informed of the CEO visits until the last minute. The company has “integration” as a corporate value.
Leadership (a most dubiously-applied concept in my mind) and vision statements may “come from the top” but they do not flow by themselves to the four corners of a company. They must be worked on, almost as a full time mission.
Vision statements have been promoted in so many corporations that have fallen over through mismanagement that statements have become a bit of a joke, in most circumstances. Nothing kills motivation quicker than hypocrisy.
(This also occurs in organisations that begin a program of corporate restructure and positioning, and the first item on the agenda is a “sexy new logo.)
It is important to remember that Enron’s motto was “Respect, Integrity, Communication and Excellence.” If one thinks that Enron is an unfair corporate example, look at one’s own company statement and seriously ask yourself whether all elements of the company are operating to those standards. Perhaps, someone needs to provide corporate morality audits.
Lastly, any vision statement must accept and mention that the principal aim of any company is to make money (a fact I learnt from Peter Sandman). To omit this reality immediately shows that the statement is not grounded and is simply management spin.
The value of brevity in government submissions and business reports
In Australia, at the moment, there are several governmental inquiries that could involve safety management issues. Submissions to inquiries can often be bloated with information that a review panel already knows or can be off topic. Frequently, relevant but not essential information is included in the body of the submission where it could be just as easily included in an appendix.
Past experience in handling Cabinet submissions has indicated that a brief listing of the recommendations or requests is best, as this makes it much easier for the review panels to digest. People tend to forget that their submission is going to be one of, perhaps, hundreds, and that brevity is highly valued in the public service (except perhaps in their own publications and reports?).
This position on brevity is one that should also be applied to client reports concerning workplace safety. Many consultants forget that their clients are already very familiar with their own workplace and don’t need to be shown “how to suck eggs”.
Engagement is Consultation re-badged
Recently an international business established an intranet discussion forum concerning “employee engagement”. By and large, this is another example of business management twaddle.
Essentially, when one engages with another, there is discussion, a conversation and the sharing of ideas in a cooperative, positive manner. In OHS circles this is called “consultation”. By discussing issues, people learn the basics, they refine their understandings and, often, come to a consensus or a resolution.
“Engagement” is another word for what happens on a daily basis in workplaces everywhere. What is bothersome is when a new management term is generated in order to, primarily, sell a new management book, and in a much lower priority, to provide a new perspective.
In the current edition of Australia’s business magazine, BRW, there is a discussion on engagement, (not available online). Through an OHS perspective, interpret the following quotes about “employee engagement scores):
“About 40 per cent of employees were failing at the most basic level, saying they either didn’t know what was expected of them or didn’t have the tools to do it.”
OHS = consultation, job description, induction, supervision.
“Those in a leadership position now are taking advantage and redoubling their efforts around employee engagement.”
OHS = leadership, safety culture
The article makes a useful distinction that an “engaged employee” does not equal a “happy employee”.
The BRW article does not, however, discuss the possible downsides of engagement. There is a risk that benchmarking of engagement may applied inappropriately and, according to the CIPD:
“Research confirms however that there is a significant gap between levels of engagement found among UK employees and those that would produce optimum performance. HR professionals need to recognise that engagement is a strategic issue that cannot simply be left to manage itself.”
Engagement is another tool for management but just how many tools are needed?
In short, a management system needs to talk with employees, listen to employees, and support employees. Wow, how radical. It can be that simple.
Cost of occupational injuries and illnesses rise
According to a report in the Australian Financial Review (page 5, not available online) on 14 April 2009, the costs of work-related injury and disease has increased to $A57.5 billion. This represents 5.9% of the country’s gross domestic product, up from 5% in 2000-01.
Of perhaps more concern is the sectors of society which are estiimated to bear these increasing costs. 49% of costs are borne by workers, 47% by the community and 3% by the employers. Even if the insurance costs were allocated to employers, this would only amount to 18% of the injury and diseases costs.
The figures from the report conducted by the Australian Safety & Compensation Council could justify the push by some in the OHS profession to move workplace safety into the area of public health. Regardless, the spread of the cost should be borne in mind when OHS organisations lobby government for more support and attention.
BHP Billiton deaths – government intervention
The West Australian government has taken the extraordinary step of talking directly to the senior management of Australian mining corporation BHP Billiton about the recent spate of fatalities at BHP’s worksites. The cynic would say that we now know the number of workplace fatalities that it takes to gain a Minister’s attention however, the fact that this high-level meeting is occurring is a clear indication of the severity of the issue. It may also indicate just how effective a union safety campaign can be. It is just regrettable the campaign is generated from multiple fatalities rather than preventive issues.
According to the Minister, Nick Moore
“Mines inspectors will now issue prohibition notices to BHP under the Mines Safety and Inspection Act 1994 – basically a stop work notice – for any breach of work practices or work place conditions that may constitute a hazard to workers.”
Mr Moore went on to say, according to one media article, “…the policy would remain in force until he had seen the report of a Section 45 review currently under way into safety management systems at all of BHP Billiton’s Pilbara iron ore mine sites.”
The article noted that
“The review, requiring independent engineering studies of BHP worksites to be carried out, is expected to be completed by April 30.”
BHP, meanwhile, has given guarantees of the following safety improvements:
- Reduce site access;
- Improve contractor management;
- Enhance existing strategies to prevent excess working hours;
- Move rail operations from the Mine Safety and Inspection Act to the Rail Safety Act;
- Enhance traffic management standards, and;
- Suspend all non-essential work outside daylight hours