A recent investigative report into workplace safety at Los Alamos laboratory in the United States included this statement:
“The Center’s probe revealed worker safety risks, previously unpublicized accidents, and dangerously lax management practices at other nuclear weapons-related facilities. The investigation further found that penalties for these practices were relatively light, and that many of the firms that run these facilities were awarded tens of millions of dollars in profits in the same years that major safety lapses occurred. Some were awarded new contracts despite repeated, avoidable accidents, including some that exposed workers to radiation.”
The whole article deserves reading but this paragraph in particular illustrates that deficiencies in procurement apply to large organisations in high risk sectors just as much as it can in the small to medium-sized business sector. A major reason is that detailed and diligent procurement has been seen as red tape and it seems to have taken disasters like Grenfell Tower to illustrate the moral deficiencies and short-term economic fantasies of
Recently Huffington Post Australia posted a video about male suicides called “Men are killing themselves to be real men”. Many of the speakers talked about their experiences at work or with work. The video is highly recommended.
SafetyAtWorkBlog had the opportunity to talk with the Associate Video Editor, Emily Verdouw. Below is an edited transcript.
On May 1 2017 safetyculture released an e-book called “Confused about Workplace Safety?” intended to address questions commonly asked of them. The topic of most interest is their advocacy of Safe Work Method Statements (SWMS), an activity discussed earlier by SafetyAtWorkBlog.
safetyculture states up front that SWMS are for “high risk construction work” as defined by occupational health and safety (OHS) legislation and lists the activities that make up high risk construction work. But then poses a confusing question:
“So why did my principal contractor request that I supply a SWMS for the plastering or turf laying job I just did?”
High visibility clothing has spread from the work site to the public arena and, as such, has complicated the reasons for hi-viz clothing. However the fundamental underpinning of high-viz is to contrast against the surrounding environment. This contrast does not only relate to clothing but also signage.
Several years ago, a couple of women from Tasmania visited the offices of SafetyAtWorkBlog to discuss the practicality of hi-viz vests for toddlers and small children. The hi-viz logic of the work site is easily applied to the public park or farms. A contrasting colour to the trees or bushland would make it easier to identify someone, like a wayward child. On a work site, the hi-viz is more about identifying a hazard, whether that be a person, an overhead wire or a work boundary.
Jargon can help create a subculture. This can be positive for those on the inside but relies on excluding others. Occupational health and safety (OHS) is no different and one of the best illustrations of OHS jargon is “practicable”. This was emphasised recently in a document released by WorkSafe WA where “practicable” had lost out to “practical”.
The guidance also omitted the duties of builders for the health and safety of those affected by their work.