The reality of needing to provide psychologically healthy and safe work seems to have been widely accepted, if not still well understood, if the number of corporate work-related psychological assessment and management programs is any indication. One of the most recent is “The Psychosocial Safety Blueprint” published by Culture Plus Consulting’s Felicity Menzies. The blueprint is interesting until the document’s marketing purpose starts to dominate.
Australian trade unions rarely campaign solely on the basis of occupational health and safety (OHS), meaning without supplementary aims such as increased wages or remuneration. Below are some examples, but they are few and usually in the wake of an industrial disaster. There are a couple of prominent union OHS campaigners, but we rarely hear of them after their passing, and many of their contributions are remembered more through internal mythologising than through documented reform.
For the last few years, McDonald’s in the United Kingdom has been embroiled in scandals involving the harassment and sexual harassment of staff by other staff members. As McDonald’s is an international company with similar operational systems of work, how would the Australian arm of the company react to a similar situation?
Every year, Australia conducts a Farm Safety Week. The latest has just closed. Every year, the safety information is fundamentally the same: deaths, serious injuries, tractors or quad bikes, middle- to old-aged workers, mental health, the protection of children and more. But there are a couple of interesting variations this year from WorkSafe Victoria.
Australian business media, especially the Australian Financial Review (AFR), continues to oppose the Victorian (Labor) government’s intention to make working from home (WFH) a formal right and entitlement. Every week, the mainstream media report on the latest research that criticises the move on the basis of productivity impacts, restrictions on career progress and other business negatives; occasionally, very occasionally, some positives are reported – better mental health, reduced living and commuter costs, flexibility for family duties and obligations.
Workplace bullying has a habit of becoming visible only after harm has already occurred. In 2010, the 2006 death of 19-year-old Brodie Panlock became the point at which many Australians first understood that bullying at work was not merely a Human Resources (HR) irritant, or a personality weakness, or one of those unfortunate things that happens in a rough workplace somewhere else. It was an occupational health and safety (OHS) issue.
Please note that this article discusses suicide and mental trauma.
I am old enough to remember the work-related suicide of Brodie Panlock in 2006, meaning this year is the 20th anniversary. Her death, the findings of the Victorian Coroner and the prosecution by WorkSafe Victoria are pivotal to how workplace bullying and mental health at work are seen and managed today. But there is a generation of young workers who may be unaware of her case.
This series of articles trace that failure of prevention across three stages: the immediate OHS significance of the Café Vamp prosecution, the public and legal response through Brodie’s Law and national inquiries, and the continuing relevance of psychosocial hazard prevention under modern OHS duties.
The articles are based on the original SafetyAtWorkBlog articles from 2010 onwards. Today, here is a brief reminder of what Brodie Panlock experienced.
Please note that this article and those following discuss suicide and mental trauma.
