Category: design

OHS Professional magazine is a mish-mash

The Safety Institute of Australia‘s OHS Professional magazine has been out for a couple of editions now and the good news is that it is improving.  The sad part is that it remains well-behind other OHS magazines.

The latest edition has contributions, finally, from a freelance writer, Liam Tung.  Liam is not an OHS professional, to my knowledge, and this shows a little in some of the generalized elements of his articles.  But the articles are at least original content and this addresses a repeated criticism of the magazine.

The SIA runs many OHS conferences but very rarely ever see these as sources of content.  The current edition of OHS Professional comes with a supplement of some article from the 2010 Safety In Action Conference.  It is a good souvenir of the conference but is very thin. Continue reading “OHS Professional magazine is a mish-mash”

The importance of evidence in OHS decision-making

There are a couple of actions in Australia’s OHS profession that are worth linking together.  The first is occurring outside OHS as well and that is the demand for evidence-based decision making.  The second is the push by the Safety Institute of Australia and others to establish a core body of OHS knowledge.

On the first point a recent Editorial in Elsevier’s “Policy and Safety” journal summarise the recent evolution of evidence-based decision making and evidence-based polices (EBP) which gained credence through the governments of Tony Blair particularly.  The editorial states that much of this push is a management strategy

“…based on the common-sense notion that business strategies and directions are underpinned by a solid information base will be superior to navigating without reliable charts and compass.”

In some ways this “notion” may be an assumption or an ideal.  The notion is sound, as far as it goes but, according to the editorial, evidence could be better used informing policy rather than providing the foundation.  Continue reading “The importance of evidence in OHS decision-making”

Safety Cases must become a reality in the US

Some of the media, over the weekend, was critical of BP for not applying a Safety Case to the BP/Deepwater horizon oil rig.  The Safety Case is an established method of assessing risk in high-hazard organisations and should have been applied.  Whether such a technique would have made any difference is debatable as it is hypothetical.

Safety Case regimes have proven effective and are used as a default risk setting in many corporations but the story is not only one of a specific Safety Case missed opportunity.  BP is an example of corporate hypocrisy that supports the cynicism of the community to large corporations whose actions do not reflect their commitment. Continue reading “Safety Cases must become a reality in the US”

New UK podcast on drilling regulation

HSE podcasts are almost always worth listening to.  The June 2010 podcast capitalises on the topicality of offshore oil drilling generated by the BP incident in the Gulf of Mexico.

The podcast is available for listening online

The important element of the podcast is whether such deepwater drilling incidents could occur elsewhere?  This is useful not only for the UK jurisdiction but for Europe and Australia.

The interview discusses the value of a “safety case” regulatory regime and the disadvantages of a prescriptive regime.

Interestingly the UK wells are individually notified to HSE almost a month before drilling is due to commence.  This allows for an assessment of the well design and structure prior to activation.

Clearly, this approach stems from the Piper Alpha explosion in 1988.  The BP Gulf incident can be considered the United States’ Piper Alpha.

It raises the question of did BP, an English company that should have been well aware of the usefulness of the safety case approach to drilling, apply a different approach to its Gulf drilling contractors to that applied elsewhere, and why?  Was BP really committed to “best practice” in safety, or as it called it “beyond the best“?

Explosive impacts from the Quin Investments prosecution still to be felt

The Quin Investment prosecution in South Australia is a good indication of the importance of workplace safety and equipment maintenance.

On 24 June 2010, Quin Investments and one of its directors Nikolai Kuzub were found guilty of breaches of OHS law in South Australia by Industrial Magistrate Ardlie.  The incident involved an explosion at an explosives factory in May 2006 that killed three workers, injured two others and flattened the factory.  Pieces of equipment were located over 600 metres away, houses a kilometre away were damaged and the explosion was heard 40 kilometres away according to one media report.

Grant Germein, the lawyer representing Quin Investments, has asserted a conspiracy from, at least, the start of the court case:

“He said the company was being used as a scapegoat and SafeWork SA’s investigation into the incident was “not directed at the cause of the explosion”, but to “see if they could find a culprit”. Continue reading “Explosive impacts from the Quin Investments prosecution still to be felt”

CSB agrees to investigate the root cause of the BP Deepwater disaster

The chairman of the Chemical Safety Board (CSB), John Bresland, has formally announced his organisation’s investigation into the BP/Deepwater oil rig disaster.  The experience and professionalism of the CSB is evident in correspondence to the U.S. House Committee on Energy and Commerce where the scope is defined and additional resources anticipated.

The letter identifies those current investigations that may need wrapping up quickly so that resources can be diverted to the BP/Deepwater investigation.  This honesty has the advantage of reinforcing that the CSB  is begin called on to undertake tasks beyond its resource allocation and is clearly an opening pitch for the next funding season, as a chairman should do. Continue reading “CSB agrees to investigate the root cause of the BP Deepwater disaster”

New Zealand farm advocates talk briefly on quad bike safety

New Zealand’s Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) has released some statistics on quad bike incidents in support of its attendance at field days in mid-June 2010 and the release of three new agricultural safety publications.  The media release quotes research from the Otago University.

“Three farmers or agricultural workers died and nearly 300 were injured in quad bike accidents on farms last year, according to ACC claims figures.

Recent research from Otago University forecast that in any given year farm workers will lose control of quad bikes on approximately 12,645 occasions, resulting in about 1400 injuries.  Not all of these will be registered as workplace injury claims with ACC.”

The risk of jumping to conclusions from these statistics is that the ACC is not only concerned with workplace incidents and hence the conditional sentence at the end of the quote. Continue reading “New Zealand farm advocates talk briefly on quad bike safety”

© Workplace Safety Services P/L (ABN: 68091088621) and SafetyAtWorkBlog, 2008-2025. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Kevin Jones and SafetyAtWorkBlog with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

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