A reader has drawn SafetyAtWorkBlog’s attention to one State regulator in Australia who has already begun to apply the broader definition for “employer” in their OHS guidance material.
In September 2009, the ACT Safety Commissioner published a Guidance on “Safe Structures, Systems and Workplaces“. In that guidance, the Commissioner refers to
…”New general duties to ensure work safety by managing risk apply to a person:
…carrying on a business or undertaking;…”
This anticipates the definition put forward in Australia’s OHS model Act in relation to PCBUs (Peek-A-Boos).
The matter of a “business or undertaker” was also used in the ACT’s Work Safety Act 2008 (effective from 1 October 2009) throughout the document but with slight variation. Of most interest here are the definitions of employer, worker and “business or undertaking”:
“employer, of a worker, includes a person who engages the worker to carry out work in the person’s business or undertaking.”
“worker means an individual who carries out work in relation to a business or undertaking, whether for reward or otherwise, under an arrangement with the person conducting the business or undertaking.”
“business or undertaking includes—
(a) a not-for-profit business; and
(b) an activity conducted by a local, state or territory government.”
The logic of such an inclusive term is understandable but needs greater clarity which is likely to some from regulations or supportive documents.
Having a Peek-A-Boo is one thing, let’s just hope that the jargon does not develop to start referring to “undertakers”.
The first award was for the Health & Safety Representative of the Year, won by Phyl Hilton. Hilton was clearly honoured by the award and in his acceptance speech acknowledged that good OHS laws are “socially progressive” – a position that is rarely heard outside of the union movement or from non-blue-collar workers. It is an element missing from many of the submission currently being received by Australian Government in its OHS law review.
The Best Solution to a Health and Safety Risk was given to Bendigo TAFE for a machine guarding solution. Guards have become an unfashionable hazard control solution and often now seem to rely on new technology. The chuck key guard was as hi-tech as an interlock device but one that the users of the lathes, almost all young workers, would not need any involvement with. If chuck key remains in the place, the guard is out of position and the machine cannot start. Simple is always the best.
and it would have been great to have a single device but the stacking option was particularly interesting. Many pub cellars are cramped and being able to stack beer kegs in a stable fashion is attractive, and sensible. The cross-support that is placed on top of each keg was, perhaps, the standout feature. One can almost see the staring at the top of the keg by the designers and the creative cogs turning. The best solutions always seem to be those where one asks “why didn’t I think of that?”
The attraction of this winner of Best Design for Workplace Safety is that the inventor has looked beyond PPE for jockeys to what a jockey is likely to hit when falling of a racehorse at speed.
