Maddocks law firm has just concluded the second part of their psychological health and safety seminars. Lawyers Catherine Dunlop and Dale McQualter have the advantage of following a seminar on the same topic held by Victoria’s occupational health and safety (OHS) regulator just the other day. The advantage with this seminar is that the lawyers feel comfortable in giving their opinions and advice in contrast to the careful words of the WorkSafe people.
In 2023, a Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability recommended that the Commonwealth Disability Discrimination Act 1992 be amended to introduce a positive duty on all duty-holders to eliminate disability discrimination, harassment and victimisation. This echoes the imposition in 2022 of a positive duty to prevent sexual harassment. Occupational health and safety (OHS) legislation has had its positive duty to prevent work-related harm since 1985. So why this current push for positive duties?
The most significant challenges for employers in Victoria’s new OHS (Psychological Health) Regulations, supported by a new Compliance Code, are likely to be fostering a strong workplace safety culture. Occupational health and safety (OHS) advocates have been emphasising the importance of culture for several decades now (Sociologists examined it decades before). It appears that we will be hearing a great deal more about culture for some time to come, but what is expected of employers?
Next year marks the 20th anniversary of the death of Brodie Panlock. I have been thinking of her a lot over the last few months as Victorian employers (finally) start to seriously consider their legislative obligations to provide a mentally safe and healthy work environment. I wonder whether the new psychosocial safety regulations had been in place in 2005-06, Brodie Panlock would have lived.
[Note: This article discusses issues related to suicide.]
Australia’s efforts to enhance the health and safety of its workers are hindered by the constitutional framework, which assigns responsibility for occupational health and safety (OHS) to local jurisdictions.
Recent comments by a Federal Minister on sexual harassment illustrate this dilemma, which is not restricted to OHS.
Australian occupational health and safety (OHS) laws require employers to be compliant with their OHS duties, but also allow the flexibility for employers to determine their own level of compliance. This has complicated OHS because employers can never be sure that they are in compliance. Compliance and non-compliance are usually determined accurately through the courts after legal action by the OHS regulatory agency and after a workplace incident. This uncertainty is compounded for small business owners who just want to be told what to do to be compliant.
Perhaps the most challenged industry sector is farming, which cannot avoid the uncertainty that the OHS laws provide. This uncertainty is one that highly-resourced employers are proud to claim as a well-fought-for benefit, namely, flexibility, but it is more of a problem for isolated rural workplaces and small businesses.
Neil Foster and Jacqueline Meredith‘s 3rd Edition of Workplace Health and Safety Law in Australia can be seen as a companion to Creighton and Stewart’s Labour Law. Both have excellent occupational health and safety (OHS) content for their respective markets; both have very different tones.
