This article is about SafeWorkNSW’s recently released Draft Code of Practice for Managing the Risks to Psychological Health, but it is not going to focus on the Code. Instead the focus will be on the supplementary Explanatory Paper because this presents the rationale for the Code’s contents and, in many ways, is a more useful tool for occupational health and safety (OHS) discussions. However, just as the Code has structural and legislative limitations as part of its Purpose, the Explanatory Paper is a support document for submissions on the Draft Code and therefore has its own limitations.
The iconic Australian theme park, Dreamworld, will never fully recover from the consequences of the deaths of four people after the Thunder River Rapids ride malfunctioned in 2016. The legal journey through the Queensland Courts finished on September 28 2020 with the handing down of a financial penalty of $3.6 million, although others could say the journey ended with the parent company’s, Ardent Leisure’s, plea of guilty, and others may pursue Ardent Leisure for civil penalties, if they can access details of Ardent Leisure’s insurance policies.
The pursuit of Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews for Industrial Manslaughter (IM) over the spreading of COVID19 from quarantine hotels is developing into a conspiracy if a recent interview with Federal politician, Barnaby Joyce, is any indication.
Previous SafetyAtWorkBlog articles have discussed the opinions on Andrews and Industrial Manslaughter espoused by journalist Robert Gotttleibsen and Ken Phillips. On television on September 28, 2020, breakfast television’s Sunrise program interview the National Party’s Joyce and the Australian Labor Party’s, Joel Fitzgibbon. Host, David Koch, asked Joyce about the resignation of Victoria’s Health Minister Jenny Mikakos over the Hotel Quarantine issues, and Joyce floridly replied:
Eric Windholz has released a perceptive paper on Industrial Manslaughter (IM) that neatly summarises the risks and rationales behind these legislative changes to Victoria’s occupational health and safety (OHS) laws.
Windholz explains two functions of the amendments – a motivator for employers to improve OHS in their workplaces and to provide a pathway for bereaved families to actively consult with the government.
The mechanism for the families’ input is the Workplace Incidents Consultative Committee. Windholz writes:
A major barrier to change is that Australia, as a whole, has never subjected its occupational health and safety (OHS) laws to a detailed analysis to determine whether the legislation and the supportive documentation works. To be clearer, Australia has never subjected its laws to a “safety clutter” analysis. No one seems to have tried to determine if the laws have any positive benefit on operational safety?
Discussion on the sexual harassment allegations against former High Court judge Dyson Heydon continue even though some Australian States’ media have returned to COVID19 clusters and football. On July 6, 2020, five hundred women in the legal profession published an open letter calling for
“… wider reforms to address the high incidence of sexual harassment, assault and misconduct in the legal profession”
The signatories call for an independent complaints body for the Australian judiciary and changes to the appointment of judges. What is missing is Prevention.
The latest media release from the Australian Institute of Health and Safety (AIHS) shows a remarkable maturity and a newfound ability to be inclusive and topical.
The AIHS, in conjunction with several other occupational health and safety (OHS) related organisations, developed and released an important guidance on respiratory protection masks for the work environment. Not only is this super topical but the effort has the support of the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU), an organisation that, historically, has been reluctant to support OHS initiatives from outside trade union resources.
The primary purpose of the media release is to push the Federal Government for “the urgent establishment of a register for approved respirators (aka face masks)”, but this may be too simplistic and too narrow a focus especially when the issue of face masks is a critical part of the Governments’ plans to “reopen” the economy.