There are many similarities between the management of occupational health and safety (OHS) and environment protection. Both seek to prevent and/or mitigate harm, and both have similarly focussed legislation. However, this similarity extends to vulnerabilities in each approach. Neither discipline is solely responsible for the lack of progress in prevention and protection, but both have not realised their potential for change.
Last week epidemiologist Hassan Vally wrote one article in The Age called either “Health or economy a false choice” or “COVID caution can be a win for both public health and business” (paywalled), depending on the sub-editor and format. Curiously one has a negative implication, the other, the opposite. Either way, the article illustrates the public health dichotomy that mirrors that of occupational health and safety (OHS).
OHS often requires a decision between profit or production and safety. Public Health deciders need to consider the interests of the public and the duties of government. I prefer the former headline because it states that this decision is a “choice”. Safety, occupational or public, is always a choice.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
The gig economy is in trouble. Rideshare drivers are cancelling in droves. Wait times for food delivery are ballooning out and driver shortages are leading to food waste.
So, what’s going on? To find out more, I interviewed 30 Melbourne gig workers who worked as rideshare drivers, food deliverers or for task-based platforms such as Airtasker.
I also spoke to 30 customers who use such services, and to 20 industry stakeholders. My colleague, Elizabeth Straughan from the University of Melbourne, conducted a further ten interviews with gig workers after the pandemic set in, to learn how they’d been affected.
Continue reading “Guilt, shame, dissatisfaction: workers and customers on the gig economy (and how to make it better)”The Australian Treasurer, Dr Jim Chalmers is receiving good media attention for his thoughts on a “well-being budget”. This newsworthiness has been helped by American economist Joseph Stiglitz being on an Australian speaking tour at the same time. Stiglitz strongly advocates using socioeconomic measures to complement traditional economic measures. Well-being budgets shift how governments view policies, programs and strategies in a similar ideological fashion to how we should consider safety differently. The occupational context of well-being is well-established, but this new approach to measurement may challenge those established well-being programs.
Australia is not ignorant of the well-being budgets. It is not something created by Chalmers or just imported from New Zealand.
Occupational health and safety (OHS) is rarely analysed as a stand-alone business element. As such opportunities are missed to clarify one’s understanding of work health and safety and companies’ experience of it beyond “commitments” and workers’ compensation costs.
There is great potential for change in the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), especially Goal number 8. Sadly, even here “Decent Work” which includes the safety and health of workers (8.8) is shared with “Economic Growth”. As a result, it is often difficult to isolate the OHS components. A recent analysis of Australia’s ASX200 companies illustrates the problem.
Ellen Pinkos Cobb is building an interesting library of books on sexual harassment. Next month sees the release of “Managing Psychosocial Hazards and Work-Related Stress in Today’s Work Environment – International Insights for U.S. Organizations“, but one of her previous titles from 2020 is also enjoyable. Cobb published “International Workplace Sexual Harassment Laws and Developments for the Multinational Employer“. This comparative study is an excellent resource, even though the legal environment is changing rapidly.
Recently the Australian Institute of Health and Safety (AIHS) released a chapter of its Body of Knowledge on Ethics. But rather than a discussion of the role of occupational health and safety (OHS) in modern society, it focussed on the ethics of the OHS professional. This is a valid perspective but one of limited relevance to most of the community or to the market for OHS services. A broader consideration of OHS and ethics, one that assists in understanding what is expected of having a Duty of Care, is still required.
