A recent occupational health and safety (OHS) prosecution in New Zealand illustrates many issues and attitudes to safety held by small business operators around the world.
Enforceable Undertakings (EUs) are increasingly popping up in the prosecution lists of occupational health and safety (OHS) regulators. A curious one appeared on WorkSafe Victoria’s website in January 2018.
Ardex Australia P/L was prosecuted for breaching OHS laws after a subcontractor was burnt:
“…when a dry powder mixing machine was operated whilst hot metal slag from welding activity was in the plant, causing an explosive dust-air mixture.”
But what is most curious is the EU’s inclusion of a $A50,000 donation to the Safety Institute of Australia (SIA).
One of the arguments that occupational health and safety (OHS) consultants use to convince employers of the importance of workplace safety is that good safety management will increase productivity through the reduction of disruptive incidents. But there are various types of productivity. Multi-factorial productivity (what business lobbyists usually talk about) is declining in Australia BUT labour productivity has been steadily increasing for years, until only recently.
Crikey newsletter keeps pointing out this reality to its readers because the official data is being ignored by many business commentators and advocates who continue to claim that (labour) productivity is declining or in crisis. The discussion usually revolves around company tax rates but it is an important differentiation for OHS professionals and safety advocates.
It seems that workers and companies have taken heed of the urging to work smarter and not harder but how does OHS fit with all of this? It is difficult to know because any correlation between OHS data and labour productivity has not yet been made. (Partly this is because OHS data continues to be based on workers’ compensation claims rather than incident data and associated costs; I’ve banged on about that enough). It may be that good safety management = less incidents = greater productivity = greater profits but the evidence for that flow does not seem to exist outside of anecdotes or vague economic logic.
And it is evidence that the OHS profession is going to need if it is to continue using the productivity/safety/disruption argument in a very crowded and competitive market of business consultants.
Every couple of months, after the release of official workplace fatality figures and serious injury, the Australian media reports the three most dangerous industries as Agriculture, Fishing and Forestry. The latest article appeared in Australia’s Fairfax Media on 17 January 2018. It is good that occupational health and safety (OHS) is gaining attention. When so little media attention is given, any publicity is useful.
However this type of article also presents some negatives, including that it may be only representing 60% of all workplace fatalities and serious injuries.
Prominent Australian actor, Craig McLachlan, has been accused of indecent assault by cast members of the Rocky Horror Show, according to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) and Fairfax media (paywalled). One actress, Erika Heynatz, has identified this behaviour as a workplace safety issue:
“Heynatz went immediately to the head mechanic, whose job it was to ensure safety. She recalled that he was laughing “uncomfortably”. But she told him that McLachlan had to be spoken to, that this was a safety issue.”
Articles in both media outlets relate the anguish that actors felt after the alleged events and how this affected their work performance. Continue reading “McLachlan accusations place more focus on the OHS of sexual harassment”
One online news site in Australia has suggested that sexual harassment is an occupational health and safety (OHS) issue. At first blush, it should be. Sexual harassment can create mental ill-health and can certainly be harmful. But from the early days of discussions about workplace bullying and occupational violence in Australia, sexual harassment has been consciously excluded from OHS.
Is It or Isn’t It?
Some of the best discussion on bullying, harassment and violence was written by Dr Clare Mayhew for the Australian Institute of Criminology in 2000. These included a practical handbook on prevention. (It’s peculiar that some of the most perceptive works on OHS occur outside the OHS profession. Well perhaps not so surprising.) In the handbook, Mayhew points out that harassment has always been an element of workplace bullying but excludes sexual harassment from her discussion:
“The Australian Institution of Criminology believes that prevention, rather than post-incident reaction, is the key to improved outcomes. However, the handbook needs to be adapted specifically to each organisation for best results. The discussions exclude activity that could be described as sexual harassment, which is extensively dealt with elsewhere.” (page 1)
This position is reflective of the OHS literature yet, on reflection, this position may have been wrong for it contributed to a fractured approach to managing workplace psychosocial hazards.
In the middle of 2017 SafetyAtWorkBlog asked why the Victorian Government was slow in releasing the report of an independent review into its occupational health and safety (OHS) regulator, WorkSafe. Victorians have received a Christmas present with the release of the report of the Independent Review of Occupational Health and Safety Compliance and Enforcement in Victoria and the Government response.
In Principle
According to the Minister for Finance Robin Scott’s media release, dated 18 December 2017,
“The review was a Labor Government election commitment and made 22 recommendations – all of which the Government supports in principle.” (emphasis added)