In 2002, after several corporate collapses, the United States government signed in the Sarbanes-Oxley Act which was intended to establish business practices on accounting and auditing among other aims. The Western world watched the introduction of this legislation and echoed many of the requirements in their own legislation and corporate oversight agencies.
It is likely in the wake of the global financial crisis that the United States (and Europe to a lesser extent) is entering another wave of corporate regulation or interference, depending on one’s politics.
These laws introduced substantial change to the management of businesses, the disclosure of information and the role of corporate executives. When will this type of change include occupational safety and health?
Firstly, the United States’ safety professionals and regulators need to accept that their system of OHS legislation and enforcement is not “world’s best practice”. There are major deficiencies in high-risk organisations and a misunderstanding of safety obligations at the shopfloor level. These problems exist partly because of the structure and population of the country itself and also because there is so much baggage in its legal system that new perspectives in law are difficult to imagine.
A significant change in OHS law outside the United States is the issue of personal accountability for safety-related decisions. There are few who complain about the jailing of CEOs and executives for the loss of money (their own and that of others) but there is a real barrier to jailing those same people when their management decisions led to a loss of life. Continue reading “Where’s the Sarbanes-Oxley for workplace safety?”
