Discussions about safety in the mining sector continue with recent debate in the Queensland Parliament but change continues to be at a slow pace and in a manner that reflects “business as usual” rather than being innovative and establishing a sound base for business to grow, and grow safely.
On 31 October 2018, the Queensland Government got tough on safety in its mining and resources sector. But how tough is tough? A press statement says that
“Parliament today backed maximum penalties close to $4 million for mining companies that fail to keep their workers safe. As well, mines inspectors will be able to hit mine operators with tough new fines of up to $130,550 without taking them to court.”
For those of us who do not have $4 million to cover prosecutions over occupational health and safety (OHS) breaches this may indeed sound “tough” but recent inquiries and reviews into OHS enforcement question whether financial penalties are the most effective way of improving workplace health and safety.
In late October 2018, the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) released a summary of the latest work-related injury and illness data, although it was easy to miss as few, if anyone, reported on it. On first view, that mental health is barely mentioned in the Summary is surprising and the workers compensation data raises interesting policy questions.
On October 29 2018, RMIT University and the Safety Institute of Australia conducted a forum on Industrial Manslaughter laws. The mix of presenters offered a respectful discussion on the issue but also illustrated where such proposed legal changes fit. The event was organised and hosted by Gloria Kyriacou-Morosinotto whose introduction listed the questions we should all be asking about the Industrial Manslaughter laws proposed for Victoria.
Australia’s national government has announced an inquiry into mental health to be conducted by the Productivity Commission. The Victorian Government has promised a Royal Commission into Mental Health as part of its election pledge. New South Wales has a five-year Mentally Healthy Workplaces Strategy. All of these initiatives are being applauded by the mental health advocates but two of them have yet to specify their terms of reference or their timelines for delivery, making it difficult to determine what role workplaces, workers and employers will have.
There is also a political risk that community expectations or the evidence base changes during the delivery period. Workplace mental health seems particularly susceptible to this risk at the moment.
Recently the West Australian Department of Corrections was prosecuted over the work-related death of an inmate. It was fined $100,000 plus costs over the death of a remand prisoner crushed between a truck and a wall at Hakea Prison in 2015. The WorkSafe WA media release provides a level of detail rare in these sorts of incidents and it is recommended reading.
The incident and the prosecution raise enforcement issues that would be familiar to many occupational health and safety (OHS) regulators but also to businesses.
Dr Caroline Norma had an opinion piece published in The Age newspaper on October 24 2018 that fails to acknowledge the occupational health and safety (OHS) duties of Victorian businesses operating sexual services. SafetyAtWorkBlog has looked closely at OHS in this industry sector before and has previously communicated with Dr Norma on sex work safety. Dr Norma’s current article illustrates a common perspective on workplace safety and health issues where one set of legislation dominates the public policy conversation rather than the multidisciplinary approach.
It is necessary to clarify Dr Norma’s opening statement:
“The Victorian Labor Party will consider fully deregulating the state’s sex industry if re-elected to office in November.”
According to the 2018 Platform of the Victorian Australian Labor Party (ALP), in the context of Human Rights and Equal Opportunity, the ALP will:
“recommend that the Victorian Law Reform Commission consider decriminalisation of all sex work in Victoria as per other systems recognised internationally by human rights organisations.” (page 87)