Category: government

One person’s red tape is another’s due diligence

Australian business is soon to be required to apply the concept of “due diligence” to occupational health and safety.  One would have expected the agency that is coordinating the changes to provide detailed guidance on what is expected from “due diligence”.  That is not the case and so, inevitably, lawyers have stepped in (some stepped in some time ago).

Part of the due diligence obligation is that it is necessary to “verify… compliance with the business’ safety obligations” and this is unavoidably achieved by audits and subsequent paperwork.  In fact, paperwork is a vital element of support for “evidence-based decision-making”.  So it is with some concern that one sees the New South Wales WorkCover Authority is number three on the NSW Business Chamber’s list of “top 5 red tape offenders”(?), released on 9 March 2011 . Continue reading “One person’s red tape is another’s due diligence”

Raising awareness about stress instead of controlling it

In March 2011, in response to one of the several Stress Awareness Days, HRLeader magazine ran an edited version of a Personnel Today article called “5 steps to tackle employee stress”.  The Personnel Today had “6 steps”, so are Australian readers being ripped off?

Personnel Today included a step called “Refer the Health and Safety Executive’s management standards”.  HRLeader’s editor must have made the call that HSE information is geographically specific and therefore not relevant to Australia but the change is more indicative of the fact that Australia does not have anything to match the HSE management standards to help control stress.  According to the HSE website:

“….the six Management Standards cover the primary sources of stress at work. These are:

Daniel’s story

Below is an article submitted to SafetyAtWorkBlog as a comment several days ago.  After much deliberation I have decided to publish this as an article for the consideration of readers and in the hope that someone may be willing to provide some practical assistance to Daniel.

Daniel has provided a phone number and email address to SafetyAtWorkBlog.  Please contact the Editor if you are able to help.

“This is my story. I have tried different other government departments last year to get some help all I have got is the runaround so I thought I would try here. I really don’t know how to word this or where to begin so I’ll start from 2003. I was working for a company here in Adelaide for about a year when I had an accident at work, a week later I was put on work cover my boss decided to get rid of me because I was no used to him anymore. I spent the next three years on work cover, setting at home and slowly going crazy I spent most of that three years fighting work cover to get them to do something to get me back to work but nothing ever happened. after losing my family and everything I had while I was on work cover,

“Finally I was offered redemption prayer out. It wasn’t much for the price I had to pay to be left with a permanent disability and plus I was suffering from depression from the time I spent on work cover I lost my identity as a person and felt completely demoralized. And feeling Continue reading “Daniel’s story”

OHS harmonisation to result in a substantial increase in costs to business

Australian lawyer Andrew Douglas has provided a frank assessment of the OHS harmonisation process instigated by the Australian government to reduce red tape and administrative costs of safety.  In Smart Company on 1 March 2011, Douglas wrote:

“…the Model Act, the regulations and documents that flow from it will dramatically increase state-based businesses legislative compliance, will massively increase the paperwork proving compliance and will inevitably lead to a substantial increase in costs to business in managing safety and OHS.”

Most State governments continue to support the harmonisation process, in almost all its elements, as a positive for business. So what’s the story here?

Andrew Douglas’ opinion needs serious consideration as it is one of the few contrary positions expressed to date. Continue reading “OHS harmonisation to result in a substantial increase in costs to business”

Graphic hazard video from WorkSafe BC

Graphic ads or videos from OHS regulators are not new but each has their own approach and WorkSafe BC has released one, in particular, that is of interest to the construction industry.

On first viewing, the conduct of the supervisor is annoying.  He provides inadequate information to the worker.  He approves of the wrong tool for the job.   Others may see nothing but a silly young worker. Continue reading “Graphic hazard video from WorkSafe BC”

New books – South African nursing and a Canadian perspective

This week two new OHS books came across my desk unbidden.  Both are very good but have very different contexts and both were published by Baywood Publishing Company Inc.

“Who Is Nursing Them? It is Us.” “Neoliberalism, HIV/AIDS, and the Occupational Health and Safety of South African Public Sector Nurses” by Jennifer R Zelnick

Northern Exposure – A Canadian Perspective on Occupational Health and Environment by David Bennett

South Africa is an exotic foreign land to me.  I am aware of the basic political issues of the country for the last 30 years but, in terms of OHS, I know there have been some major mining incidents and that HIV/AIDS is a major occupational and social challenge.  Zelnick’s book illustrates clearly the difficulty of tackling a workplace risk that is also a hot, contentious public health and political issue. Continue reading “New books – South African nursing and a Canadian perspective”

NZ releases new guidelines on quad bike safety

Any new OHS guidelines from regulators important to read and consider when implementing safety interventions.   New Zealand’s Department of Labour (DoL) has released new guidelines for the use of quad bikes in workplaces, predominantly, farms.

Quad bike manufacturers are strong advocates of “active riding” techniques as an important safety practice. The new guidelines support this position.

Regular readers will be aware that there are engineering controls for rollovers of quad bikes where “active riding” is an administrative control of rollovers. The engineering control is primarily a rollover protective structure (ROPS). The difference between the two control measures is significant as the engineering controls are considered to be a higher order, or more effective, control in the hierarchy of controls advocated by OHS regulators and professionals around the world.

The NZ DoL guidelines make reference to ROPS but only as a text box because the evidence on ROPS remains contentious. Continue reading “NZ releases new guidelines on quad bike safety”

© Workplace Safety Services P/L (ABN: 68091088621) and SafetyAtWorkBlog, 2008-2026. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Kevin Jones and SafetyAtWorkBlog with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Concatenate Web Development
© Designed and developed by Concatenate Aust Pty Ltd