hazards – Page 80 – SafetyAtWorkBlog

Australian financial newspaper discusses workstation ergonomics

For some time, restricted posture at workstations has been identified as being unhealthy. The Australian Financial Review on 15 May 2012 takes up the story but the author, Dierdre Macken, points to squatting as an option until “they wait for the occupational health and safety review of chairs to come in”. She misses the point. Chairs are not the problem. The type of work and the design of workplaces is a much more important problem.

We have come to understand that productivity is not always achieved through a restricted focus on a work task based on an eight-hour day and that includes between one and three formal breaks. A better productivity comes from engagement, interaction and a variety of tasks. Interestingly workplace safety is also improved through these same elements.

Kevin Jones

“Do some good” sounds more effective than achieving “zero harm”

The April 2012 edition of the UK magazine Training Journal makes a statement that is so simple, safety professionals should be kicking themselves. The safety profession is trying to change the measurement of safety from lag indicators to lead, from negatives to positives, from failures to successes and yet we continue to talk about zero harm. In Training Journal, Stuart Walkley states that

“…we face a new challenge, not just to ‘do no harm’ but to ‘do some good’ in the workplace, to create a healthy working environment that supports and contributes to our wellbeing.”

“Do some good”. I would rather be a Do Some Good Manager than a Zero Harm Manager. Focussing on the safety positive is what I do as a safety adviser but saying that my job is to “do some good” makes me feel better about my job than if I was minimising the negative, which is what the zero harm descriptor does.

Also, “do some good” sits well with the new approach that safety professionals are supposed to have, having to blend the psychosocial hazards into our risk controls approach. Continue reading ““Do some good” sounds more effective than achieving “zero harm””

Workplace safety and the human condition

Articles and reports about decent work, dignity at work and mental health issues are increasingly appearing on my desktop. Perhaps this indicates a convergence of perspectives to a better understanding of the human imperative in the modern workplace. It may be a realisation of where and how work fits the human condition.

On May 1 2012, the Australian Catholic Social Justice Council (ACSJC) issued a pastoral letter on the “Dignity of Work“. This came across my desk around the same time as I was looking at values-based safety. The parallels between dignity and values-based safety were obvious.

Australian OHS awards need reviewing now more than ever

The various government safety awards process in Australia needs a thorough coordinated review in order to maintain their relevance. Earlier last year WorkSafe Victoria tried a new strategy to increase community participation in their awards process. This involved monthly mini-awards and nominees calling on their friends and professional networks for support and votes. It was worth a try but WorkSafe Victoria went it alone and it will be difficult to sustain this strategy without broader support, probably from the other States.

SafetyAtWorkBlog stated following last year’s national safety awards ceremony that change was required but no one took up the challenge. The need for review was even more evident at this year’s Safe Work Australia Awards held last week. The lacklustre atmosphere could have been partly due to an MC, Paul McDermott, who is more comfortable piercing the pretensions of institutions. In these awards, it would have been rude to make fun of workplace safety. McDermott understood this and could only make jokes of his own brushes with danger, such as having his scrotum pierced with a winklepinker. But it is more likely that the awards had more serious deficiencies. Continue reading “Australian OHS awards need reviewing now more than ever”

Australian senator sees OHS consultation as “collusion”

In response to correspondence from an Australian safety professional, Senator Eric Abetz, Federal Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations, has displayed his ignorance of occupational health and safety (OHS) laws. In the email response, reproduced in full below and dated 26 April 2012, Senator Abetz, accuses “big Government” “big unions and big business” of colluding on the development of Codes of Practice.

Abetz shows his misunderstanding of the status of codes of practice in the regulation of OHS. He also uses a DRAFT code of practice to illustrate the absurdity of new OHS laws, a draft that is having a contentious route but is expected to be considerably changed in the final version.

The draft code he chooses is workplace bullying and the senator tries to illustrate how silly this code’s suggestions are by hypothesizing a small business. He chooses a two person plumbing firm. How different his perspective could have been should he have chosen a real small business workplace bullying case that resulted in a worker killing herself. How convenient to avoid the Cafe Vamp example. Continue reading “Australian senator sees OHS consultation as “collusion””

Is fat the past tense of fit? WorkHealth assessment

Several years ago the board of WorkSafe Victoria decided to fund a $A600 million health assessment program for workers from the workers’ compensation fund. The WorkHealth program has not been without its critics but WorkSafe announced this week that 1 in 4 Victorian workers have participated in the WorkHealth program. Given this significance I undertook a work health assessment at the Safety In Action trade show.

The WorkHealth stand at the trade show had no waiting so I signed up for an assessment. The form asked basic questions about age, health, family illnesses, amount of exercise, alcohol consumption, smoking and dietary intake. I wrote that I was a fat, fifty, sedentary, moderate drinker who does not eat enough fruit. Continue reading “Is fat the past tense of fit? WorkHealth assessment”

Just workplace hardship

Yossi Berger writes:

We’re all familiar with the notions of focus and attention, and selective attention. We’ve all experienced how difficult it can be to attend to target information when background noise is distracting. The issue can be referred to as the signal-to-noise ratio.

I often find its effects in discussions with managers and workers during workplace inspections. That is, I hear animated discussions of hazards, of risks, of risk assessments and risk management and various systems and theories. The conversations over flow with these concepts whilst most of workers’ daily problems aren’t even raised, they don’t reach the level of a signal.

Thankfully in most workplaces, most managers and most workers have not experienced any fatalities. By far most of them will not have experienced or witnessed a serious injury or serious disease. Nor have most experienced their local hazards actually seriously hurting anyone.

But most workers will have experienced some dangerous working conditions, mostly not mortally dangerous, but dangerous. Continue reading “Just workplace hardship”

Category: hazards

Australian financial newspaper discusses workstation ergonomics

Like this:

“Do some good” sounds more effective than achieving “zero harm”

Like this:

Workplace safety and the human condition

Like this:

Australian OHS awards need reviewing now more than ever

Like this:

Australian senator sees OHS consultation as “collusion”

Like this:

Is fat the past tense of fit? WorkHealth assessment

Like this:

Just workplace hardship

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this: