industrial relations – SafetyAtWorkBlog

Wellness Is Not Safety and Employers Can No Longer Avoid Their Duty

For a country with clear health and safety obligations for almost half a century, it’s remarkable how often Australia still hears employers say they’re “unsure” what psychological health and safety requires. The duty has never been ambiguous. Employers must provide work that is safe and healthy and free from risks so far as is reasonably practicable. That obligation to prevent psychosocial hazards, the precursors to psychological ill-health, has been sitting in legislation since the 1970s and 1980s. It didn’t suddenly appear. It didn’t evolve spontaneously out of the primordial ooze. For those of us under the age of 70, it has always been there.

Subscribe to SafetyAtWorkBlog to continue reading.
Subscribe Help

Already a member? Log in here

OHS Clarity Emerges Early in Victoria’s New Royal Commission

The Victorian government has commenced its Royal Commission into the Integrity of Major Public and Civil Infrastructure Construction Projects in Victoria. Occupational health and safety (OHS) was mentioned on Day 1 in the opening statements of Counsel Assisting the Commissioner, Chris Young KC, indicating that OHS may feature in the investigations over the next year.

Subscribe to SafetyAtWorkBlog to continue reading.
Subscribe Help

Already a member? Log in here

Migration Politics and Work Health and Safety

Like many other countries, Australia’s political debate seems dominated by immigration issues. This week, after Federal Minister Tony Burke announced the government’s revised immigration policy, Queensland primary producer Joe Moro linked migration to occupational health and safety (OHS) and labour availability.

Subscribe to SafetyAtWorkBlog to continue reading.
Subscribe Help

Already a member? Log in here

Australia’s Migrant Majority and the New Realities for OHS

Australia is living through a demographic and economic shift that is far more consequential for workplace safety than most organisations or regulators have acknowledged. George Megalogenis’ new book, Three Shocks, identifies three structural changes reshaping the nation: Australia is now a majority‑migrant country; professional women have overtaken blue‑collar men as the largest occupational group; and the geopolitical environment that once provided stability has become unpredictable. These shocks are lived realities in workplaces, and they demand an occupational health and safety (OHS) overhaul.

Subscribe to SafetyAtWorkBlog to continue reading.
Subscribe Help

Already a member? Log in here

Myth Construction and the Limits of Union OHS Influence

Australian trade unions rarely campaign solely on the basis of occupational health and safety (OHS), meaning without supplementary aims such as increased wages or remuneration. Below are some examples, but they are few and usually in the wake of an industrial disaster. There are a couple of prominent union OHS campaigners, but we rarely hear of them after their passing, and many of their contributions are remembered more through internal mythologising than through documented reform.

Subscribe to SafetyAtWorkBlog to continue reading.
Subscribe Help

Already a member? Log in here

On sexual harassment, Australia requires prevention, while the UK requires response

For the last few years, McDonald’s in the United Kingdom has been embroiled in scandals involving the harassment and sexual harassment of staff by other staff members. As McDonald’s is an international company with similar operational systems of work, how would the Australian arm of the company react to a similar situation?

Subscribe to SafetyAtWorkBlog to continue reading.
Subscribe Help

Already a member? Log in here

Psychosocial hazards, dignity and the unfinished legacy of Brodie Panlock

By 2013, the debate over workplace bullying in Australia had moved from outrage to regulatory detail. That is often the stage where social reform either matures or dies. The draft code on preventing and responding to workplace bullying being developed at that time attracted submissions from industry and employer associations, many of which were troubling. The concern was not simply that business groups opposed a code. It was that several appeared to miss the code’s central purpose of preventing psychological harm to people at work.

Please note that this article discusses suicide and mental trauma.

Subscribe to SafetyAtWorkBlog to continue reading.
Subscribe Help

Already a member? Log in here