innovation – Page 23 – SafetyAtWorkBlog

WorkSafe Victoria tries humour in safety advertising

For the last few weeks WorkSafe Victoria has been running new injury prevention advertisements based on a game show theme of playing the odds on injuring a worker. The curiosity of this campaign is that humour and a little bit of shame has been employed to communicate.

It is refreshing for an OHS regulator to use humour in the aim of improving workplace safety particularly as this attempt avoids the slapstick humour that has been tried in the past by several safety organisations. Workplace injuries are not a laughing matter but a gentle humour can be used to prick the conscience of those who have safety obligations.

Conversations with OHS peers on these ads has shown a perplexity over these ads. Those who have established a public face or a reputation in the safety field are unsure whether laughing or, at the least, being amused is appropriate. There is a fine line between mockery and amusement so hesitation is understandable. Continue reading “WorkSafe Victoria tries humour in safety advertising”

“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””

Award winner illustrates a potential new approach to small business OHS support

The most interesting winner at the Safe Work Australia was a small greengrocer, The Hub Fruit Bowl. This family run business improved their occupational health and safety management system (OHSMS) with little more than a free “Small Business Safety Pack” from SafeWorkSA (no longer available on the SafeWorkSA website). This is a remarkable contrast to the, presumably expensive, Dupont-based achievement of Australian construction company, Grocon. The win also illustrates the continued importance of the need for free, or cheap, practical plain safety advice. (Why isn’t there a Dummies Guide to Workplace Safety?)

The Hub Fruit Bowl’s achievement could have far-reaching effects as the low-cost approach can be applied to thousands of small businesses in Australia. The greengrocer has a healthy record of providing young people with their first jobs, jobs that include a solid understanding of workplace health and safety. The Grocon experience is more corporate and very common where solutions are sought from outside one’s business.

The Hub Fruit Bowl’s win should encourage OHS regulators to reassess their small business OHS strategies. Instead of funding OHS consultants to provide three or six hours of OHS advice, frequent encouragement and engagement with small business, structured round documented processes may be more effective. SafeWorkSA does not mention the concept of “case managers” but applying this to harm and injury prevention strategies may have merit. Providing sustained support and encouragement instead of a quick intense session should be seriously considered by OHS regulators.

It may also be useful to consider providing pro-bono safety services to small businesses, as a civic duty but also to freshen the experiences of safety professionals.

Kevin Jones

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”

Video interviews with four safety professionals

Last week at the Safety In Action Trade Show I participated in a live web interview on safety. The video of my interview is available below. Many thanks to Digicast for making this and other OHS videos available.

Other video interviews are available with:

Dr Angelica Vecchio-Sadus- HSE Leader at CSIRO Process Science and Engineering.
Marilyn Hubner – Workplace Learning and Development Specialist at the National Safety Council of Australia
John Lacey, Video President IOSH & CEO Lincsafe

Kevin Jones

Evidence of the need to change how and why we work

Last week Professor Rod McClure of the Monash Injury Research Institute urged Australian safety professionals to look at the ecology of safety and injury prevention. By using the term “ecology” outside of the colloquial, he was advocating that we search for a universal theory of injury prevention. In short, he urged us to broaden our understanding of safety to embrace new perspectives. It could also be argued that he wanted to break the safety profession out of its malaise and generate some social activism on injury prevention – a philosophical kick in the pants.

Before discussing the latest research Australia’s Barbara Pocock has undertaken, with her colleagues Natalie Skinner and Philippa Williams, the challenge of achieving some degree of balance between the two social activities of work and non-work can be indicated by a graph provided by Dick Bryan and Mike Rafferty in a recent DISSENT magazine article about financial risk.

In 2008 people in Australian households were working over 50 hours per week. The reasons for this are of less relevance than the fact that Australian workers are well beyond the 40-hour work week, not including any travel time. Work has a social cost as well as a social benefit and any discussion (debate?) over productivity, as is currently occurring in Australia, must also consider the social cost of this productivity. The graph above is a symptom of the challenge of achieving a decent quality of life and a functional level of productivity – the challenge that Pocock, Skinner and Williams have undertaken. Continue reading “Evidence of the need to change how and why we work”

Zero Harm is a “fallacious deception” – thoughts on the 2012 Safety In Action Conference

Overall the Safety In Action Conference, currently occurring in Melbourne, has been consistent but without any standout moments. However there have been nuggets of interest from the speakers and insight from some of the participants.

Andrew Douglas of M+K Lawyers was blunt in describing some of the actions between State Governments and the Federal Government over the harmonisation of occupational health and safety laws as “extortion” that is impeding much-needed growth. Also, he was clear that the most effective people to undertake investigations of workplace incidents were OHS professionals as safety is their expertise. He was adamant that lawyers are experts in law and safety professionals in safety but that they must work cooperatively.

Gerard Forlin was an enormously entertaining presenter who should have been a keynote speaker as, he himself said, he was only warming up after his half hour. His comparisons between Australian and UK OHS law were insightful. Industrial manslaughter laws are out of vogue in Australia but Forlin stated that corporate manslaughter laws have contributed to an increased focus on safety by senior executives, even though prosecutions under those laws have been curiously targeted. Continue reading “Zero Harm is a “fallacious deception” – thoughts on the 2012 Safety In Action Conference”

Category: innovation

WorkSafe Victoria tries humour in safety advertising

Like this:

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

Like this:

Award winner illustrates a potential new approach to small business OHS support

Like this:

Australian OHS awards need reviewing now more than ever

Like this:

Video interviews with four safety professionals

Like this:

Evidence of the need to change how and why we work

Like this:

Zero Harm is a “fallacious deception” – thoughts on the 2012 Safety In Action Conference

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this: