manslaughter – Page 17 – SafetyAtWorkBlog

What is the problem that Industrial Manslaughter laws are intended to solve?

This week Melbourne Victoria hosted a conference about Work Health and Safety Prosecutions and Enforcement. The two-day conference, run by Criterion Conferences, focused on law and the application of that law. Occupational health and safety (OHS) was largely a subtext of the discussion, but it raised its head occasionally.

The audience of around 100 consisted of many OHS regulators and lawyers from most Australian States. This conference profile set the tone of this conference where a lot of legal knowledge and terminology was assumed even though, occasionally and not knowing the audience, a speaker trod old ground with Law 101.

New Safety Podcast focuses on Law

One of the prominent occupational health and safety (OHS) lawyers in Australia has started a podcast. The first episode discusses Industrial Manslaughter.

Steve Bell of law firm Herbert Smith Freehills recently published the Safety Podcast, but the title is a bit of a misnomer as, judging by the first episode, the discussion is more about safety law than safety. Regardless, the podcast adds to our state of OHS knowledge.

What does the recent election result mean for workplace health and safety?

This article was written after a request from the Safety Institute of Australia and distributed to its members on June 4, 2019. Some additional links have been added.[If you want exclusive OHS-based articles, contact Kevin Jones directly]

So, the Australian Labor Party (ALP) did not win the Federal Election that most people expected it to win. As a result, Australia is likely to NOT see, at a national level:

“a harmonised industrial manslaughter offence”,
An implementation of all of the recommendations of the Boland Report, nor
“a national advisory committee made up of representatives from each state and territory who have been personally impacted by a serious workplace injury or death to develop recommendations for federal, state and territory governments to act upon.”

OHS thoughts trapped in the bubble

For the first time in many years, the Safety Institute of Australia’s National Conference heard from two prominent industry association leaders, Mark Goodsell from the Australian Industry Group (AiGroup) and James Pearson, CEO of the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (ACCI). The absence of a representative of the trade union movement to “balance” some of the comments was a weakness of the conference but perhaps unavoidable a few days after a very busy Federal Election campaign. Both conference speakers addressed OHS issues and the topic-de-jour, Industrial Manslaughter laws.

Victims of industrial crime

On May 13 2019 the Australian media published articles based on research (released after embargo) conducted by the RMIT’s Centre for Innovative Justice and about victims of crime which those advocating for Industrial Manslaughter laws should seriously consider.

The Age newspaper reports

“Victims of crime felt let down by the system when offenders pleaded guilty to a less serious charge and did not proceed to trial ‘‘ because they wanted the opportunity to tell their story’’ , …..”

and that

“One victim interviewed during the research said they felt left out of discussions with the OPP when charges in their case were downgraded from murder to manslaughter for a plea of guilt …”

Occupational health and safety (OHS) seems a little ahead of the game here as relatives of deceased workers have been integrated into OHS consultation in both Queensland and Victoria. Relatives had a very strong voice through the Senate Inquiry into Industrial Deaths. Victim Impact Statements have been possible in the Courts for many years but Industrial Manslaughter laws add an additional depth to the participation of victims of industrial crime, and an additional risk of false promises.

Industrial manslaughter laws are (still) unlikely to save lives in the workplace

In June 2018, Rick Sarre, now the Dean of Law at the University of South Australia’s School of Law, wrote an article in The Conversation titled
“Why industrial manslaughter laws are unlikely to save lives in the workplace“. On the eve of the #safetyscape conference and an upcoming conference on enforcement in which presentations on Industrial Manslaughter laws will feature, SafetyAtWorkBlog asked the very busy Professor for an update on some of the themes and thoughts in his article. Below are his responses.

Beware any politician talking about the coloured tapes of bureaucracy

Some of the Australian media on May 8 2019 began quoting the current Prime Minister, Scott Morrison, over his concerns about the “green tape” of environmental laws and something called “the expansion of union “red tape””. (Nine Australia’s papers, paywalled) Crikey’s Bernard Keane asks “Does Australia really have a ‘green tape’ crisis?” (paywalled) and proceeds to answer, No we don’t. But where there is Green Tape, the Red Tape of occupational health and safety (OHS) follows.

What Morrison means by “union red tape” is unclear. The newspapers included this quote from him:

Category: manslaughter

What is the problem that Industrial Manslaughter laws are intended to solve?

Like this:

New Safety Podcast focuses on Law

Like this:

What does the recent election result mean for workplace health and safety?

Like this:

OHS thoughts trapped in the bubble

Like this:

Victims of industrial crime

Like this:

Industrial manslaughter laws are (still) unlikely to save lives in the workplace

Like this:

Beware any politician talking about the coloured tapes of bureaucracy

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: