Safe Work Method Statements and independent positions

Over the last few months most Australian OHS regulators, and many labour law firms,have been conducting workshops and public seminars on Australia’s plans to harmonise its OHS legislation.  In those workshops, the consultative process and timeframes have been described by some as a “nightmare”, which is not exactly inspiring participants who are seeking clarity from the confusion.

Significantly, others are encouraging the audience to advocate specific positions in potential submissions.

Recently, concerns were raised over the revisions to Safe Work Method Statements (SWMS) provisions.  It was suggested that SWMS have the potential to bloat beyond several pages due to the need to include “associated risks”.  Most safety management systems and OHS professionals would already have include secondary, ancillary or associated risks as part of the job safety analyses and SWMS. Continue reading “Safe Work Method Statements and independent positions”

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”

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”

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”

Important OHS and legal issues in findings of South Australian Coroner into young man’s death

The debate on OHS laws will be passionate in the pre-election frenzy of New South Wales but the OHS law reform is a national strategy and the safety debate is not asleep in the other States.

On 11 February 2011, AAP ran an article about the long-lasting familial and social effects a horrible workplace incident in South Australia in 2004.  Diemould Tooling Services (fined in 2009) took its appeal against prosecution to the High Court of Australia in 2008 and on 10 February 2011, almost six years after the death of 18-year-old Daniel Madeley, South Australian Coroner Mark Johns has said, at Madeley’s inquest:

“A horizontal boring machine had been operated at Diemould for years in a condition which could only be described as deplorably unsafe. It could have been guarded, but was not. It could have had a braking system, but did not. It could have had an automated lubrication system, but did not.

“Many other things could have been done, but any one of these would have been sufficient to save Mr Madeley’s life….”

Coroner Johns was very critical of SafeWorkSA about its actions following the 2004 death.  The coroner’s findings make for disturbing reading on several issues. Continue reading “Important OHS and legal issues in findings of South Australian Coroner into young man’s death”

Business jumps the gun on OHS, unions hope for the best

As the Australian State of New South Wales approaches its March 2011 election day, the lobbying is becoming more fierce.  In fact,  conservation opposition leader, Barry O’Farrell will need to rein in some of his business colleagues if the lobbying becomes too fierce.

It is widely tipped that O’Farrell will win the election and people are already planning for his ascension.  If the business pressure becomes too overt, it may reduce the size of the landslide win that is being predicted.

For example, prior to the Council of Australian Governments meeting organised by the federal (Labor) government, the New South Wales Minerals Council provides an example of the issue they will be running on through to the election.  CEO Dr Nikki Williams has said in a media release this afternoon: Continue reading “Business jumps the gun on OHS, unions hope for the best”

Death in the workplace guide could have been much more helpful

Workplace Health & Safety Queensland (WHSQ)has released an update of its guidance on how to handle the impacts of a death at work.  “A death in the workplace– a guide for families and friends” provides very useful information for a period when a family’s life will change forever and when thinking clearly will be difficult.

Like many guidances from OHS regulators, this one is very legalistic or procedural.  It explains the roles of police, coroners, OHS inspectors and others but it lacks a humanity that many would find reassuring in such a difficult time.

One of the issues that creates great anxiety is any delay in getting the body of their loved one back.  The Queensland guide discusses organising this through a funeral director but grieving people want a little more information.  The guide would have been improved by simply stating that there may be a delay in returning their loved ones and that a delay of a week is often the norm.

Often families choose not to know the details of the procedures because they are focussing on their loss.  Anyone who has had to organise a funeral after a sudden non-work related death knows how traumatic the process already is and how disruptive it can be to a family, without the involvement of government agencies, police and others.

If the readership of this guidance was families and friends it has the wrong tone.  It provides important information without understanding the context in which such a guide may be read.  WorkCover New South Wales’ guide for families recognises this context with “a word of introduction”. Continue reading “Death in the workplace guide could have been much more helpful”

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