law – Page 191 – SafetyAtWorkBlog

Suicide advice shows reactive thinking

Workplace suicides are in the news at the moment due to Foxconn and, to a lesser extent, France Telecome. There is enough media attention for companies to start to evaluate their own risk exposures.

Through LinkedIn, Tom Boudreau of R&R Insurance Services, issued the following advice under the title “Do Employers Have a Duty to Prevent Workplace Suicides?”:

“A tech company in China has recently been plagued with a rash of worker suicides (and attempted suicides). Nine workers (all of them young) died and two others suffered serious injuries. These workers have not only killed or tried to kill themselves, they’ve done so in the workplace itself. …..

Some labor groups have blamed the company for the suicides, claiming it runs military-style factories and abuses workers. Regardless of the cause, these tragic deaths do raise an interesting question: what duty do employers have—if any—to prevent workplace suicides? Continue reading “Suicide advice shows reactive thinking”

The “Triffid defence” applied to asbestos

At the end of The Day of The Triffids, John Wyndham, had mankind living on the Isle of Wight, making sure that Triffids did not infest the island. Tasmania has a similar mindset as can be seen by its diligence on keeping the land free of foxes but that is keeping out a hazard. The greater challenge is renewing the land and removing a hazard that was allowed to grow and establish itself like triffids or, more realistically, asbestos.

SafetyAtWorkBlog has written elsewhere about the Australian Workers Union push to make Tasmania free of asbestos by 2020. The signs are increasingly positive as the Tasmanian government issued a media release on 6 June 2010 that provides substantial impetus and legitimacy to the campaign.

The Minister for Workplace Relations, David O’Byrne, said today that the government will work with industry to develop legislative frameworks that provide a pathway for the prioritised removal of asbestos from Tasmania. Continue reading “The “Triffid defence” applied to asbestos”

The advantages of integrated enforcement action

In the 1990s, WorkSafe Victoria (then the Occupational health and Safety Authority) coordinated Hazardous Chemicals Audit Teams (HCAT). I was one member of the administrative unit for HCAT. This coordinated approach to inspection and enforcement had substantial merit and was very effective as the Auditor-General found in 1995. I was reminded of this initiative by the simultaneous action taken by the Victorian Government against Mobil Australia, a subsidiary of ExxonMobil, on 3 June 2010.

The Environment Protection Authority (EPA) has

“…cancelled Mobil Refining Australia Pty Ltd’s accredited licence”.

The EPA media release quotes CEO John Merritt (formerly executive director of WorkSafe Victoria):

“In the absence of [an ongoing commitment to constantly improving their environmental performance], EPA has the power to cancel the accreditation…. EPA is less than impressed with Mobil’s track record in which there has been a number of incidents at the site all with the potential for environmental and community risk.

It is EPA’s belief that Mobil’s onsite practices have not demonstrated a high level of environmental performance to justify accreditation.” Continue reading “The advantages of integrated enforcement action”

What can OHS professionals learn from government program failures?

Marcus Priest of the Australia Financial Review wrote a good article on 2 June 2010 (only available through subscription or hard copy) that illustrates the managerial deficiencies of the Australian Government by looking at the lessons from two governmental investigation reports concerning a large-scale construction program for existing schools and the home insulation scheme. Priest identifies several issues that should be noted by those who are designing large projects and who need to deal with the government directly

Priest’s opening paragraph is:

“The decisions by the Rudd government to try pull (sic) the country out of a recession by spending billions on schools and free home roofing insulation have come to be regarded as worthy ideas that morphed into a disaster of public administration.”

Marcus says that these reports show an overworked public service, unreasonable government expectations, a disconnection between policy and its real-world application and poor assumptions. Continue reading “What can OHS professionals learn from government program failures?”

What is the OHS “public interest”?

On 7 May 2010 Judge Lacava of the County Court of Victoria increased the $A25,000 fine applied to A Bending Company to $A75,000.

WorkSafe’s Acting Director for Health and Safety, Stan Krpan, said in a media release:

“The fact that the Director of Public Prosecutions [DPP] found the original penalty inadequate, and the increase in the fine on appeal, demonstrates the courts’ attitude towards health and safety offences.”

The DPP made the appeal to the County Court after a request for review of the original fine was made by WorkSafe Victoria. According to the judge’s decision (not yet available online):

“The appeal by the Director is made pursuant to section 84 of the Magistrates’ Court Act 1989. The section gives the Director the power to appeal to this Court “if satisfied that an appeal should be brought in the public interest“.” [emphasis added]

So how was the public interest served by increasing the fine by $A50,000? Continue reading “What is the OHS “public interest”?”

“We will trust but we will verify” – upcoming lessons from the Gulf of Mexico

The mass media is full of reports on legal action being taken on behalf of shareholders in BP over the continuing oil spill from the former Deepwater oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico.

An Australian video report was broadcast on 25 May 2010 and a composite article has appeared in The Australian on 26 May 2010 as well as elsewhere. Many outlets are mentioning the law suit (Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority and Robert Freedman v Anthony B Hayward et al, Court of Chancery for the state of Delaware, No. 5511) but no details of the suit are publicly available at the moment.

Although safety is mentioned as one of the bases for the suit, it is likely that environmental impact will get prominence over occupational safety and that impact on stock value will be of the most concern. The shareholder outrage mentioned in some of the articles seems to focus mostly on the financial impact on BP share value rather than any moral outrage on environmental impact or dead and injured workers.

BP CEO Anthony Hayward has acknowledged the substantial “reputational risk” but his comments are almost always reported surrounded by financial bad news. Continue reading ““We will trust but we will verify” – upcoming lessons from the Gulf of Mexico”

Is OHS part of Labour Law?

The question in the title of this article came about from the release of a fabulous new book by LexisNexis- Butterworths – Australian Labour Law – Text, Cases & Commentary, 5th edition.

Through my introductory look at the book, it seems that occupational health and safety gets around half a page in a book of over 1200 pages. As an OHS reader I was disappointed, as I believe that OHS is an important subset of labour law. My belief is echoed by some Australian publishers who include, usually, a chapter on OHS in their labour law titles. LexisNexis has never been a publisher of OHS information with the market leader being CCH but with Federation Press holding the more quality and original sector.

One possible reason for the lack of OHS is that the authors, Marilyn J Pittard and Richard B Naughton are lecturers in labour law at Monash University and OHS does not feature in their program. Another could be that the book is a monolithic volume already and, perhaps, OHS could not be given adequate attention without adding a couple of pounds to the book and generating a manual handling risk.

It is hoped that LexisNexis realises there is a market opening for authoritative and fresh writing on OHS in Australia, particularly in this period of change due to harmonisation. The morphing of OHS in the areas of due diligence and risk management are particularly interesting to watch. Continue reading “Is OHS part of Labour Law?”

Category: law

Suicide advice shows reactive thinking

Like this:

The “Triffid defence” applied to asbestos

Like this:

The advantages of integrated enforcement action

Like this:

What can OHS professionals learn from government program failures?

Like this:

What is the OHS “public interest”?

Like this:

“We will trust but we will verify” – upcoming lessons from the Gulf of Mexico

Like this:

Is OHS part of Labour Law?

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: