law – Page 205 – SafetyAtWorkBlog

Risk/Reward trade-off

On 11 January 2010, the Tasmanian Workplace Relations Minister, Lisa Singh, announced a new safety focus on the abalone industry following the findings of a coronial inquest into the death of David Colson in 2007.

There are several interesting elements to the Minister’s decision. Firstly and, perhaps, most importantly, the decision shows the significant role that Coroners in Australia play in improving workplace safety. For legislative change, it is difficult to see any more effective political motivator.

Also, the Coroner can express opinions based on evidence in a way that few other courts do. The findings are not yet publicly available. Continue reading “Risk/Reward trade-off”

Health Department bans all employees from smoking at work

Most of the Australian media have reported on a memo to staff of the Australian Department of Health that only allows smoking while on meal breaks. Health Department employees are not permitted to smoke while undertaking departmental duties or “when representing the department in any capacity”.

Government authorities have long participated in smoking reduction campaigns which have succeeded in minimising smoking. Workplaces in Australia already have workplace smoking bans. So what’s caused the memo (a copy which has not been seen by SafetyAtWorkBlog) to be issued?

The principal reason seems to be to improve the “professional reputation of the department”. It has always been a ridiculous image to see Health Department employees crowding around departmental doorways smoking cigarettes. Continue reading “Health Department bans all employees from smoking at work”

Changing political support of workplace safety in the US

Occupational health and safety used to be above political argy-bargy. It was accepted that the safety of workers was a core importance to the management of any business. Often it operated as a subset of industrial relations and popped its head up occasionally, usually when new of revised legislation was due. Rarely has workplace safety been a catalyst for political controversy.

In the United States, the last political fight was over the ergonomics rule under a Republican Bush presidency in 2001. According to one media report:

“The president has directed Labor Secretary Elaine Chao to find a less expensive way to protect worker health.” Continue reading “Changing political support of workplace safety in the US”

Migrant workers’ deaths on Christmas Eve

According to the Toronto Police, four workers died on December 24 2009 when the swing stage they were working on collapsed. A fifth man, Dilshod Marupov, is in hospital.

Media reports have identified the five workers as migrant workers and although the swing stage was at the thirteenth floor of an apartment complex, no-one was wearing safety harnesses. Continue reading “Migrant workers’ deaths on Christmas Eve”

Legal professional privilege and safety management

The Safety Institute‘s OHS Professional magazine for December 2009 included an article (originally published in an OHS newsletter from Piper Alderman for those non-SIA members) about the application of legal professional privilege using a New South Wales Industrial Relations Commission decision as its basis (Nicholson v Waco KwikForm Limited). The case received considerable attention by OHS law firms. Continue reading “Legal professional privilege and safety management”

Orewa College explosion update

The New Zealand Department of Labour has released a media statement about the prosecution reported on yesterday but

“The Department will not name either the parties or the specific charges until the charges reach court.”

This may be an indication of the political sensitivities of the prosecution.

A representative of the Orewa College Board of Trustees, Phil Pickford,was interviewed by New Zealand Radio on 21 December 2009. The interview is available online.

Pickford states that he is proud of the OHS systems that are in place at Orewa College and places Orewa in the top 10% of schools for OHS performance.

It is difficult for anyone to make public statements on an OHS prosecution without knowing who has been charged and with what.

From SafetyAtWorkBlog’s perspective, regardless of any action taken by the DoL, it would have been expected that both the school and the Education Department would have undertaken their own investigations in to the death of one of their own employees, if for no other reason than to stop a similar occurrence in other schools.

A TV report of the explosion from mid-2009 is available online.

Kevin Jones

CSR in firing line on asbestos compensation

SafetyAtWorkBlog has not reported on the asbestos compensation problems faced by James Hardie Industries directly because in 2009, the issue is one of corporate responsibility more so than workplace safety. The reality is that asbestos kills and victims deserve compensation. The fact that asbestos companies are avoiding their responsibilities is of little surprise.

In Australia, most of the focus has been on James Hardie due, principally, to its corporate conduct to the Australian stock exchange and its prosecution by the financial regulators. But another asbestos miner and building product manufacturer is at the Australian Courts in December 2009.

In some ways, CSR Limited is the more notorious asbestos manufacturer due to its operation of the Wittenoom asbestos mine. It could be said that CSR is the James Hardie of the 1980s.

According to a media report in the Sydney Morning Herald, CSR is planning to demerge but the Federal Court has been told that the Australian Securities & Investments Commission believes that insufficient allowance has been made in the strategy for asbestos compensation.

CSR is splitting its sugar and renewable energies divisions away from the building products division where the compensation is likely to sit. The sugar business will be called Sucrogen.

For those who do watch the corporate manoeuvrings of asbestos manufacturers, CSR’s actions should be familiar but those new to the issue should look beyond James Hardie to gain fuller appreciation of asbestos and capitalism.

For a global perspective on the whole industry it is hard to go past “Defending the Indefensible” by Jock McCulloch and Geoffrey Tweedale.

Kevin Jones

Category: law

Risk/Reward trade-off

Like this:

Health Department bans all employees from smoking at work

Like this:

Changing political support of workplace safety in the US

Like this:

Migrant workers’ deaths on Christmas Eve

Like this:

Legal professional privilege and safety management

Like this:

Orewa College explosion update

Like this:

CSR in firing line on asbestos compensation

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: