Maddocks law firm has just concluded the second part of their psychological health and safety seminars. Lawyers Catherine Dunlop and Dale McQualter have the advantage of following a seminar on the same topic held by Victoria’s occupational health and safety (OHS) regulator just the other day. The advantage with this seminar is that the lawyers feel comfortable in giving their opinions and advice in contrast to the careful words of the WorkSafe people.
Category: state of knowledge
Why do we need a “positive duty” to prevent harm?
In 2023, a Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability recommended that the Commonwealth Disability Discrimination Act 1992 be amended to introduce a positive duty on all duty-holders to eliminate disability discrimination, harassment and victimisation. This echoes the imposition in 2022 of a positive duty to prevent sexual harassment. Occupational health and safety (OHS) legislation has had its positive duty to prevent work-related harm since 1985. So why this current push for positive duties?
OHS Lessons from the Antoinette Lattouf Case
Just before Christmas in 2023, Antoinette Lattouf was taken off-air by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation halfway through her five-day contract as a radio fill-in. It sparked an acrimonious unfair dismissal dispute. Last week the Australian Labour Law Association held a webinar on the case which touched on the occupational health and safety (OHS) perspective.
Denmark and Australia Compared on Psychosocial Safety
Niru Tyagi recently wrote on LinkedIn about Denmark’s regulatory approach to work-related psychosocial hazards, comparing it the current Australian approach, framing Denmark as creating an industrial obligation. It is a perceptive comparison but downplays the significance in Australia of the criterion of reasonably practicable.
Are emotion and anger also types of energy?
One of my previous employers was highly committed to occupational health and safety (OHS), but always gave the program, the schedule or utilisation a higher priority. Whether that was a justifiable compliance level was of little concern, as long as the auditors recertified the OHS management systems. The company realised their approach to OHS was not working, so it turned its focus on “critical risks”, which were, bluntly, anything that would kill you. But such was the strength of the culture that even this focus on critical risks failed to cut through and give OHS the respect that it legislatively deserves.
Matthew Hallowell‘s latest book, “Energy-Based Safety – A Scientific Approach to Preventing Serious Injuries and Fatalities (SIFs)“, discusses this focus on critical risks.
OHS and Politics
In support of Australia’s Safe Work Month, I have recorded a 12-minute opinion piece on how Australian politics since 2010 has affected the perception and development of occupational health and safety, based on past SafetyAtWorkBlog articles.
It is an interesting opportunity to reflect on the decisions and actions of influential individuals like Julia Gillard, Kristina Keneally, Jeff Lawrence, and David Gregory.
Polishing What Exists: Making Sense of the New Psych Safety Code
Prominent occupational health and safety (OHS) lawyers Dale McQualter and Catherine Dunlop have just concluded the first of two online seminars about Victoria’s new psychological/psychosocial regulations and compliance code. Many employers will have a lot of work to do to comply, but the overall sense was one of reassurance.






