The latest edition of Creighton & Stewart’s Labour Law book (7th edition) has been released. I say “book”, but it is almost a brick, weighing in on my scales at 1.8 kilograms (see photo below). The book is excellent and probably authoritative, with the primary negative being its size and format. This article focuses on the 79-page occupational health and safety (OHS) chapter written by Richard Johnstone.
The latest annual occupational health and safety (OHS) breakfast seminar by the Australian Institute of Health and Safety tried a different format with mixed success. These seminars have run almost continuously at the offices of Herbert Smith Freehills for a couple of decades, and perhaps a refresh was required, but there was one noticeable absence – Victoria’s OHS regulator, WorkSafe.
Last week, Maddocks law firm conducted an end-of-year summary of its workplace relations issues and a forecast for 2025. Occupational health and safety (OHS) are almost inseparable from industrial relations (IR), so the overlaps between the four or five topics discussed were enlightening and provided a good contrast to the information from other law sources.
One of the most important sources of information about occupational health and safety (OHS) is seminars organised by law firms. A great example was a webinar hosted by Herbert Smith Freehills on October 30, 2024, as part of its Safety Leadership Series. It was a general discussion on Australia’s most prominent OHS issues but outlined increasingly significant consequences.
Tasmanian politicians recently discussed Industrial Manslaughter laws in Parliament. As with similar debates in other jurisdictions, occupational health and safety (OHS) appears to justify these amendments, but the OHS principle of preventing harm is rarely discussed. Deterrence? Yes, but Prevention? Not really.
Recently, Herbert Smith Freehills (HSF) conducted a seminar on internal workplace investigations and ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) frameworks. Occupational health and safety (OHS) seems to be gaining more attention as an ESG element, but it must compete with so many other elements that it may always be seen as a side issue.
While watching Maddocks’ recent webinar on the Right-to-Disconnect for its local council clients, I was reminded of a comment from one of Maddocks’ competitors, Steve Bell, of Herbert Smith Freehills in a seminar earlier this year (paraphrased):
“This is less a right to disconnect as a right to refuse to respond”.
The webinar summarised three contexts for the new Right-to-Disconnect laws – Industrial Relations, Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) and Governance.
