Category: lawyers

Never admitting guilt is contrary to OHS principles

Many companies plead guilty to breaches of OHS legislation but remain convinced that they have done nothing wrong.

Employers have been constantly frustrated by never being sure that they are complying with OHS law because compliance is now a very grey area and one that  few people are brave enough to say has been achieved.  So it is no surprise when an employer responds to a workplace incident by saying “I’ve done nothing wrong”.  In their experience this statement is true but if they had a basic understanding of safety and OHS law (two very different things), they would know that if an incident occurs something must have gone wrong. Continue reading “Never admitting guilt is contrary to OHS principles”

Clarity of OHS laws in Australia

On 2 September 2010, an interview I undertook with Radio Atticus was broadcast in Australia  (9 minute mark of the podcast)  Radio Atticus is a law program on public radio in Australia.

As well as my comments, the reporter, Nat Cagilaba, interviewed Neil Foster of the  University of Newcastle (referred to as Ian in the podcast I believe).  We discuss the intended role and the current reality of OHS laws.

Comments on the audio are welcome.

Kevin Jones

IOSH responds to OHS misperceptions

If ever there was an indication that the UK’s Institute of Occupational Safety & Health (IOSH) is the leading OHS organisation around the world, its entry into the OHS debate generated by the new UK Prime Minister, David Cameron, and the inquiry into OHS by Lord Young confirms it.  “Rebalancing Act?” is a terrific summary of the major points of contention in the debate.

But, IOSH is also pursuing a reform that should have a much greater impact on the OHS profession.  It is establishing a professional accreditation scheme that should set the benchmark for other OHS professional associations elsewhere, particularly in Australia.  The scheme is not revolutionary but the process IOSH has used to build the scheme is admirable, especially when compared with the Australian HaSPA program that has stagnated, apparently, due to organisational politics. Continue reading “IOSH responds to OHS misperceptions”

Tooma takes aim at the Environment Minister over accountability

Participants at the 2010 Safety In Action conference and the 2010 ASSE Conference will be familiar with lawyer, Michael Tooma‘s faith in due diligence to improve safety management in Australia.  In the lead-up to his appearance at another Australian OHS conference in October 2010 he has again restated his faith but this largely ignores the changed political context of OHS harmonisation on which the new Work Health and Safety laws are based.

I have mentioned Australia’s current peculiar political position elsewhere.  The uncertainty of Federal politics overlaps and could greatly affect the OHS harmonisation process, or rather, its application.  It seems even more likely that the Labour Governments in Queensland and New South Wales will fall at their next State elections rendering the fast becoming an ideal of OHS harmonisation dead.

Tooma (pictured right) makes no mention of the changed political reality in a recent media release concerning his upcoming conference appearance although he is willing to take a pot shot at the Federal Environment Minister, Peter Garrett, over the lack of accountability over the deaths, fires and injuries that resulted from the botched home insulation scheme. Continue reading “Tooma takes aim at the Environment Minister over accountability”

Confusion over bullying and sexual discrimination on display in air traffic controller media reports

The Australian media is providing considerable coverage to the legal claim by two female workers against Airservices Australia over bullying and sexual discrimination.  Airservices Australia is a government organisation that control aircraft movement over Australian airspace.

The details of the harassment mentioned in the media are quite offensive and have no place in the modern workplace.

There are a couple of OHS related issues that pertain to the legal action and the media articles.  Firstly, the media struggles to differentiate between sexual discrimination, sexual harassment and workplace bullying.  Bullying has the most direct relationship to occupational health and safety but the others generate stress in the workplace and therefore the impacts, if not the actions, fall within the OHS purview.  The Australian Financial Review (AFR) (page 7, not available online) has a headline “Flight controllers sue for sexual discrimination” yet the article reports on bullying.   Continue reading “Confusion over bullying and sexual discrimination on display in air traffic controller media reports”

Apprentice set on fire, bully gets $5k penalty

Most of the Australian media covered the prosecution of the latest of three young men who set fire to a work colleague during their apprenticeships.

As the case was heard in a Magistrates’ Court, the only sources of information on the case are a couple of original media reports and the statement from WorkSafe Victoria which says:

“Matthew Lever, 23, was the third apprentice to be prosecuted after a January 2008 incident where three apprentice mechanics ignited brake-cleaning fluid which they sprayed on another apprentice….

The Ringwood Magistrates’ court today [1 July 2010] convicted Matthew Lever on three charges under the Occupational Health and Safety Act and fined him $5,000. The two other apprentices were convicted on health and safety charges in December 2008, and also fined $5,000 each.” [link added]

WorkSafe says it is “currently investigating a similar incident which occurred in Dandenong in March, where two apprentice mechanics suffered burn injuries after allegedly igniting brake fluid.” Continue reading “Apprentice set on fire, bully gets $5k penalty”

Explosive impacts from the Quin Investments prosecution still to be felt

The Quin Investment prosecution in South Australia is a good indication of the importance of workplace safety and equipment maintenance.

On 24 June 2010, Quin Investments and one of its directors Nikolai Kuzub were found guilty of breaches of OHS law in South Australia by Industrial Magistrate Ardlie.  The incident involved an explosion at an explosives factory in May 2006 that killed three workers, injured two others and flattened the factory.  Pieces of equipment were located over 600 metres away, houses a kilometre away were damaged and the explosion was heard 40 kilometres away according to one media report.

Grant Germein, the lawyer representing Quin Investments, has asserted a conspiracy from, at least, the start of the court case:

“He said the company was being used as a scapegoat and SafeWork SA’s investigation into the incident was “not directed at the cause of the explosion”, but to “see if they could find a culprit”. Continue reading “Explosive impacts from the Quin Investments prosecution still to be felt”

© Workplace Safety Services P/L (ABN: 68091088621) and SafetyAtWorkBlog, 2008-2024. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Kevin Jones and SafetyAtWorkBlog with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

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