Important OHS court decisions go unreported

On 20 May 2010 a Victorian magistrate fined an employer over $A500,000 following a workplace prosecution.  Almost all of it went to charity, according to WorkSafe Victoria.

There are several issues raised by Magistrate Vandersteen’s decision:

  • Why to charity?
  • Why the particular charities?
  • Why not allocate the funds to OHS-related organisations or initiatives?
  • Why does the Magistrates’ Court not make court decisions publicly available?

The workplace incident that started this case was that in August 2008, a 40-year-old man had his arm ripped out of the socket when it became tangled in an unguarded post peeler.   He was taken to hospital by an emergency ambulance helicopter where his life was saved. Continue reading “Important OHS court decisions go unreported”

Australian roundtable podcast on workplace bullying

On 21 May 2010, Boardroom Radio (BRR) released a podcast on workplace bullying that includes opinions from some worthy speakers.

Andrew Douglas, Managing Director at Douglas LPT;

Wayne Blair, Fair Work Australia Commissioner;

Gail Hubble, Barrister; and

Anna Palmer, HR Consultant, at Provenio Consulting

Some of the questions are a little peculiar such as whether current generations are more “vulnerable” to bullying.  Speakers responded that there are more opportunities for bullying now due to new technologies Continue reading “Australian roundtable podcast on workplace bullying”

Lack of separation of pedestrians and forklifts results in $A24k fine

SafeWorkSA has released details of a successful OHS prosecution concerning forklifts, yet again.  But the full judgement has more management information than is usual and deserves to be read in full.

The circumstances, according to a media release (not yet available online) are

“…an incident… in August 2007 in which a 56 year old delivery driver tripped over the tines of a forklift which was about to exit the curtained doorway of a cold-room.”

The judgement in the South Australian Industrial Court expands upon the charge:

“… that Kerafi, being the occupier of a workplace, had failed to ensure so far as was reasonably practicable that means of access to and egress from the workplace was safe.   Continue reading “Lack of separation of pedestrians and forklifts results in $A24k fine”

Professor Michael Quinlan on Jeff Shaw’s legacy

The Australian newspaper on 12 May 2010 published an article that is an example of the type of article on the passing of former New South Wales Attorney-General Jeff Shaw that SafetyAtWorkBlog expressed concerns over.  For most of the article Shaw’s alcoholism is the focus yet we should not judge a person only by their flaws but by their achievements.

Prof Quinlan

SafetyAtWorkBlog interviewed Professor Michael Quinlan who was closely involved in some of the law reform work that Jeff Shaw instigated in the 1990s when he was the Attorney-General.

Quinlan echoed the opinions of Professor Ron McCallum over Shaw’s commitment to industrial relations and OHS law reform but spoke of a different set of legislation  that Quinlan thinks was an important achievement of Shaw. Continue reading “Professor Michael Quinlan on Jeff Shaw’s legacy”

Important OHS law reformer, Jeff Shaw, dies

Around 15 years ago, occupational health and safety law in New South Wales looked exciting.  The NSW Standing Committee on Law & Justice was  investigating OHS, and not just the laws.  There was a potential for the inquiry to make New South Wales a leader in innovation in this sector.

On 11 May 2010, the news broke that a leading supporter for the review, Jeff Shaw, had died.  Although his legal career ended in controversial fashion, Shaw’s activities in relation to industrial relations and OHS were notable.  SafetyAtWorkBlog looks briefly at Jeff Shaw’s OHS legacy. Continue reading “Important OHS law reformer, Jeff Shaw, dies”

Where’s the Sarbanes-Oxley for workplace safety?

In 2002, after several corporate collapses, the United States government signed in the Sarbanes-Oxley Act which was intended to establish business practices on accounting and auditing among other aims.  The Western world watched the introduction of this legislation and echoed many of the requirements in their own legislation and corporate oversight agencies.

It is likely in the wake of the global financial crisis that the United States (and Europe to a lesser extent) is entering another wave of corporate regulation or interference, depending on one’s politics.

These laws introduced substantial change to the management of businesses, the disclosure of information and the role of corporate executives.  When will this type of change include occupational safety and health?

Firstly, the United States’ safety professionals and regulators need to accept that their system of OHS legislation and enforcement is not “world’s best practice”.  There are major deficiencies in high-risk organisations and a misunderstanding of safety obligations at the shopfloor level.  These problems exist partly because of the structure and population of the country itself and also because there is so much baggage in its legal system that new perspectives in law are difficult to imagine.

A significant change in OHS law outside the United States is the issue of personal accountability for safety-related decisions.  There are few who complain about the jailing of CEOs and executives for the loss of money (their own and that of others) but there is a real barrier to jailing those same people when their management decisions led to a loss of life. Continue reading “Where’s the Sarbanes-Oxley for workplace safety?”

Case study of existing hazards in the new legislative context

Last month Joe Catanzariti of the Australian law firm, Clayton Utz, wrote a short article that links two OHS issues in a manner that others should follow.

Catanzariti made the jump from a prosecution under current New South Wales OHS legislation (according to many the most draconian in Australia) to identify how such a decision would be made under the harmonise OHS law system through the Work, Health and Safety Act.  The perspective needs to be applied more as it assists greatly in transitioning our understanding of “old” law to the new. Continue reading “Case study of existing hazards in the new legislative context”

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