Category: Leadership

The Asphyxiation of OHS

Good OHS thinking and practice are being slowly asphyxiated.  By far most suggestions by workers, unions or good consultants for Health & Safety improvements are ‘choked’ by management naysayers and bureaucrats more in touch with their current minister’s moods than workplace reality.  Not choked immediately or blatantly.   In fact, that person may be patted on the back and encouraged to raise more OHS matters, “Yes, mate, good!  Tell us what else we’re doing wrong, very very helpful.  You just keep on telling us”……..  And slowly any significant discussion about OHS problems is suppressed and killed.

The majority of workers in Australia work in small workplaces where (typically) practical OHS programs are regarded by managers as a nuisance, a bit of ‘over-the-top’ nonsense that slows down productivity.  It’s regarded as an irritant of fashion that will pass, like the fashion-related, politically correct things to say. Continue reading “The Asphyxiation of OHS”

OHS needs innovative thinking to manage fatigue

The December 2010 edition of WorkForce Management magazine (not available online) reports on a recent US survey concerning fatigue. The raw data is not available but the survey of 820 companies showed that over 80 per cent of respondents believed that fatigue was more of a workplace issue that in the past.

This may indicate an increased awareness or an increased reality but regardless, the hazard is gaining more attention.

Of greater interest is the possible causes identified in the survey. These include:

  • “Reduced head count,
  • Lack of boundaries between home life and work,
  • Second jobs,
  • A culture of ‘wanting to do it all'”.

How many of these contributory factors can an OHS professional affect? Continue reading “OHS needs innovative thinking to manage fatigue”

Is capitalism anti-safety? Systemic failures in oil industry

The Wall Street Journal and other media around the world have reported on systemic failures of the global oil industry and government regulators identified by the National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling.  These articles are based on the release of a single chapter, Chapter 4, of the final report due for release on 11 January 2011.

A media release from the Commission includes the following findings from Chapter 4

“The well blew out because a number of separate risk factors, oversights, and outright mistakes combined to overwhelm the safeguards meant to prevent just such an event from happening.  But most of the mistakes and oversights at Macondo can be traced back to a single overarching failure—a failure of management.  Better management by BP, Halliburton, and Transocean would almost certainly have prevented the blowout by improving the ability of individuals involved to identify the risks they faced, and to properly evaluate, communicate, and address them.”

“. . .the Macondo blowout was the product of several individual missteps and oversights by BP, Halliburton, and Transocean, which government regulators lacked the authority, the necessary resources, and the technical expertise to prevent.”

“The blowout was not the product of a series of aberrational decisions made by rogue industry or government officials that could not have been anticipated or expected to occur again. Rather, the root causes are systemic and, absent significant reform in both industry practices and government policies, might well recur.”

“What we. . .know is considerable and significant:

  1. each of the mistakes made on the rig and onshore by industry and government increased the risk of a well blowout;
  2. the cumulative risk that resulted from these decisions and actions was both unreasonably large and avoidable; and
  3. the risk of a catastrophic blowout was ultimately realized on April 20 and several of the mistakes were contributing causes of the blowout.”
The significance of these quotes is that the Commission is critical of an industry and not just a single company.   Continue reading “Is capitalism anti-safety? Systemic failures in oil industry”

Undercover Boss is an example of executive alienation

“Undercover Boss” has become a popular television program in many countries over the last few years.  The format is fresh and the results revealing.  The eyes of each boss are opened to the deficiencies of a business and to the value of the workforce.  Each episode ends with the reward of acknowledgement to the workers and new wisdom to the boss.

But the show is also an indictment of the attitudes of, and the management training provided, to senior executives.  Why were the employees not being valued by the executives already?  How did the executives lose touch?

If business management, corporate structures, and management training was rooted in the reality of work rather than profit, a series like Undercover Boss would never have been possible.

The concept of an executive maintaining a perspective of frontline customer contact is not new.   Continue reading “Undercover Boss is an example of executive alienation”

Australia needs a sound and credible OHS organisation

Any organisation that claims to be “considered by Industry and Governments to be the premier membership based organisation for the Safety Professional” establishes very high expectations in the community and its members.

At the end of November 2010 the Safety Institute of Australia (SIA) concluded what could be described as its annus horribilis with its 2010 Annual General Meeting in Melbourne.

2010 has been busy for the SIA on the home front with its Western Australia Division morphing into a new OHS organisation (with a loss of 4,000 members according to the National President’s report in the Annual Report), a National Secretary being suspended, a Fellow being accused of contempt of the National Board, legal action continuing over SIA-related matters and special general meetings occurring, or being organised by longstanding and disgruntled members.

The various ructions in the last 12 months have been described in the SIA Annual Report [not available publicly online] by the outgoing National President, as “ill-informed” and reflective of “a suburban tennis club”.

The National President also briefly discusses breaches of ethics.  It is good to see, in one way, that “most [ethical breaches] were dismissed as frivolous or vexatious”, but the fact that the perceived breaches were even lodged should indicate that the SIA needs to devote a great deal more resources into educating its membership on due process in this area, or in reviewing the administration of the Code of Conduct.

Annual General Meetings are an important element of corporate and organisational accountability.  Indeed, a quick description of AGMs says that

“An AGM is held every year to elect the Board of Directors and inform their members of previous and future activities.  It is an opportunity for the shareholders and partners to receive copies of the company’s accounts as well as reviewing fiscal information for the past year and asking any questions regarding the directions the business will take in the future.” Continue reading “Australia needs a sound and credible OHS organisation”

Controlling Christmas party risks is a year-round activity

Every year, around this time, law firms and OHS regulators release statements and good OHS advice about the risks of Christmas and end-of-year work parties.  But companies who wait until now to introduce control measures and policies for the risks of occupational violence, sexual harassment and reputational damage have, largely, missed the opportunity to effectively manage these risks.

The need to enforce safe behaviours at work functions is not a seasonal process but one that is integral to the establishment of a safe workplace culture the year round.  This is not to say that a friendly reminder is not useful but, if managed well, it should be nothing more than a reminder.

Of all the OHS advice for parties, Workplace Health & Safety Queensland is most succinct:

Safety website says OHS association is heartless

Safety In Australia has posted an extraordinary article questioning the decision of the Safety Institute of Australia to proceed with a process to consider the expulsion of one of its members regardless of the member recently suffering a heart attack.

The article says that the SIA has received a doctor’s letter saying that Phil Kamay, the member in question, should not attend the special general meeting on health grounds but the SIA has decided to proceed regardless. Safety In Australia questions this decision on the grounds of fairness. It is unclear who, if anyone, will be presenting Kamay’s rebuttal of the accusations against him that have led to the expulsion moves.

On an unrelated note, it is understood that the SIA has two tables booked for Worksafe Victoria’s Safety Awards late next week and that Phil Kamay is a guest at one of those tables.

Kevin Jones

© 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