As I write this, hundreds of workers’ memorial services are taking place around the world. I usually attend the Melbourne, Victoria, event and wish I could have been there today because one speaker, Lana Cormie, transcended the usual politics and platitudes to outline a broader strategy for occupational health and safety (OHS) reform.
Most countries and regions seem to have a sport of cultural significance. Australia has several, but all professional sports are played in workplaces, the players are employees, and the sporting clubs are employers. Most have a supervisory and administrative body. Recently, an Australian Rules Football player, Elijah Hollands, displayed signs of a mental health condition during a match. Some spectators noticed that “something was wrong”; some players noticed this at the time, but Hollands played three-quarters of the game, offering only one direct contribution to play, before he was taken off, to only return later in the last quarter. The ABC and 7News provide a good background to the situation
The questions that remain unanswered are why Holland’s employer did not remove a clearly unwell player earlier, and whether the Carlton Football Club breached its duty of care.
By now, SafetyAtWorkBlog readers are well aware that the ways to prevent psychosocial hazards and manage psychological harm and safety are well established. A brand-new global report from the International Labour Organisation in support of next week’s World Day for Safety and Health at Work provides excellent information on psychosocial hazards, but I wanted to know more. I wanted to know why these hazards exist and thought the ILO report may offer some answers or clues.
Workplace bullying, harassment and other psychosocial risks are no longer fringe issues – they are central to how we think about safety, fairness and dignity at work. One forum that has been shaping this conversation for more than two decades is the International Association on Workplace Bullying and Harassment (IAWBH) and its much‑anticipated biannual conference. This year’s event brings researchers, regulators and practitioners together in Canberra to tackle some of the most difficult problems in working life, with a strong emphasis on practical solutions, especially pertaining to sexual harassment and gender-based violence.
Professor Carlo Caponecchia, who is presenting at the conference, made some time for a couple of questions.
Continue reading “Solving Psychosocial Harm at Work: The Upcoming Global IAWBH Conference in Canberra”The most effective way to prevent psychological harm at work is to redesign work and its systems, especially the workload. What is often overlooked is the need to redesign the workload of and the expectations we have for senior executives. The Australian Financial Review published an article on this issue, drawing on the personal experience of marketing executive, Roni Millard.
I don’t believe that all occupational health and safety (OHS) principles, risk assessment tools, or values are relevant to the non-work culture, but there is sufficient overlap for OHS to offer a framework for hazard identification, incident investigation, and potential risk control options. The current political debate in Australia about “Australian values” and immigration offers an illustration of this overlap; an overlap and debate that is being echoed in the United Kingdom.
Australian lawyer Michael Tooma is always worth listening to, and he recently participated in a webinar titled “When AI Watches Work: Monitoring Workers and Psychosocial Risks!” hosted by the Global Initiative for Industrial Safety. Tooma reinforced warnings about overreliance on artificial intelligence (AI) in occupational health and safety.
