In mid-March, pandemic advice from occupational health and safety (OHS) regulators was assessed with the generic guidance from WorkSafe Victoria being praised. Many changes to workplaces have occurred since then and Safe Work Australia (SWA) has caught up with the demand for industry-specific guidance on managing work in this pandemic. SWA’s advice is very good and is discussed below.
It is very hard to write about any occupational health and safety (OHS) issue in this time of a global pandemic. Many of the workplace hazards continue to exist but in a different context and, of course, the duty of care on both employers and workers continues wherever work is being done. Australians, understandably, have an insular focus at the moment, but there is some benefit from looking at how national disruption has been handled elsewhere in the recent past. COVID19 is not SARS, but Singapore’s action in 2003 is useful in showing how change can be managed. This change management is likely to be a more integral part of effective OHS management for all Australian businesses once the pandemic declines.
Every occupational health and safety (OHS) man and their dog is providing advice about how to manage the COVID19 pandemic. The only advice this blog has offered is to target your sources of information about managing the risks to your local health department or OHS regulator. This information is changing all the time in response to new information but there are a couple of OHS guidances that are worth paying close attention to.
Continue reading “Australian OHS guidances for COVID19”
In 2005 I was able to interview prominent risk communicator, Peter Sandman. It was a time of pandemic threats from Avian Influenza, or “Bird Flu”, and we talked about pandemics, their complications and their management. The virus situation has progressed enormously from 2005 to today’s announcement by the World Health Organisation of a coronavirus pandemic but I provide access to this interview to offer a different and historical perspective on the current outbreak of coronavirus. I also had to include my tips for managing coronavirus in Australian workplaces.
Of most interest and relevance, perhaps, is this statement from Peter Sandman:
“If you really think there is going to be a severe pandemic, the first thing you are going to want to do is organise the earliest survivors, the people who get the flu and don’t die, into delivery people. Then they can deliver food and fuel and everything people need so that everyone else can stay home .”
Many OHS professionals and business gurus state that safety leadership must come from the top of the corporate tree. BHP Billiton received some rare positive press on 16 June 2009 concerning its OHS policies.
According to Mark Hawthorne, BHP CEO Marius Kloppers has revealed he is battling “pig flu”, in his words. This seems to have generated a flurry of OHS activity. Sadly the best OHS practice was not mentioned, which would be to send the infected CEO home.
Hawthorne’s article identifies several BHP swine flu actions:
- non-essential trips have been cancelled;
- executives who must fly are being provided with Tamiflu;
- cleaning shifts have been increased;
- telephones, keyboards, rest rooms and public areas are being disinfected more regularly; and
- bottles of alcohol-based hand sanitisers have appeared.
SafetyAtWorkBlog is seeking clarification from BHP Billiton on a number of points.
It is hoped that these measures were not generated only by the CEO comments but were already in place, particularly, following previous incidents with SARS and even avian influenza.
Any measures should be supported by staff consultation that involves more than a notice on the board or an email in the intranet. Many of these measures generate as many questions as they hope to answer and there should be information sessions for those who wish more detail.
Indeed one of the basic employment issues that always comes up in discussions about pandemics is leave entitlements. The importance of brainstorming pandemic planning can be illustrated by an article in The Australian, also on 16 June 2009. The ACTU believes that unpaid leave should not be applied if a worker needs to be absent from work due to influenza, even if the worker themselves are not ill.
The ACTU has told SafetyAtWorkBlog that the following motion was passed at last week’s ACTU Congress
that Federal and State governments should bring together peak union and employer groups to establish guidelines for handling the pandemic. These would:
- ensure workers and their families are not financially disadvantaged by the outbreak;
- provide employers with useful information and procedures to deal with any suspected cases of swine flu in the workplace;
- ensure persons who are in isolation as a consequence of swine flu are not discriminated against or disadvantaged in their employment; and,
- educate the community about the disease to stop misinformation, panic and help in the overall strategy to slow down the spread of the disease during the winter months.
One of the criticisms that SafetyAtWorkBlog has expressed about many influenza advice sites is that control of the hazard at work is not being seen in the context of occupational health and safety. This was the case with www.fluthreat.com.
Sadly, influenza information from OHS regulators is of dubious value and application, in many instances, and the regulators have not been promoting their advice. Very little OHS traction has been gained on the pandemic, even when the unions make the point to the media, as the ACTU did with The Australian newspaper. The Australian’s article did not mention the following, and sensible, ACTU advice:
“Employers owe a duty of care to workers to provide healthy and safe workplaces as far as reasonably forseeable(sic) [and] the swine flu outbreak has been highly publicised and is reasonably forseeable.”
Let’s hope that the BHP Billiton control measures are part of an integrated OHS/pandemic plan and not a reflex action to please the boss.
On the evening of 2 June 2009, the ABC TV show “Lateline Business” ran a short item on the business continuity issues associated with Australia’s swine flu outbreak. Not much that was said was new but it proposed an interesting scenario for those people who manage aged care facilities where a potentially virulent illness could harm residents who it may be difficult to isolate or quarantine.
Michael Tooma of Australian law firm, Deacons, spoke briefly to remind viewers that health and safety were important legislative obligations that relate to illnesses, such as swine flu. Interestingly he provided a rule-of-thumb scenario on business continuity. He asked whether a business could continue to operate with 20% less staff, a 20% reduction in logistics services and 20% less customers, if the swine flu realises its potential.
Most of the speakers spoke from the current position that Australia is suffering from a “mild” case of this virus. The story would be considerably different if Australia suffered its first swine-flu fatality, as have other nations. One death and the terminology will change.
A video of the segment is available to view online.
Some time ago SafetyAtWorkBlog was critical of OHS regulators releasing swine flu information because the advice was not being easily translated in the workplace, and some of the advice was just silly.
Much better advice is available from the New South Wales government however, curiously, the Workplace Guide to Managing Influenza Pandemic has been issued by the Department of Commerce. The department’s Office of Industrial Relations has released the document which makes more sense however the release seems to be contrary to WorkCover New South Wales who defers to the NSW Health Department, surely the most logical central point for communication on this public health issue.
There are too many “experts” on the workplace impact of swine flu influenza and pandemics. SafetyAtWorkBlog has kept out of this issue as we share the position of WorkCover NSW – defer to the State or National authorities.
However, some companies feel obliged to be seen to be doing something, anything, about swine flu and their half-cocked measures are discrediting their overall process of safety management.
One national company recently issued a new policy advice to all staff on swine flu. The policy was little more than a cut and paste from an official fact sheet. It added little to the employees’ knowledge of the hazard and in no way answered staff questions such as
- If my child’s school is closed due to a swine flu threat, what type of leave am I entitled to take?
- The company has provided annual influenza vaccinations. Will I need re-vaccinating in the event of swine flu and will the company cover this cost?
- In what circumstances can my employer send me home?
Not only was it next to useless, the company had the cheek to include its own corporate logo on the policy. Public health and OHS information is usually flexible in its reuse but somebody in the company looks like they are empire-building rather than managing their staff.
People want advice on how swine flu will disrupt their lives and working lives, not information on swine flu itself. Employers should leave the health information to the health authorities and concentrate on the management of the disruption and potential health threats within their area of expertise, their own workplaces.
If employers raise expectations by issuing policies in areas outside of their expertise, they begin a spiral of the demand for information that it may be impossible to satisfy.