Occupational health and safety (OHS) is the central theme of this blog, but it is essential to remember that not all workplace health and safety actions are governed by a single set of laws or a single regulatory agency. Safety in the retail sector offers a good example.
The community in Melbourne, Australia, has been talking about little else but a sex abuse scandal in the childcare industry. (It makes a difference from talking about beef wellingtons.) The media and the government are announcing and investigating various regulatory and enforcement options to prevent a recurrence. This abuse is a grave concern and not one that was unexpected, as earlier inquiries had identified the risk. The prevention of sexual harm to children has an occupational health and safety (OHS) context that should not be ignored.
Recently, Federation Press published a weighty tome written by Arie Freiberg called “Regulation in Australia. 2nd Edition“. For those of you who are legislative junkies and can quote sections of occupational health and safety (OHS) law, you will love this, as it examines the mechanics of regulation, not just those of Industrial Relations or OHS. And there is some powerful context to market failures that often lead to new regulations, a perspective shared with Naomi Oreskes and Erik M Conway in their 2024 book, “The Big Myth“.
I have liked James Lovelock ever since I heard about his Gaia Hypothesis in the brilliant English political drama, Edge of Darkness. I am not happy with all of his intellectual positions. I baulk at nuclear power from the unique Australian position of being nuclear-free but still exporting uranium. But as I finish reading the latest biography of him, I am starting to realise what I have learned.
Over the next week or so, SafetyAtWorkBlog will be focusing on the issue of psychosocial hazards and psychological risks at work, as we cover the Psych Health and Safety Conference in Sydney. These risks and hazards are the most pressing topic in occupational health and safety (OHS) at the moment, with an increased demand for solutions from workers and the community, as well as heightened expectations for regulatory compliance. I apologise for this intense focus, but I welcome your comments and participation.
I will start by posing this question:
“The Australian approaches to psychosocial hazards and psychological safety in Human Resources and Work Health and Safety have been siloed in the past. Are the approaches getting closer? Is there more cooperation between the two or are the two disciplines’ aims still too different?”
Currently, workplace politics in New South Wales are wrapped up in arguing about changes to the way workers’ compensation covers those with a psychological injury. The justification, as it was with similar issues in Victoria last year, is that the growth in workplace mental health claims apparently jeopardises the viability of the workers’ compensation scheme. These arguments exclude the long-term occupational health and safety (OHS) solution to the problem, and it is not as if governments were unaware of this emerging financial challenge.
Elements of Andrew Hopkins’ latest book have been spinning in my head for a couple of weeks as they echo my thoughts on occupational health and safety (OHS) over the last few years. I cannot shake his discussion of stakeholder capitalism and shareholder capitalism. These two elements of business management are crucial to our understanding of OHS and how we should proceed, particularly in relation to psychological health.
