Authority in denial?

Polite or ignorant?

Coroners can be a polite lot, preferring what they would call ‘substance’ to emotion, accuracy to grand standing.  They also hope that their Findings make a difference and help to protect people against a range of lethal circumstances.  Ex-coroner Graeme Johnstone (Victoria) was an outstanding example in OHS.   So any comments in their Findings ought to be considered against this background.

However, the comments by the South Australian State Coroner Mark Frederick Johns in his Findings (9/2/2011) in the death of Daniel Nicholas Madeley who died (6/6/2004) as a result of an occupational incident are puzzling.  Either the man is being very polite or seriously ignorant of what really goes on in industry.  And it does matter because coroners carry a lot of authority.  Work by Johnstone, Olle and Tasmanian coroners (mining disasters) has been very helpful.

Poor guarding

To paraphrase: Daniel was 18 years old when he died of ‘horrific injuries sustained when he was caught in a horizontal boring machine’.  He became entangled in the machine Continue reading “Authority in denial?”

Conference videos provide optimism and nerves

Several years ago I assisted the Safety Institute of Australia in providing introductory video profiles for many of their conference speakers.  The intention was to provide a teaser for the content of conference presentations and to introduce more obscure speakers.  The strategy is continuing with several pre-conference videos being made available on-line.

Conference teasers in 2011 include Professor Niki Ellis and Australian lawyer, Andrew Douglas.

Andrew Douglas

Andrew Douglas says that safety professionals need to be careful of jargon as it can create an impenetrable elitism that may run counter to the aim of the profession.  Part of the risk of professional jargon is that it may support an inaccuracy that creates considerable damage.

Douglas identifies “zero harm” as an example of a phrase or concept that con become popular, perhaps dominant, even though it may  be unsupported by OHS laws.  Because the laws and the reality of workplace safety is that there will always be people who are hurt or injured at work, “zero harm” is unattainable and those who utter the “mantra of zero harm”, as Andrew Douglas describes it, lose any OHS credibility. Continue reading “Conference videos provide optimism and nerves”

People enter the quad bike ROPS debate

A week on from Australia’s The Weekly Times using its front page to open a debate about roll over protection structures (ROPS), the debate has continued in the letters and op-ed pages of The Weekly Times.

Dr Yossi Berger of the Australian Workers Union asks the valid question in his opinion piece – should all the responsibility for quad bike incidents be placed on riders or can manufacturers do better?  If injuries and deaths on quad bikes continue to occur after rider-focused control measures have been advocated and encouraged for many years, isn’t it time to look at more than PPE and administrative controls?  As Albert Einstein is alleged to have said:

“The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.”

Rhys Griffiths of the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries says in his piece that the quad bike manufacturers are frustrated that low-cost, in safety-speak, administrative controls are not being applied by riders or endorsed by safety regulators.  The control measures recommended are likely to have positive safety impacts but these could be improved further by the integration of a ROPS.  However Griffiths says that :

“Roll Over Protection Systems are not the answer”.

I agree but safety is rarely about “the” answer.  Better outcomes are mostly achieved by a combination of controls that can accommodate the varying work characteristics. Continue reading “People enter the quad bike ROPS debate”

Evidence on the need for safe job design

One reader has provided an example of recent research that supports the previous SafetyAtWorkBlog article on the importance of quality and safety in job creation.

In the March 2011 online edition of the Occupational & Environmental Medicine journal, Australian researchers have analysed data concerning “the psychosocial quality of work”.  According to an accompanying media release (not available online yet) they found that

“The impact on mental health of a badly paid, poorly supported, or short term job can be as harmful as no job at all…” Continue reading “Evidence on the need for safe job design”

New quad bike research and practical safety guidance

A major Australian rural newspaper, The Weekly Times, has devoted its front page to an article on rollover protective devices on quad bikes.   It has taken as the base new information released by the Australian Centre for Agricultural Health and Safety (ACAHS) through a media release. The new policy paper and the supporting Practical Management Guide acknowledge new research from independent engineers that has finally questioned the established knowledge base on the safety of quad bikes.

ACAHS has come to a position where it states:

“Farmers and other owners of quad bikes should be encouraged to fit suitably tested protective devices to reduce death and serious injury from rollovers.” Continue reading “New quad bike research and practical safety guidance”

Raising awareness about stress instead of controlling it

In March 2011, in response to one of the several Stress Awareness Days, HRLeader magazine ran an edited version of a Personnel Today article called “5 steps to tackle employee stress”.  The Personnel Today had “6 steps”, so are Australian readers being ripped off?

Personnel Today included a step called “Refer the Health and Safety Executive’s management standards”.  HRLeader’s editor must have made the call that HSE information is geographically specific and therefore not relevant to Australia but the change is more indicative of the fact that Australia does not have anything to match the HSE management standards to help control stress.  According to the HSE website:

“….the six Management Standards cover the primary sources of stress at work. These are:

Grief guidance got right

A reader has pointed out an excellent guidance on managing situations after the sudden loss of a work colleague or family member, following on from a recent SafetyAtWorkBlog article.

In 2004 Skylight and New Zealand’s Accident Compensation Commission published “Death Without Warning – After an Accidental Death”.  This book (only available for purchase) is an excellent guidance that provides advice on managing grief-stricken staff at the same time as providing some dignity.

Significantly the guidance is contemporary with current support practices.  There is none of this rubbish about “closure”, or “getting over it”.  It also acknowledges that men and women grieve differently and that each individual grieves in their own personal way, a way that those who provide support must accommodate and understand.

The guidance has a 2nd edition which can be purchased online and, on receipt of our copy, will be reviewed here.

The guidance has a particular poignancy following the recent fatal earthquakes in Christchurch, New Zealand where many were killed as their workplaces collapsed.

Research Paper

For those readers who are, perhaps, researching in this area of occupation well-being or workplace mental health, one research article that is worth digging up is a 2010 paper by several Australian researchers called “Loss and grief in the workplace – What can we learn from the literature?Continue reading “Grief guidance got right”

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