The Victorian trade union movement is preparing for the November 2018 State Election with one element of that campaign being the advocacy of Industrial Manslaughter laws.
At the end of January 2018, the unions “kicked off” their campaign with a meeting which reviewed the challenges and wins for injured workers in 2017 and outlined their intentions for 2018. The Industrial Manslaughter Action Kit included a petition which says: Continue reading “Victoria is ripe for Industrial Manslaughter laws”
Below is the first video of what we hope to produce weekly – a SafetyAtWorkBlog Update. This short weekly video is an informal wrap up of some of the SafetyAtWorkBlog articles and a quick mention of what is coming up soon. This episode also mentions a couple of interesting safety-related books.
Please let me know your thoughts on this initiative.
“Every year something like 1,000 people are killed at their work in this country. Every year about half a million suffer injuries in varying degrees of severity. 23 million working days are lost annually on account of industrial injury and disease.”
The existence of this statement is of no surprise to occupational health and safety (OHS) professionals. Similar statements are made all the time. The sad surprise of this quote is that it appeared in 1972 on page 1 of the Safety and Health at Work – Report of the Committee 1970-72, otherwise know as the Robens Report.
Perhaps it is time to begin contemplating what OHS fundamentals we should apply in the next generation of workplace safety health and wellbeing laws ?
The hyperbole about ISO45001 keeps coming now that the International Standard for Occupational Health and Management Systems has been finalised and due for publication on March 18 2018.
On February 1 2018, Vic Toy, chair of the US technical advisory group is quoted in EHS Today:
“ISO45001 is one of the most significant developments in workplace safety over the past 50 years, presenting an opportunity to move the needle on reducing occupational health and safety risks…..
The goal was to create a widely accepted standard that can produce a highly effective safety and health management system for an increasingly interconnected world, regardless of an organisation’s size, location, supply chains or nature of work. It becomes a minimum standard of practice, and a good one at that.”
ISO45001 does have great potential for change but primarily in those countries that have no such standard already and where OHS laws are under-developed or poorly enforced. Continue reading “Hyperbole over new OHS Standard”
by Melody Kemp
“It was nine at night and the shooters had the advantage of superior fire power and night vision goggles …. We stood no chance. Two friends were killed…”
David Paklett, a Wildlife Ranger working in Tanzania pulled up his trouser leg and showed me an ugly red scar that looked a bit like an alien pasted to his skin. It was 2013. We were in Spain’s ancient university town of Salamanca, at WILD 10, a sporadic gathering of wilderness and conservation specialists. He told me how the year before, he and his colleagues had been in a John Woo style shoot out with Vietnamese poachers. The Vietnamese were overhead in a helicopter, firing at them with automatic rifles. ‘It was nine at night and the shooters had the advantage of superior fire power and night vision goggles.’
His words have stayed with me.
‘We stood no chance. Two friends were killed, and I got this.’ When I looked up, his eyes had the look of someone who was looking back with horror. ‘Did you ever talk about that night with anyone?’ I asked sipping a Rioja red. ‘Who is there to tell?’ David grimaced. ‘It’s part of the job. The game has changed. The Chinese are arming these guys and making sure they get away with the kill. The forces behind them are so powerful and we have no resources.’
Lao Rangers in the Annamite mountain range report the same fear according to Bill Robichaud. ‘Camera traps showed these guys (poachers) to have the latest technology, to be well dressed and armed, with modern communication and GPS gear.’ Continue reading “Out of Range – Work Risks of Wildlife Protection Officers”
February 2018 is an important month for the SafetyAtWorkBlog as it is the 10th anniversary of the blog’s operation and the 1st anniversary of our subscription service.
Firstly, I need to thank the over-100 subscribers who have shown their appreciation for an independent voice on workplace health and safety. I do not claim to be right but I do claim to be provocative and provide a fresh perspective on OHS. I have had particularly positive feedback on the recent series of articles on sexual harassment and OHS.
The funds from subscriptions have provided me with the opportunity to attend local and international OHS conferences in 2017 and to provide exclusive reports back to subscribers. It has also allowed me to commission some works from other OHS people outside of Australia – a unique report on the OHS of wildlife rangers will be appearing shortly.
For those several thousand followers who don’t subscribe, I hope you appreciate the occasional free-access articles, the statistics certainly indicate there are plenty of you out there. Some basic stats for the SafetyAtWorkBlog in its first year of subscriptions include
I hope that the subscribers will resubscribe this year and that they will encourage others to. Some will automatically have their subscriptions renew automatically, other subscriptions will expire (depending on the purchase process you chose) and require a manual purchase.
Regardless I think it is the best $200 you will spend on your OHS state of knowledge this year.
I need also to thank the tireless work of the people at Concatenate who designed the website from the ground up and continue to do so.
Best Regards and Thanks
Occupational health and safety (OHS) policy makers are keen on making decisions based on evidence. But evidence seems hard to get, for many reasons.
Some people, including those in workplace relations and OHS, often fill the evidence gap with “anecdotal evidence”. Frequently people being interviewed are asked for evidence to substantiate their claims and respond that “anecdotally” there is a problem yet there is no sample size for this evidence, there is no clarity or definition of the incident or issue – it is simply “what I heard” or “what I’ve been told”. Using anecdotal evidence is okay as long as its inherent uncertainty is acknowledged and it is not used as a basis for substantial change.