Category: small business

Business report is contradictory on OHS

cover of small_business_taskforce_fa_lr_r2The Victorian Employers’ Chamber of Commerce and Industry (VECCI) has released its small business blueprint.  The document continues the misunderstanding of industry and business groups in respect to occupational health and safety (OHS) and red tape.

The “Small business. Big opportunities” document continues to show OHS as a burden rather than an opportunity.  The chapter that discusses “high level of
labour market adaptability and flexibility” includes this recommendation:

“Simplify existing workplace relations legislation applying to small business, without removing the intent of regulations to provide safe, fair, productive and successful workplaces.

Small business currently needs to comply with numerous
substantial pieces of legislation (for example, taxation,
superannuation, OHS, equal opportunity and corporations law) that can act as a major disincentive to growth, employment and investment.” (page 10)

Previous SafetyAtWorkBlog articles have highlighted how inaccurate and unfair it is to include OHS obligations with other laws, such as taxation, as they have fundamentally different origins.  OHS laws are not a “major disincentive to growth, employment and investment”. 

Subscribe to SafetyAtWorkBlog to continue reading.
Subscribe Help
Already a member? Log in here

“The regulator should be respected, but not feared”

cover of Transforming Work Health and Safety Performance FINALHow different can occupational health and safety (OHS) regulators be? A review into WorkSafe Victoria was announced in February 2015 but the review into its equivalent in South Australia, SafeWorkSA, is more progressed and has released a public discussion paper entitled “Transforming Work Health and Safety Performance“. Its suggestions should be noted by James Mackenzie the reviewer of WorkSafe Victoria.

Maybe not surprising to many, the future is a reworking of the past.

Subscribe to SafetyAtWorkBlog to continue reading.
Subscribe Help
Already a member? Log in here

AiGroup pushes for harmonised OHS laws during Victoria’s election campaign

Cover of Vic Pre-election statementLater this month, Victoria is conducting its regular State election.  Workplace safety has not been mentioned by any of the candidates but at least one industry association has mentioned occupational health and safety in its pre-election statement.  The Australian Industry Group (AiGroup) has recommended

“The next Victorian Government should immediately commit to the harmonised OHS laws as the state remains the only jurisdiction not to do so.” (page 5)

The AiGroup does not expand on the reasons for this recommendation other than seeing OHS has part of its general call for harmonisation and that it is part of “reducing costs of doing business”.  SafetyAtWorkBlog was able to fill in some of the AiGroup’s reasoning by talking, exclusively, with

Subscribe to SafetyAtWorkBlog to continue reading.
Subscribe Help
Already a member? Log in here

EU-OSHA releases a business case for safety and health at work

cover of The business case for safety and health at work-2One of the most ignored, but important, elements of occupational health and safety (OHS) management is the business case.  Work on this issue is being completed in Australia by Safe Work Australia but the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work (EU-OSHA) has beaten it to the punch by releasing “The business case for safety and health at work: Cost-benefit analyses of interventions in small and medium-sized enterprises“.  This document includes new case studies that provide detailed analysis of cost and return on investment from interventions as varied as a vacuum lifter for pavers to warm-up exercises and task assessments of domestic builders by qualified physiotherapists.

The report found that:

  • “Wide-ranging interventions appear to be more profitable than interventions targeting a particular
    issue related to the sector of the enterprise.
  • Interventions that mainly concern training and organisational change appear to be more profitable than interventions based on technical changes (such as introducing new equipment).
  • Interventions that include direct worker (participatory) involvement appear to be more profitable, regardless of whether or not increased productivity benefits are taken into account in the
    economic evaluation.
  • In most cases, the enterprises managed to estimate benefits related to increased productivity. It
    should be emphasised that increased productivity does not always come as a result of improved
    safety and health, but it is taken into account in the context of a business case.” (page 10)
Subscribe to SafetyAtWorkBlog to continue reading.
Subscribe Help
Already a member? Log in here

Integrated approach to OHS and wellbeing to be promoted in Australia

Cover from VWA_INTEGRATED APPROACH GUIDELINES_D3-2Later this month, the Victorian WorkCover Authority (VWA) will be releasing a document entitled “Integrated approaches to worker health, safety and well-being” (pictured right, but not yet available online).  It is intended to generate discussion on how to improve workplace safety performance by breaking down the walls of various disciplines, production processes, consultative silos and institutional or organisational biases.  This document builds on the overseas experience of the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH – Total Worker Health program), the World Health Organisation (WHO – Healthy Workplace Framework) and others to provide an Australian context.

Those who are experienced in risk management principles may see little new in this approach and the publication’s success is likely to depend on how VWA explains the initiative and how its stakeholders, Victorian businesses of all sizes, accept the concept and believe it can work in their own workplaces.

Integration

The release of a publication advocating Integration implies that an unintegrated approach to safety management has been an impediment to change. This may be a surprise to risk managers and those who have been consulting broadly on OHS in their workplaces and those companies who have integrated systems managers with responsibility for Quality, OHS and Environment.

Subscribe to SafetyAtWorkBlog to continue reading.
Subscribe Help
Already a member? Log in here

Safe Work Method Statements – their role, their use and their curse

Paul Breslin caused a stir in Australia’s OHS sector in 2013 with his costing of one element of managing high risk workplaces, the Safe Work Method Statement (SWMS).  In 2014, an update of Breslin’s research was published in The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Health, Safety and Environment (only available through subscription), in which he states that

“Industry stakeholders claim that the SWMS Process is no longer manageable and that this document process has failed the industry and has basically outlived its usefulness” [and] Recent “criticism has centred on the fact that SWMSs, which were intended to be easy to use documents, have often become so large and complex that they are impractical to use”.

(The latter statement was supported by speakers at a recent (poorly attended) Safety In Construction Conference in Melbourne, Australia.)

Some general industry criticism has been aimed at occupational health and safety (OHS) regulators such as the various WorkSafes and the

Subscribe to SafetyAtWorkBlog to continue reading.
Subscribe Help
Already a member? Log in here
© Workplace Safety Services P/L (ABN: 68091088621) and SafetyAtWorkBlog, 2008-2026. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Kevin Jones and SafetyAtWorkBlog with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

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