The debate over the safety of quad bikes on farms continues but it is increasingly one-sided. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) and workplace safety advocates continue to hold the line on the need to install operator protection devices (OPDs) to all quad bikes being sold in Australia. Farmers, often supported by commercial interests, want to keep their quad bikes and as they are, because there are no alternative vehicles that are as versatile as the quad bike.
On July 4 2020, the Western Magazine quoted the CEO of the Federated Chamber of Automotive Industries‘ (FCAI) Tony Weber:
“Evidence suggests in some circumstances CPDs do prevent injuries, other times they create more injuries and that’s not a satisfactory outcome we should address the fundamental problem and that is the way in which humans behave around this machine…”
This quote neatly summarises the points of argument in the safety debate which have been reported on extensively in this blog previously – evidence, most benefit, design, use….
One important stage in improving the safety of farm vehicles was completed on October 10 2019 with the acceptance by the Australian Government of recommendations to make Operator-Protection Devices (OPD) mandatory for all quad bikes in Australia. That decision is a substantial achievement that many have lobbied, and fought, over for many years, but it will not save every farmer’s life as quad bike use has always only ever been one part of the occupational health and safety (OHS) risks on farms.
The Australian Government’s recent announcements on this issue have also been a little odd.
SafetyAtWorkBlog believes the fact that commercial vehicles are also workplaces remains under-utilised in Australia. There are hints that this position is shared by others and that the analysis of occupational health and safety (OHS) in the transport sector is maturing. An Issues Paper released in May 2019 by the Productivity Commission (PC) as party of the review of the 2009 National Transport Regulatory Reform program looks at potential safety outcomes.
In each of the sectors within the reform program – heavy vehicles, rail and maritime – safety improvements, enhancements and improvements were expected. The PC accepts the multidisciplinary and multi-factorial elements of OHS:
“…. the national laws and regulators are only one influence on safety outcomes. The multiplicity of influences on safety outcomes raises challenges for measurement of the contribution of the national system to any changes in safety outcomes since the system was introduced. The Commission envisages that the direct net benefits from safety related reforms must be assessed by the use of simple methods such as benchmarking (including to other countries) and other descriptive analyses. For example, Hassall (2014) estimates the accident rate (broken down by accident severity) per 100 million kilometres.”page 12
(Given that the PC has a separate inquiry into mental health, it will be interesting to see if this perspective is consistent across different sectors)
Last year SafeWork South Australia was evaluated by that State’s Independent Commission against Corruption. A couple of years ago Martyn Campbell (pictured right) took on the role as the Executive Director. SafeWork SA had obvious challenges and Campbell has needed to recalibrate the organisation to meet contemporary standards and expectations.
SafetyAtWorkBlog had the chance to put some questions to Martyn Campbell recently. Below are his responses.
Australian research into
occupational health and safety (OHS) is a lot less than research into other
areas of business and management, especially in relation to the psychological
wellbeing of workers at all levels of the corporate structure. As such, it has become common for experts,
advocates and researchers from the social, non-work, public health areas to
overlay general and broad research findings on to workplaces – they are, in
effect, filling a vacuum. But just
because the OHS research into psychological harm is thin or immature does not
mean that work does not have its own characteristics.
Over many years OHS has
produced research and guidelines that include the psychological effect of
sexual harassment, but it has been ineffectual or ignored for may reasons. This submission is an attempt to illustrate
the potential already in existence
in Australia that could be used to prevent sexual harassment-related
This submission has
drawn almost exclusively on Australian-based documentation and research to
better satisfy the title and aim of this Inquiry. This is not saying that actions and data from
overseas are not relevant: there is some excellent information on the matter
from the European Union,
for instance. But quite often people seem to look overseas for evidence and
solutions when Australia already has good research and advice, if one looks.
Summary of key points
harassment often results in psychological harm to workers, and employers and
PCBUs already have a legislative obligation under OHS/WHS law to eliminate
(prevent) risks to health and safety, including psychological risks.
accepting that sexual harassment is a form of workplace violence, new
prevention options may be available.
has a range of general and specific guidance on the systematic prevention of
the psychological harm generated by sexual harassment, produced by Federal and
State or Territorial health and safety regulators.
of sexual harassment may be extremely disruptive to workplaces even though it remains
the most effective control measure.
strategy to prevent sexual harassment must have a multidisciplinary and
assessment of sexual harassment risks can be determined to internationally-recognised