Category: WorkCover

Questions raised about the Victorian Government’s transparency on WorkCover

In December 2011 the Victorian Liberal Government announced the removal of almost $A500 million from WorkCover funds to be placed in general revenue over the next four years.  Some unions were outraged and began a protest petition.  Labor politicians were similarly outraged.

The removal of the funds sounds odd as it is understood that these funds are originally generated through the workers compensation insurance premiums required to be paid by most Victorian businesses.  The funds are then invested to provide a healthy return with the intention that the pool of WorkCover funds is used to support the OHS functions of WorkSafe and its inspectorate and to provide funds to assist in the rehabilitation of injured workers. Logically, the more funds available, the better the rehabilitation services and the better the prospect of people returning to work.

In this context, how come such a large amount can be removed without affecting the level of inspectorate and rehabilitation services?  Does the current success of Australia’s economy really justify this move, even though a large part of that economic health is from States other than Victoria? Continue reading “Questions raised about the Victorian Government’s transparency on WorkCover”

A new approach to OHS advertisements is required in Australia

Workcover NSW should be supported in its new advertising campaign “Here to Help”.  Two ads are currently available on-line and are embedded below.  What is surprising is that OHS regulators still feel the need to create new awareness-raising campaigns rather than providing examples of the consequences of non-compliance.

It may be unfair to criticise an OHS regulator for an advertising campaign that raises the awareness of the need for safety, particularly if that ad is only the most visible element of a new enforcement strategy but it would be refreshing to see a different type of ad, one that speaks directly to business owners, with perhaps a similar one to workers.

What I see is an advertisement  similar to the famous Yul Brynner anti-smoking ad but with a script similar to this:

[Close up of head and shoulders of a businessman facing the camera.  Camera slowly pulls back as businessman speaks.] Continue reading “A new approach to OHS advertisements is required in Australia”

CEO departure has no apparent controversy

Speculation has been rife about the departure of Victorian WorkSafe’s CEO, Greg Tweedly since it was announced on 11 January 2012. Crikey (not available online) has aired questions about Tweedly’s lack of action on workplace bullying which WorkSafe has been accused of not addressing. The Age newspaper has juxtaposed the Liberal Government’s use of $A471 million of WorkCover premiums for consolidated revenue with Tweedly’s departure.

On the workplace bullying issue, Tweedly has said previously that he does not believe that WorkSafe has a toxic work environment. When the accusations were being aired in 2011 it was Tweedly who faced the media, where in the past it would have been more likely for the Executive Director to address these issues. Bullying accusations are highly embarrassing for WorkSafe as they issue the sdvice on preventing bullying at work, however WorkSafe is only one of the many government bodies in Victoria and in other Australian States that have been accused of this hazard. Other instances of workplace bullying reports have resulted in independent inquiries but not so with WorkSafe. Perhaps Tweedly is right and the working environment in WorkSafe is not toxic, or no more toxic than any other government department or authority. Perhaps the critics should be focussing on the problem of bullying in the workplace rather than the workplace, or the executive management, itself. Continue reading “CEO departure has no apparent controversy”

Lawyer says OHS harmonisation has become a shambles

The 28 December 2011 edition of the Australian Financial Review (AFR) (not available online) quotes Australian labour lawyer, Michael Tooma, talking about the harmonisation of workplace safety laws:

“It’s descended into a farce, a shambles – only four jurisdictions are ready for the laws.”

This seems supported by the words of the recently-appointed Workplace Relations Minister, Bill Shorten, who says that the new Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) laws will cover 58% of the workforce. This also equates to 42% NOT being covered – hardly a success for harmony.

Victoria’s WorkCover Minister, Gordon Rich-Phillips, continues to miss the point of national harmonisation by continuing to argue against harmonisation with parochialism. He says that the new laws are very likely to increase the regulatory and cost burden without acknowledging that Victoria has many prominent businesses who operate nationally and will incur increased compliance costs due to his delay in the implementation of the harmonised laws.

The AFR article implies that a major reason for objection is that senior executives, the ridiculously named “C-suite”, will face increased accountability for decisions that affect worker safety. Perhaps, but this increase has been coming for some time and should have been anticipated by the C-suite.

The article also implies that hesitation over these laws comes from the increased accountability of senior public servants and departmental heads. Tooma acknowledges this change:

“To date, heads of departments in the public service have never been able to be held criminally liable under federal laws.”

The public service is going to be a fierce battleground considering that psychosocial issues are so prevalent in this sector. It will be fascinating (and sad) to watch senior executives in government departments being prosecuted under OHS laws for workplace bullying, excessive workloads and the generation of stress. (The size of the challenge may be seen by recent bullying issues in the Australian emergency services, WorkSafe Victoria and WorkCover NSW)

The AFR has been one of the very few newspapers reporting on OHS harmonisation but, not surprising given its specialized readership, it has focused on the business costs of implementation. Rarely has it discussed the positive benefits to safety management or the potential increase in worker safety. Perhaps there are none.

There is little safety innovation in the new laws. If OHS is about preventing harm, these laws are no improvement on the previous.

But then safety has rarely come from laws but from how people react to, or apply, the laws. The debate on harmonisation has been missing the voice of the safety profession in Australia but perhaps that’s because there is nothing new to say. Perhaps the management of safety will not have any fundamental change. It may be that the only change is that the CEOs begin to listen to their OHS advisers. Let’s hope that is enough.

Kevin Jones

Inadequate risk assessment results in an injured worker and $99k fine

There is increasing attention being given to the preparation of Safe Work Method Statements (SWMS) in Australian OHS laws.  Amongst many purposes, SWMS should provide a basic risk assessment of tasks being undertaken, usually, that day.  Often SWMS are too generic by being prepared days or weeks earlier, often SWMS miss the big risks by looking at the small risks.  A New South Wales Workcover news release on 9 December 2011 indicates the potential inadequacy of risk assessment.

The media statement reports on a $A99,000 fine against Bulk Maritime Terminals Pty Limited (BMT).

“On 17 September 2008 two employees were unloading 25 to 30 bulk bags of clay powder into a tanker truck for transportation. Each bag weighed approximately 900kgs.

One employee was using an overhead gantry crane to lift each bag from the floor of the warehouse to the height of the tanker. The second employee was harnessed to the top of the tanker truck to open the spout on the bag.

After being lifted off the ground, one of the bags fell off the crane hook, knocking the operator of the crane to the ground. Continue reading “Inadequate risk assessment results in an injured worker and $99k fine”

Back support devices don’t work but new designs should be investigated

In 2009 Australian OHS regulators made the definitive statement on the use of back belts.  The guidance stated that:

  • Back belts don’t reduce the forces on the spine
  • Back belts don’t reduce the strain on muscles,tendons and ligaments
  • Back belts do nothing to reduce fatigue or to increase the ability to lift
  • Back belts are like holding your breath when lifting
  • Back belts can increase blood pressure and breathing rate
  • Back belts don’t reduce the chance of injury or reduce back pain.

This was a terrific example of evidence-based safety.  But this does not mean that the use of back belts should not be reconsidered if there is new evidence or new back belt designs.

One SafetyAtWorkBlog reader has drawn our attention to a new type of back support, The Tolai All Purpose Back Support.  In no way does this blog support this particular device.  In fact, there is a strong argument against the widespread use of such devices as these may advocate the reliance on PPE (personal protective equipment) rather than a higher order of control, such as task redesign, which would result in a more sustainable solution.

However, there is a counter argument of the need to support innovation and the position of continuous improvement. Continue reading “Back support devices don’t work but new designs should be investigated”

OHS compliance checklists

For several months some Australian OHS regulators have been providing “Compliance at a glance” checklists. These are not intended to establish compliance, particularly in the small business sector as listed on one regulator’s website , but are more brief indicators of areas for greater improvement.

Nevertheless the items listed in the “red zone” of the checklists establish a benchmark of NON-compliance. These items are listed below:

© Workplace Safety Services P/L (ABN: 68091088621) and SafetyAtWorkBlog, 2008-2024. 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