workplace – Page 165 – SafetyAtWorkBlog

Lord Young = old approach to OHS

Reviews of OHS legislation by governments are usually keenly anticipated as they mostly occur once a system is broken. But there seems to be considerable trepidation with the plan announced on 14 June 2010, by the Prime Minister, David Cameron.

Cameron has appointed Lord Young to undertake an extensive review of OHS. According to the Prime minister’s media statement:

“The rise of the compensation culture over the last ten years is a real concern, as is the way health and safety rules are sometimes applied.

We need a sensible new approach that makes clear these laws are intended to protect people, not overwhelm businesses with red tape.”

Lord Young has a lot of work to do in building bridges after his disastrous appearance at the 2010 conference of the Institute of Occupational Safety & Health (IOSH) in April 2010. It’s not quite like putting Lord John Browne in charge of a petrol station but…. Continue reading “Lord Young = old approach to OHS”

Comcare at Senate Estimates – enforcement performance indicators

Comcare is often seen as a minor player in OHS regulation in Australia because, although it has national coverage, it limits its OHS and workers’ compensation activities to specific industrial and public service sectors. Although it is limited, it has a monopoly in those sectors and is powerful. Its role in Australia’s harmonisation program seems to be just another OHS regulator but it has a unique role and structure.

Recently, Comcare’s CEO, Paul O’Connor, and Deputy CEO, Steve Kibble, addressed the Australian Senate’s Education, Employment and Workplace Relations Legislation Committee in the annual Estimates hearings. Hansard reports Kibble’s comments (around page 32) on the enforcement activity of Comcare:

“Comcare has initiated 16 civil court proceedings in relation to alleged breaches of the OHS Act since 2004…..

Recent prosecutions include a matter in relation to a federal agent of the Australian Federal Police for a breach of his individual duties of care. Continue reading “Comcare at Senate Estimates – enforcement performance indicators”

OHS Canaries and Apathy

Guest author, Yossi Berger writes:

“What’s the point of tellin’ them the same thing over and over when nothin’ changes? I open my mouth about safety again I could lose me job” he said, “Why would I bother?”[a]

Introduction

Words and names can be used as sneaky accomplices to construct popular or inaccurate narratives. When such constructions are used as explanations of workers’ behaviour and presumed attitudes they can misdirect occupational health and safety (OHS) programs. An example is the frequently heard ‘workers’ apathy’ explanation of poor OHS standards. The important UK 1972 Robens Report on OHS noted:

”….our deliberations over the course of two years have left us in no doubt that the most important single reason for accidents at work is apathy”.[1]

It’s 2009 and some of this in various guises[b] still obscures simple facts at work.

I believe that choosing the banner of ‘apathy’[c] as an explanation of poor OHS standards was and continues to be inaccurate. Continue reading “OHS Canaries and Apathy”

OHS challenges face the Australian taxi industry

The New South Wales Parliamentary has released the findings of its inquiry into the State’s taxi industry. Although OHS was not the focus of the inquiry, “working conditions” were included in the terms of reference and the report has made some safety recommendations. The taxi industry requires an innovative approach to OHS implementation in order to meet future driver and passenger demands.

The Committee has called for

“…an increased emphasis on occupational health and safety, industrial issues and insurance rights to better inform taxi drivers of their entitlements and responsibilities…”

even though the NSW Taxi Council stated that existing training exceeded national training standards. Perhaps the range of stakeholders consulted by the Council needs reviewing. Clearly training has been deficient in reality even if it matches national benchmarks. This calls into question one’s reliance on national training standards. Continue reading

A safe (social) system of work

For years Australian OHS legislation has focused on establishing a “safe system of work”. This focus is inclusive and is an understandable approach to safety regulation but it has also generated a fair share of confusion. If a business does not have a documented safety management system, does it have a system of work? Yes it does but the lack of documentation makes it very difficult to describe, particularly if there is a performance benchmark such as “compliance”. Humans like to have a clean line of cause and effect or a linear, causative management process. So vague concepts like “system of work” can be challenging.

Prescriptive rules used to be the way that safety compliance could be met but that world is long gone. Its distance can be seen by looking at the Australian Government’s new model Work Health and Safety Act which compounds the vagueness by including “as far as reasonably practicable” wherever possible. All of this vagueness makes the lot of the business operator more complex and more costly as the business operator seeks clarity from others such as lawyers, OHS consultants, auditors and Standards organizations. Is it any wonder that safety is seen as an exorbitant cost? In essence, OHS regulators have outsourced the responsibility, and the cost, to employers. Continue reading “A safe (social) system of work”

Army notice on asbestos bags is warning for all workplaces

Various sectors of the Australian media have been reporting on the potential use of asbestos-tainted sacks by Australian soldiers and Defence personnel. Asbestos exposure is a recurring risk for the Australian armed services due to items in use, such as the dummy, and the existence of asbestos in various buildings.

The issue of asbestos persisting in sacks was given prominence in the last 12 months by ABC journalist Matt Peacock in his book “Killer Company”. Peacock reported that inadequately cleaned sacks were reused as carpet underlay in Australia and for other purposes. Continue reading “Army notice on asbestos bags is warning for all workplaces”

Suicide advice shows reactive thinking

Workplace suicides are in the news at the moment due to Foxconn and, to a lesser extent, France Telecome. There is enough media attention for companies to start to evaluate their own risk exposures.

Through LinkedIn, Tom Boudreau of R&R Insurance Services, issued the following advice under the title “Do Employers Have a Duty to Prevent Workplace Suicides?”:

“A tech company in China has recently been plagued with a rash of worker suicides (and attempted suicides). Nine workers (all of them young) died and two others suffered serious injuries. These workers have not only killed or tried to kill themselves, they’ve done so in the workplace itself. …..

Some labor groups have blamed the company for the suicides, claiming it runs military-style factories and abuses workers. Regardless of the cause, these tragic deaths do raise an interesting question: what duty do employers have—if any—to prevent workplace suicides? Continue reading “Suicide advice shows reactive thinking”

Category: workplace

Lord Young = old approach to OHS

Like this:

Comcare at Senate Estimates – enforcement performance indicators

Like this:

OHS Canaries and Apathy

Like this:

OHS challenges face the Australian taxi industry

Like this:

A safe (social) system of work

Like this:

Army notice on asbestos bags is warning for all workplaces

Like this:

Suicide advice shows reactive thinking

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this: