One of the most appealing little occupational health and safety (OHS) crossed my desk the other day. It is a small, cheap book called “Work Well From Home – Staying Effective in the Age of Remote and Hybrid Working“. Although this updated edition was published in 2023, its appeal is that it is a reissue from 2005 when the advice is largely pre-COVID, pre-broadband service, pre-Zoom, and pre- lots of issues that now seem to complicate working from home.
As Ingrid Robeyns’ Limitarianism book hits the Australian bookshops, an earlier examination of the role of excessive profits of “affluenza” from 2005 is worth considering. How does this relate to occupational health and safety (OHS)? The prevention of harm and the reduction of risk are determined by employers deciding on what they are prepared to spend on their workers’ safety, health, and welfare. Employers are looking desperately for effective ways to meet their new psychosocial harm prevention duties. Economists identified strategies in 2005.
Marie Boland‘s work and reviews have been prominent features in Australia’s occupational health and safety (OHS) for over a decade. Last year, she took on the CEO role at Safe Work Australia, the country’s principal workplace health and safety policy body. Recently Boland spoke to the Australian Institute of Health and Safety (AIHS).
The interview/article starts with the unavoidable moral argument for the importance of workers’ lives in Australia and the social ripple effect of deaths and serious injuries. Inevitably, economic cost is mentioned:
“Our research shows that, in the absence of work-related injuries and illnesses, Australia’s economy would be $28.6 billion larger each year, and Australians would be able to access more jobs with better pay,”
page 27, OHS Professional, March 2024
Economics is always mentioned in articles about the importance of workplace health and safety but, really, who cares?
Last week, a book called Setting Relations Right in Restorative Practice by David B Moore and Alikki Vernon (pictured above, second and third from the left, respectively) was published. The launch seemed full of the authors’ friends and colleagues, as well as social workers. Although Restorative Justice has been applied a little bit to resolve workplace conflicts, the discussion was dominated by examples in youth detention, correctional facilities, health care and public sector organisations. These are important industries, but what about the private sector in which most people work?
I asked the authors for some perspectives on workplaces outside of the types already discussed?
Below is the response from Moore and Vernon.
Job strain, job stress, and psychosocial hazards at work have become mainstream if a major public broadcaster produces radio programs and podcasts about them.
On March 15, 2024, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s This Working Life program interviewed Australian experts on job strain. The program offered the latest thinking on the prevalence of this hazard and what to do to prevent it.
Note: This article mentions work-related suicide.
“Just a Farmer” is an extraordinary independent Australian film about an all too common occurrence on farms – suicide. The filmmakers have built a strong media profile over the last few months, emphasising the significance of a psychosocial work-related condition. But the film is much more than a film about mental health
Note: this article mentions suicide
There are two possible approaches to this film – a story about the realities of farm life and a depiction of mental ill-health. That both these overlapping approaches are satisfied by this film is a mark of a successful story and production.
The movie opens in over 100 Australian cinema screens on March 21, 2024.
Last week, a miner, Kurt Hourigan, died in a rockfall in a gold mine in the rural city of Ballarat. Another was rescued, and over twenty work colleagues were able to access a safety pod and exit the mine later.
Accusations of mismanagement and deficient occupational health and safety (OHS) practices are rife. The media coverage of the disaster and its aftermath reflects the days immediately after the Beaconsfield Mine Disaster in Tasmania in 2006, where the trade union, the Australian Workers Union (AWU), dominated the provision of information. But why is the AWU calling for a prosecution for Industrial Manslaughter? And why now? Isn’t there a stronger OHS message available?
