Australia is currently in the Winter season of sniffles, colds, and influenza, which generates illness and workplace absences. In the northern hemisphere, excessive heat may be causing a similar level of workplace absences. A recent article from the Australian Broadcasting Corporation discussed workplace absences due to illness.
Recently, SafeWorkNSW launched a health and safety campaign for those who provide services in people’s homes, essentially Home Care providers. The message is good and simple, but this article is less about the campaign than the risk assessment and checklist forms they promote.
Many checklists expect a Yes/No answer but fail to ask a question. SafeWorkNSW’s Home Safety Risk Assessment is an example of this problem.
Continue reading “Yes, No or N/A?”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.
There is a curious development in the current discussion in Australia about the newly introduced Right-To-Disconnect (RTD). Many are conflating RTD with Working From Home (WFH) – two separate but slightly overlapping changes to the world of work – which is impeding valid and necessary discussion.
Working From Home largely emerged as a response to the coronavirus pandemic and used flimsy work structures to provide business continuity. The WFH arrangements would have been unlikely to have been so widespread without the federal government’s investment in the National Broadband Network and the commercial growth in mobile phone communication infrastructure. However, that same infrastructure and investment have contributed to the problem that Right-To-Disconnect is intended to address.
The working-from-home (WFH) debate continues in business newspapers with tension about what the employer and worker want. The Australian Financial Review (AFR) has its regular voices from business groups saying that it is damaging productivity for workers to be away from the offices as much as they are, but also reporting the lived experience of working from home with workers identifying positive social and familial benefits.
On November 25, 2023, the newspaper confirmed that Amazon Australia is using career progression as a nudge for workers to come to the offices more frequently.
The push for workers to return to offices for the majority of their working hours or full-time continues but is one step forward and two back, or vice versa. This is partly due to mixed mainstream and online media messages from conflicting and confusing sources. This is not helpful when one is trying to make a decision on the best available evidence.
A recent example was in the Australian Financial Review (AFR) on November 22, 2023 (paywalled). A commercial real estate services provider CBRE, has released quarterly figures that say workplaces in Melbourne are “only a little over half-occupied on average”. According to Tom Broderick of CBRE:
When Australia harmonised its occupational health and safety (OHS) laws, the management focus broadened to include work, and not just workplaces. Some “knowledge” or white-collar work can be done anywhere, and employers have often struggled to understand how to extend their OHS management systems and duties to apply to this revised or expanded system of work. Current OHS guidance on working from home is too “big picture” when employers are addressing localised decisions.
