Category: WorkSafe

CEOs go undercover over workplace safety

The new initiative of Worksafe Victoria, placing CEOs undercover in their own workplaces, is a major change of direction and should produce a considerable amount of attention.

The online campaign, called The Skeleton Project, ostensibly applies the “Undercover Boss” concept to musculoskeletal injuries (MSIs) and workplace safety more generally. Elsewhere SafetyAtWorkBlog has mentioned that the “undercover Boss” concept is a realisation that CEOs and other senior executives have allowed themselves to become out of touch with the real world working environment of their companies or that the corporate management structure pushes executives into isolation however there are many positives in getting “out and about” as the CEOs in the new campaign do.

Continue reading “CEOs go undercover over workplace safety”

Brodie’s Law on bullying needs more consideration for workplace application

Recent attention on the presentation of the Crimes Amendment (Bullying) Bill 2011 to the Victorian Parliament has, understandably, focussed on the changes to the criminal code. However some of that attention should also have been given to the existing rules and control measures under workplace law, particularly considering that the proposed amendments, commonly referred to as Brodie’s law, are being described in the context of workplace bullying.

WorkSafe Victoria’s 2005 guidance on workplace violence and bullying specifies what elements of the Crimes Act 1958 could be relevant to workplace bullying:

  • Intentionally or Recklessly Causing Serious Injury
  • Intentionally or Recklessly Causing Injury
  • Threats to Kill
  • Threats to Inflict Serious Injury
  • Stalking

The inclusion of the last item may surprise some who have been reading only the newspaper coverage of Brodie’s Law as there was a clear implication that the application of stalking to workplace bullying was new.

Law firm Clayton Utz reminds us that workplace bullying remains undefined in the Crimes Act and that the Bill

“… extends the definition of the pre-existing offence of stalking by expanding the definition of that offence to pick up the type of behaviours that are typical of workplace bullying.”

If the Bill passes the Victorian Parliament, the OHS regulator will need to amend its advice on workplace bullying to reflect the expanded definition of stalking. But as can be seen by the bullet points above, changes to guidance may be minor as stalking is already seen as a potential element of workplace bullying. Continue reading “Brodie’s Law on bullying needs more consideration for workplace application”

Beware OHS statistics quoted in media releases

On 6 April 2011, at the Safety In Action conference in Melbourne, the Safety Institute of Australia and the Australian Institute of Management released the findings of their 2011 Business Survey.  The 2010 survey was discussed in an earlier blog article.

SafetyAtWorkBlog was allowed to see a version of the survey results prior to their public release next week but according to the media release of 6 April:

“More than 40 per cent (41%) of the occupational health and safety (OHS) personnel surveyed did not believe their organisation had a ‘well entrenched OHS culture.’ That view was shared by a quarter of human resources (HR) personnel and senior managers involved in the survey. In contrast, just 11 per cent of CEOs and Board members held that view.

Furthermore, almost half of OHS personnel (49%) who participated in the survey believed that efforts to minimise Continue reading “Beware OHS statistics quoted in media releases”

Understanding people is understanding safety

SafetyAtWorkBlog reader Ken Malcolm submitted this comment in response to Yossi Berger’s article of 21 March 2011 but I think it warrants a post of its own:

It is often said two safety professionals never agree however I do agree SA law has been ineffective.  However let me explain why I think this way.

I am in Victoria, in the business of making sustainable changes in the workplace.  I am convinced that prescriptive legislation does not cut it when you want to improve safety, as Lord Robens recognised.  All you get are thicker law books and people less willing to read them.  In most businesses I consult to, they have a problem and the problem is quite simple.  They have excellent systems but nobody is implementing or enforcing them; or the employees are just not following them. In many cases they have an eager OHS Manager with perfect sets of graphs and records; he or she is busily tracking failure.  What they can’t do is drive a culture change.  BTW, safety culture is what you get when the boss isn’t there.

The requirement to find hazards and manage them according to the unique circumstances of the work environment and of the persons within it, does affect culture if this process is supported by senior execs and fostered or encouraged properly.  Laws that encourage that approach are desirable.  With regards to getting tough, fear motivation does not achieve lasting change and with a normalisation of deviance, greater risks are tolerated by degree until people are climbing on safety rails to clean equipment 6 metres from the ground.  Continue reading “Understanding people is understanding safety”

Safe Work Method Statements and independent positions

Over the last few months most Australian OHS regulators, and many labour law firms,have been conducting workshops and public seminars on Australia’s plans to harmonise its OHS legislation.  In those workshops, the consultative process and timeframes have been described by some as a “nightmare”, which is not exactly inspiring participants who are seeking clarity from the confusion.

Significantly, others are encouraging the audience to advocate specific positions in potential submissions.

Recently, concerns were raised over the revisions to Safe Work Method Statements (SWMS) provisions.  It was suggested that SWMS have the potential to bloat beyond several pages due to the need to include “associated risks”.  Most safety management systems and OHS professionals would already have include secondary, ancillary or associated risks as part of the job safety analyses and SWMS. Continue reading “Safe Work Method Statements and independent positions”

Australian Football’s corporate approach to OHS

Recently the CEO of the Australian Football League (AFL), Andrew Demetriou addressed a breakfast gathering in Melbourne on the issue of “OHS in the AFL”.  He spoke almost entirely about policy initiatives without specifically addressing occupational health and safety but after a while we came to understand he was speaking of OHS from his senior executive perspective rather than the level where traditional control measures are implemented.

This was a legitimate approach to OHS but one that is rarely heard, perhaps because the AFL is a unique sporting body.  There was no mention of concepts dear to the hearts of CEOs such as Zero Harm or Safety Culture.  In fact there was hardly even a mention of Leadership.

Continue reading “Australian Football’s corporate approach to OHS”

Graphic hazard video from WorkSafe BC

Graphic ads or videos from OHS regulators are not new but each has their own approach and WorkSafe BC has released one, in particular, that is of interest to the construction industry.

On first viewing, the conduct of the supervisor is annoying.  He provides inadequate information to the worker.  He approves of the wrong tool for the job.   Others may see nothing but a silly young worker. Continue reading “Graphic hazard video from WorkSafe BC”

© 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