Discussions about safety in the mining sector continue with recent debate in the Queensland Parliament but change continues to be at a slow pace and in a manner that reflects “business as usual” rather than being innovative and establishing a sound base for business to grow, and grow safely.
There have been many inquiries and investigation in Australia and elsewhere about the “future of work” but rarely about the “future of the worker”. Research often looks at how work may be transformed by technology and new labour/employment structures with an assumption that the worker is a passive and static element in this change. Those in occupational health and safety (OHS) and workers’ rehabilitation know that this is not the case.
This article looks at one aspect of the future of the worker.
On Sunday November 4 2018, The Herald-Sun newspaper’s regular Body & Soul supplement devoted several pages to an exclusive article about workplace wellbeing ($). It is clearly an advertorial as the supplement has several full page advertisement from Medibank Private and the article includes a text box labelling it as the
“b+s 2018 Worklife Survey in partnership with Medibank”.
The article and survey is less than helpful from an occupational health and safety (OHS) perspective as there is no mention of organisational control measures or even the recent campaign in National Safe Work Month by WorkSafe Victoria on wellness!
On 31 October 2018, the Queensland Government got tough on safety in its mining and resources sector. But how tough is tough? A press statement says that
“Parliament today backed maximum penalties close to $4 million for mining companies that fail to keep their workers safe. As well, mines inspectors will be able to hit mine operators with tough new fines of up to $130,550 without taking them to court.”
For those of us who do not have $4 million to cover prosecutions over occupational health and safety (OHS) breaches this may indeed sound “tough” but recent inquiries and reviews into OHS enforcement question whether financial penalties are the most effective way of improving workplace health and safety.
If all you knew about occupational health and safety (OHS) was what you read in the physical or online newspapers , you would not know anything about safety management – or maybe anything positive. It takes being involved with managing safety in the real world to understand how OHS operates in the real world. But even then we only learn from our own experiences.
The 92-page coronial finding into the death of Jorge Castello-Riffo, released last week, is a tragic and detailed case study of OHS in the real world and should be obligatory reading for OHS professionals and those trying to understand the push for increased OHS, penalties and corporate accountability. Below I look at just one section of the Coronial Findings in this article – the Coroner’s responses to a set of proposed recommendations.
In late October 2018, the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) released a summary of the latest work-related injury and illness data, although it was easy to miss as few, if anyone, reported on it. On first view, that mental health is barely mentioned in the Summary is surprising and the workers compensation data raises interesting policy questions.
For those Australians who are watching the latest political push for Industrial Manslaughter laws, it is important to remember that the activity has a history that extends over a decade. Many of the current arguments for and against have been addressed previously. In August 2004, the earlier iteration of this blog, Safety At Work magazine, printed a special edition on “The Australian Industrial Manslaughter Debate”. Below is an edited version of my Editorial in that magazine. A longer article on the issues raised in that edition is available elsewhere in the SafetyAtWorkBlog.