New approaches on OHS fines and penalties

At the moment Australian OHS professionals, lawyers and businesses are preparing submissions to the Government on the harmonisation of OHS laws.  One of the areas that the Government is seeking advice on is penalties.  The Discussion Paper asks the following Q17. Are the range and levels of penalties proposed above appropriate, taking account of the levels set for breaches … Continue reading “New approaches on OHS fines and penalties”

Nice comparison on Directors’ complaints

In the Australian Financial Review in October 2009  there was an opinion piece (not available online) from the CEO of the Australian Institute of Company Directors (AICD), John Colvin, expressing concerns about the accountability of directors under legislation including the proposed OHS laws in Australia. According to a report by Adam Schwab in the Crikey newsletter of 23 October 2009 (also … Continue reading “Nice comparison on Directors’ complaints”

Corporate manslaughter and accountability

Corporate manslaughter, or industrial manslaughter as it is referred to in Australia, was not allowed to gain traction in Australia, except for in the Australian Capital Territory. The policy has been allowed to fade from the books of most of the Australian left-wing parties but for a while, corporate manslaughter was THE issue.  In fact … Continue reading “Corporate manslaughter and accountability”

National OHS Law Review – First Report released

The first report of the National OHS Law Review panel was presented to the Australian Government yesterday. The best initial assessment of the report can be found at a safety blog operated by Deacons law firm.  In that report by Michael Tooma and Alena Titterton, the following points are made: there should be a general … Continue reading “National OHS Law Review – First Report released”

Accountability for industrial accidents in Malaysia

This last week, the New Strait Times reported on an initiative by the Malaysian government to increase companies’ responsibility for workplace safety by making “professionals” “responsible for accidents in the workplace”.

It may be a terminological argument about whether safety professionals or risk managers or company directors are to be held personally responsible for safety infringements and incidents