Tag: OHS

Government must restructure to address the evolution of OHS

The UK government’s Health & Safety Executive is continuously countering poor decisions of local government that are being “blamed” on health and safety.  Recently the Wimbledon tennis open joined the club of misrepresenting risk decisions as health and safety.

England has a unique tabloid journalism that has generated substantial confusion on the role and application of occupational health and safety laws.  Most of the decisions being referred to as health and safety are really public liability concerns and this is where the risk management discipline enters the issue.  Occupational Health and Safety has enlisted the risk management principles to provide a structure for business to assess risk, costs and benefits of working safely.  However this has only worked when there was a clear delineation of workplace.

Over many years, OHS legislation has been allowed to broaden its remit from the shopfloor and factory fence to include those entering a workplace and visitors.  It then grew to include the impacts that any work activity may be having on others.

In Australia, the new definition of a workplace is anywhere where work is undertaken.  The OHS tentacles have penetrated all physical areas of society, although he police force has been struggling with this balance for years.  There is nothing occupational about OHS anymore.  In fact Australia will be dropping “occupational” from its Work Health and Safety legislation from 1 January 2012.  There have been sound reasons for this expansion but we now have to live with the consequences. Continue reading “Government must restructure to address the evolution of OHS”

Conservative media begins to examine new OHS laws

Workplace health and safety made the front cover of the Australian Financial Review on 1 July 2011 (once the liftoff financial special cover was thrown away).  When this happens there is a serious issue to be dealt with or it is a beat-up.  Today’s article entitled “Danger: work safety laws just got stricter” (not accessible online) is a bit of both.

Reporters Fiona Carruthers and John Stensholt reference several cases that should have generated considerable debate in the OHS fraternity.  The first is the case where Clean Seas was fined $A27,000 after not preventing an alcohol-affected diver from entering the water where he blacks out and requires hospitalisation.  Curiously they also discuss, in a textbox, fines handed out to RailCorp and Esso, events that occurred in 2003 and 1998 respectively.

Perhaps not surprisingly a financial newspaper focuses on the financial penalties of OHS breaches, injuries and deaths but the timing of the article is also curious as the law changes, stemming from the OHS harmonisation process, have been scheduled for some time and do not come into effect across Australia until 1 January 2012. Continue reading “Conservative media begins to examine new OHS laws”

Managers being closer

The following are some of the processes supposedly used in workplaces to control/eliminate hazards:   hazard identification, risk assessment and risk management.  These should address the implicit questions of: ‘What?’, ‘How bad?’ and ‘What to do?’

The language then turns to words and concepts like ‘OHS culture’, ‘behaviour-based safety’… and all within some over-arching package referred to as an ‘OHS management system’.  These are shown in the diagram below.

But that’s one representation, there are many others.  Now ask some simple questions:  Given that some 80% of workers work in small to medium workplaces, just how much interest will there be from managers in these approaches?

The single most obvious change I’ve seen in OHS in the last 20 years has been the dramatic increase in the amount and volume of talking about it.  It’s clearly not the only change, but the most wide-spread and obvious one. Continue reading “Managers being closer”

Directors Sentiment Index mentions OHS but……

The survey results of the inaugural Directors Sentiment Index have been around for several months but recent breakfasts discussing the findings have generated renewed media interest.

The survey provides a useful profile of how directors see their role and lists forecasts of trends but in none of the recent media reports does workplace health and safety receive attention although it is mentioned in the survey results.

The survey, conducted for the Australian Institute of Company Directors (AICD), lists occupational health and safety (OHS) as one of the components of what is described as Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) issues (page 64).

(Curiously “Work Health & Safety” continues to be abbreviated to OH&S showing the persistence of OHS).

The chart shows that 54% of respondents believe that the importance of OHS issues will increase a little.  This can be interpreted in many ways – directors do not know what they are talking about,  the OHS profession has a bloated sense of its own importance, a survey over time may provide a better reflection of perception or that the work of Safe Work Australia on OHS and corporate governance is not gaining traction on the agendas at board meetings. Continue reading “Directors Sentiment Index mentions OHS but……”

Media is ignorant of unsafe acts in the photos they use

That “a picture tells a thousand words”  appears true in regards to safety as it is in most areas.  This is increasingly so in the new online media but what if the picture is wrong?  Does a wrong picture tell a thousand wrong words?

Recently this blog has written many words about quadbikes and the increasing requirement for mandatory helmets.  Many of the agricultural newspapers are now including photos of riders with helmets where previously battered hats were usual.  This trend of pictures reflecting reality or, at least, the current safety practices seems rare.

The image above was used by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation to accompany an article on the in solar panels and rebates. Continue reading “Media is ignorant of unsafe acts in the photos they use”

Farming federation calls for mandatory fitting of safety devices to quadbikes

On 12 June 2010, SafetyAtWorkBlog noted the spokesperson for the National Farmers Federation, Duncan Fraser, supporting the voluntary fitting of roll protection devices to quadbikes in specific circumstances.  On 20 June 2011, the New South Wales Farmers Federation’s Industrial Relations Committee Chair Graham Morphett has spoken in favour of  “the mandatory fitting of roll bars” to quad bikes.

This is an extraordinary blow to the quad bike manufacturers who are set against rollover protection structures (ROPS) or crush protection devices (CPDs) for quad bikes.

Morphett’s comments deserve a little more analysis.

“Quad bikes can be extremely unstable on uneven farm terrain. Manufacturers have a responsibility to improve the design of the vehicles to ensure their safety.  No quad bike should be sold without a roll over bar,” he said

SafetyAtWorkBlog has criticised manufacturers for not developing new designs that counter, what some research has described as the propensity to rollover.  Morphett echoes this position.

Perhaps more significantly Morphett believes that  new quadbikes Continue reading “Farming federation calls for mandatory fitting of safety devices to quadbikes”

© Workplace Safety Services P/L (ABN: 68091088621) and SafetyAtWorkBlog, 2008-2026. 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