OHS – Page 91 – SafetyAtWorkBlog

What does the Ark Tribe case have to do with workplace safety?

Australian trade unions, particularly those in the construction sector, have strongly supported Ark Tribe in his battle with the Australian Building & Construction Commission (ABCC). Outside of the world of Australian construction trade union politics, the Ark Tribe issue has been difficult to understand without over-simplifying the issue.

In 2008, Ark Tribe attended a union safety meeting conducted by union organiser Justin Feehan. The meeting was unauthorised and led to Tribe being called on for an interview with the ABCC. He refused to attend and legal action has been taken which is likely to be resolved in the Australian courts today. Tribe faces six month’s jail.

Regularly the saga has been described as one concerning workplace safety. An unauthorised safety meeting may have been the initial event but the issue passed being an OHS matter very quickly to become one of industrial relations and a cause celebre against the ABCC. Continue reading “What does the Ark Tribe case have to do with workplace safety?”

A glimpse behind the CEO veneer

The Australian Financial Review published a brief profile of the 53-year-old CEO of the ANZ Banking Group, Mike Smith, on 22 April 2010 (page 23, not available online). The article ostensibly reported on an ambush and shooting that Smith experienced in South America in 2007 but it also revealed some of his attitudes to leadership and OHS.

Mike Smith stated that as a CEO of a large organisation

“…you really can’t have work-life balance”.

This is not to say that his staff cannot have such a benefit but it sends a message to all those would-be CEOs that personal safety, health and one’s family will be sacrificed if you reach the top. The implication is that work-life balance needs to be sacrificed on the way to the top although Smith may be describing his own pathway. Continue reading “A glimpse behind the CEO veneer”

Lord Young = old approach to OHS

Reviews of OHS legislation by governments are usually keenly anticipated as they mostly occur once a system is broken. But there seems to be considerable trepidation with the plan announced on 14 June 2010, by the Prime Minister, David Cameron.

Cameron has appointed Lord Young to undertake an extensive review of OHS. According to the Prime minister’s media statement:

“The rise of the compensation culture over the last ten years is a real concern, as is the way health and safety rules are sometimes applied.

We need a sensible new approach that makes clear these laws are intended to protect people, not overwhelm businesses with red tape.”

Lord Young has a lot of work to do in building bridges after his disastrous appearance at the 2010 conference of the Institute of Occupational Safety & Health (IOSH) in April 2010. It’s not quite like putting Lord John Browne in charge of a petrol station but…. Continue reading “Lord Young = old approach to OHS”

Comcare at Senate Estimates – enforcement performance indicators

Comcare is often seen as a minor player in OHS regulation in Australia because, although it has national coverage, it limits its OHS and workers’ compensation activities to specific industrial and public service sectors. Although it is limited, it has a monopoly in those sectors and is powerful. Its role in Australia’s harmonisation program seems to be just another OHS regulator but it has a unique role and structure.

Recently, Comcare’s CEO, Paul O’Connor, and Deputy CEO, Steve Kibble, addressed the Australian Senate’s Education, Employment and Workplace Relations Legislation Committee in the annual Estimates hearings. Hansard reports Kibble’s comments (around page 32) on the enforcement activity of Comcare:

“Comcare has initiated 16 civil court proceedings in relation to alleged breaches of the OHS Act since 2004…..

Recent prosecutions include a matter in relation to a federal agent of the Australian Federal Police for a breach of his individual duties of care. Continue reading “Comcare at Senate Estimates – enforcement performance indicators”

OHS Canaries and Apathy

Guest author, Yossi Berger writes:

“What’s the point of tellin’ them the same thing over and over when nothin’ changes? I open my mouth about safety again I could lose me job” he said, “Why would I bother?”[a]

Introduction

Words and names can be used as sneaky accomplices to construct popular or inaccurate narratives. When such constructions are used as explanations of workers’ behaviour and presumed attitudes they can misdirect occupational health and safety (OHS) programs. An example is the frequently heard ‘workers’ apathy’ explanation of poor OHS standards. The important UK 1972 Robens Report on OHS noted:

”….our deliberations over the course of two years have left us in no doubt that the most important single reason for accidents at work is apathy”.[1]

It’s 2009 and some of this in various guises[b] still obscures simple facts at work.

I believe that choosing the banner of ‘apathy’[c] as an explanation of poor OHS standards was and continues to be inaccurate. Continue reading “OHS Canaries and Apathy”

Yesmanship – the biggest threat to safety culture

The recent release of a new book on Operation Mincemeat has again raised the term “yesmanship” in the media. Online definitions explain the term as

“An atmosphere in which people claim to agree with leadership for political reasons, even when they don’t actually agree with leadership” .

The significance of the term in relation to the current trend of “safety culture” should not be underestimated. Below are some definitions of safety culture that illustrate the similarities to or risk from yesmanship.

“The product of individual and group values, attitudes, perceptions, competencies, and patterns of behaviour that determine the commitment to, and the style and proficiency of, an organization’s health and safety management” Continue reading “Yesmanship – the biggest threat to safety culture”

OHS challenges face the Australian taxi industry

The New South Wales Parliamentary has released the findings of its inquiry into the State’s taxi industry. Although OHS was not the focus of the inquiry, “working conditions” were included in the terms of reference and the report has made some safety recommendations. The taxi industry requires an innovative approach to OHS implementation in order to meet future driver and passenger demands.

The Committee has called for

“…an increased emphasis on occupational health and safety, industrial issues and insurance rights to better inform taxi drivers of their entitlements and responsibilities…”

even though the NSW Taxi Council stated that existing training exceeded national training standards. Perhaps the range of stakeholders consulted by the Council needs reviewing. Clearly training has been deficient in reality even if it matches national benchmarks. This calls into question one’s reliance on national training standards. Continue reading

Tag: OHS

What does the Ark Tribe case have to do with workplace safety?

Like this:

A glimpse behind the CEO veneer

Like this:

Lord Young = old approach to OHS

Like this:

Comcare at Senate Estimates – enforcement performance indicators

Like this:

OHS Canaries and Apathy

Like this:

Yesmanship – the biggest threat to safety culture

Like this:

OHS challenges face the Australian taxi industry

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this: