politics – Page 41 – SafetyAtWorkBlog

Politics and safety in California

Workplace safety, as is any legislation, is subjected to the political whims and decisions of whichever political party is in power at the time. In Australia, John Howard’s conservative government almost halved the already meagre budget of the National OHS Commission, stopping many of the programs of national OHS uniformity that are now being resurrected by the Labor Government of Kevin Rudd.

On 14 January 2010 an investigative report into the operation of Cal-OSHA by KCET says that there was a marked change in the enforcement policies of Cal-OSHA shortly after the election of Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger as Governor of California. Continue reading “Politics and safety in California”

Changing the OHS guard

John Merritt is leaving WorkSafe Victoria to head up the Environmental Protection Authority. Nothing special in such a move as such progression is part of many senior executive public servant’s career plans. But Victoria’s politicians have started to use this change for political point-scoring on the basis that Merritt is married to Victorian parliamentarian, Maxine Morand.

This is unfortunate but not surprising. The political argy-bargy implies that John Merritt is undeserving of his new appointment and this is not the case.

I have met John Merritt over a number of years and from before he became the executive director of WorkSafe in 2001. During his time with the National Safety Council of Australia, there was an air of optimism in this moribund organisation, the same air he brought to WorkSafe. I interviewed him regularly

Continue reading “Changing the OHS guard”

Shipbreaking Explosion

In September 2009 several workers were killed and burnt when cutting up an old tanker that still had chemical residue. The National Labor Committee (NLC) has released a a ten minute video interview with the NLC Executive Director, Charles Kernaghan.

According to an 11 January 2010 NLC notice:

“Eight more workers in Bangladesh were burned to death on December 26, 2009, when the ship they were dismantling exploded. The workers had been told that the gas tanks on the Agate oil tanker had been cleaned. It was a lie. Continue reading “Shipbreaking Explosion”

PPE can be a lazy OHS solution

One of the occupations with the clearest need for personal protective equipment (PPE) is that of a firefighter. There are few other industries where PPE has such a high priority in workplace safety but sometimes PPE can still be forgotten.

A report on ABC radio and online in Australia on 11 January 2010 shows that even in firefighting PPE may be forgotten. The firefighter was the first one to take a fire hose to a shop fire and did not have on any breathing apparatus (BA). His fully suited colleagues caught up with him and began fighting the fire. It appears from this one media report that the firefighter kept his attention on fighting the fire rather than taking a break and putting on his BA. Shortly after he began feeling unwell.

Research

On 4 January 2010 the Australasian Fire and Emergency Service Authorities Council (AFAC) released a firefighting information package, based on an early September 2009 workshop, that includes some interesting information about firefighter health and safety. Continue reading “PPE can be a lazy OHS solution”

Changing political support of workplace safety in the US

Occupational health and safety used to be above political argy-bargy. It was accepted that the safety of workers was a core importance to the management of any business. Often it operated as a subset of industrial relations and popped its head up occasionally, usually when new of revised legislation was due. Rarely has workplace safety been a catalyst for political controversy.

In the United States, the last political fight was over the ergonomics rule under a Republican Bush presidency in 2001. According to one media report:

“The president has directed Labor Secretary Elaine Chao to find a less expensive way to protect worker health.” Continue reading “Changing political support of workplace safety in the US”

Boiler death puts OHS spotlight on New Zealand Education Department

Reports are coming out of New Zealand that representatives of the Education Department are uncomfortable with being charged under the country’s OHS legislation following a fatal boiler explosion at Orewa College.

On 24 June 2009, a boiler exploded at Orewa College in Northland, New Zealand. Initial media reports said that the boiler was being repaired the day after a malfunction. Rough phone video taken by one of the students during the evacuation is available online.

Richard Louis Nel received burns to 90 per cent of his body and later died. A contractor, Robin Tubman, suffered a fractured skull and a shattered face.

The Department of Labour indicated shortly after the event that an investigation had begun but the Board of Trustees chairman Phil Pickford has questioned the delay in the prosecution. According to one media report, Pickford said:

“On December 24 it will be six months since the tragedy and here we are at the 21st… They have to prosecute within six months and they have left it to the last minute. Why? I could surmise why, but I’m sure there’s another way they could have done it.”

SafetyAtWorkBlog contacted the NZ Department of Labour on 21 December 2009 for further information about the prosecution. All the spokesperson would say is that “the outcome of the investigation is still being finalized”.

The belief that schools are not covered by OHS legislation is a common misperception in Australia and, from what one NZ SafetyAtWorkBlog reader says, New Zealand also. Partly this is because the education of children is seen as the principal focus by teachers and educators, to the exclusion of all else. Modern businesses and institutions have slowly learnt that this is not the case and that there are a wealth of obligations, legislative and social, that apply. Educational institutions are often slow to acknowledge this reality.

Another reason, which may stem from the first, is that government departments have been very hesitant to prosecute each other. This may also be supported by the political conflicts that could arise by one politician’s department taking action against another politician’s department. Politicians should not take the credit for departmental achievements and then not be held accountability for failings (although this seems to happen frequently).

In August 2007, The Education Department in Victoria was fined $A8,000 for ignoring the directions of a WorkSafe inspector. The media statement on the case illustrates a dismissive attitude to OHS issues.

Of more significance were issues at Merrilands College where “a Victorian principal accused of bullying has been removed from school and given a job in the Education Department after years of complaints by staff” according to The Age in July 2004. The issues at Merrilands had been occurring for some time:

“It was also revealed that the Education Department – which confirmed there had been “Worksafe (sic) issues” at the school in the past – had known about the allegations since 2000, when 12 teachers wrote to the department after a staff member died of a heart attack that some believed was linked to workplace stress.”

According to the same media report

“WorkCover recently issued an improvement notice against the department following allegations of bullying and harassment at two other schools in the northern suburbs.”

To some extent the Orewa College explosion is a more straightforward prosecution because the incident came from an equipment failure and did not relate to the teaching staff or students. The administrative staff are likely to be asked about maintenance schedules, particularly after other schools in the area had their boilers inspected with several found to be less than perfect. It is likely that the prosecution by NZ DoL will illuminate the plant maintenance procedures of secondary colleges but, perhaps of more long-lasting significance will be the attitudes of the education department and school representatives on show in court.

Kevin Jones

Tasmanian mine safety review

Safety in mines in Tasmania has received great attention in the aftermath of Larry Knight’s death at Beaconsfield gold mine. On 13 December 2009, the Tasmanian Workplace Relations Minister, Lisa Singh released a regulatory impact statement and information paper on proposed amendments to the Workplace Health and Safety Act 1995.

This legislative package, according to the Minister’s media release:

“The proposed package considerably expands upon existing legislation, by including both general duties and hazard specific regulations for the mining industry.

“A key focus is the requirement for each mine to implement a health and safety management system, which must include risk management processes and procedures.”

Any OHS review should be welcomed but what is this trend of short periods of public comment? There were many complaints of the Federal Government for short periods of review on national model OHS laws and now the Tasmanian Government wants responses by 14 January 2010!!??

Just one month for responses and that month includes Christmas holidays and New Year. This brings the consultation period to around 19 working days.

A spokesperson for Workplace Standards Tasmania (WST) said that the various reviews and coronial reports over recent years have put pressure on the Government to improve mine safety legislation. She also said that comments on the Regulatory Impact Statement is an important and necessary step in drafting the relevant legislation.

The spokesperson said that WST is effectively closed down between Christmas and New Year but has an emergency response. Any enquiries from the public about the RIS will be handled by the WST Helpline on other working days untill relevant staff return. The Helpline is being briefed on the RIS this week.

WST emphasised that the consultation on the legislative amendments has been occurring for months. SafetyAtWorkBlog acknowledges this is the case but the Public Comment period is very tight.

The Minister, Lisa Singh, has said in her media release that

“I encourage comment from persons connected with the mining industry, including workers, mine operators and contractors.”

SafetyAtWorkBlog contacted the Minister’s Office and a spokesperson said that the timing of the Public Comment period is unfortunate but that the Government does not want to delay the process any longer than it has too. She advised that the minimum time period for comments on an RIS is three weeks and that the comment window on this particular process is four weeks.

There is no accusation of a conspiracy here but the unfortunate scheduling highlights a legitimate conflict between the aims of an effective public comment phase and legislative development that seems endemic through Australian politics.

Kevin Jones

Tag: politics

Politics and safety in California

Like this:

Changing the OHS guard

Like this:

Shipbreaking Explosion

Like this:

PPE can be a lazy OHS solution

Research

Like this:

Changing political support of workplace safety in the US

Like this:

Boiler death puts OHS spotlight on New Zealand Education Department

Like this:

Tasmanian mine safety review

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Research

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this: