research – Page 6 – SafetyAtWorkBlog

“Loose” workplace bullying statistics published

Workplace bullying policy matters are at their peak in Australia this week as public hearings occur at the House Standing Committee on Education and Employment inquiry into workplace bullying. Several experts on the prevention of workplace bullying will be appearing at these hearings but the topicality also allows others to release or promote data on workplace bullying.

Safety Consultants Australia (SCA) released a “blueprint” on Safety Hazard: Workplace Bullying in March 2012 that has been recirculated this week. The blueprint is a useful example of the care that needs to be taken when summarising data on workplace bullying.

SCA states, IN VERY BIG LETTERS, that the Productivity Commission estimated that

“Workplace Bullying costs Australian employers between $6 – $36 billion every year.”

SCA has released a flyer with the same information in EVEN BIGGER LETTERS however the Productivity Commission’s report Performance Benchmarking of Australian Business Regulation: Occupational Health & Safety (2010) states on page 279:

“Estimates of the prevalence and cost of psychosocial hazards vary considerably. For example, using international studies as a guide, estimates of the annual cost of workplace bullying to employers and the economy in Australia ranged from $6 billion to $36 billion (in 2000).” Continue reading ““Loose” workplace bullying statistics published”

Unanswered questions on Safety Institute activities

Earlier this year, the Safety Institute of Australia (SIA) launched its OHS Body of Knowledge (BoK) project, an excellent collection of workplace safety information and research but one that has had restrictions imposed on it that seem contrary to its purpose.

SafetyAtWorkBlog has communicated repeatedly to the SIA about the BoK project and the, seemingly, related operation of the Australian OHS Education Accreditation Board (AOHSEAB) but, although the communications have been acknowledged, no responses have been received. Some of the questions go to the heart of the meaning of an OHS profession and body of knowledge but also to the relationships of various organisations under, or connected to, the SIA such as the Health and Safety Professionals Association (HaSPA) and AOHSEAB.

OHS Body of Knowledge

BoK contains over 30 articles about most of the major workplace safety issues of modern times. These have been produced by some of the most prominent OHS researchers in Australia. But it can only be read on a computer screen and the PDF files have a security level that forbids any cutting and pasting. Why would this important safety information be any different to guidance and data that OHS regulators provide for fair use? The SIA has never provided a reason for this peculiar approach to spreading OHS knowledge.

The SIA professes the organisation to be about the following:

“We are committed to creating a profession that can deliver the highest standards of OHS and we do this through the engagement of our individual members, corporate and strategic partners, governing bodies and key profession stakeholders.

Through the SIA, individuals have access to qualified timely advice into public policy and regulation, research and development to advance OHS knowledge and guidance. We have developed a body of knowledge to set health and safety standards, procedures and practices to be adopted on a national basis across the profession.”

SafetyAtWorkBlog posed the following questions to the appropriate contact person, Pam Pryor, Registrar, of the Australian OHS Education Accreditation Board in early May 2012. The AOHSEAB issued its first ever newsletter on 5 July 2012. (Hyperlinks have been added) Continue reading “Unanswered questions on Safety Institute activities”

Public hearings into Workplace Bullying to commence in Australia

Next week Australia holds public hearings into the issue of workplace bullying. Currently the House Standing Committee on Education and Employment has not yet made any submissions publicly available which handicaps the value of the public hearings for observers but the Trade Unions have released their submissions. Generally, the suggestions for control measures are progressive but the submissions also indicate the extent of the challenge in “controlling” workplace bullying and some of the challenges facing this inquiry.

The ACTU claims that workplace bullying was given national prominence following a survey of union members in 2000 but that survey is not representative of the broader Australian community and should be treated with caution. The ACTU submission seeks support for its survey results from more authoritative sources such as Safe Work Australia and the Productivity Commission. But neither of these sources indicates workplace bullying to be as big an issue as the ACTU claims.

Safe Work Australia’s figures, quoted by the ACTU , say that in

“In 2007/08, 26% of accepted workers compensation claims for mental stress in Australia resulted in 26 or more weeks off work.”

The significance in this quote is that bullying is not mentioned and if one accepts that bullying is a subset of mental stress and psychosocial hazards, bullying should be only a fraction of the 26% figure. It is also the case that it is common for victims of bullying to eliminate the hazard through resignation rather than lodge workers’ compensation claims. So one metric may indicate a low bullying rate but another indicates a “hidden” rate. Accurate measurement, the accumulation of evidence, is a major problem in any study of workplace bullying and is a major challenge for this Parliamentary Inquiry. Continue reading “Public hearings into Workplace Bullying to commence in Australia”

WorkSafe’s approach to marketing safety to teenagers revealed

Two articles in two days concerning OHS advertising may seem a little much but in 2008 Australia’s Advertising Standards Board (ASB) received complaints about one of the graphic ads used by WorkSafe Victoria at that time. WorkSafe had identified a need to shock teenagers about workplace risks but some television viewers found them disturbing.

young-workers-pix-004 — WorkSafe Young Workers Campaign

A couple of the complaints reflect some of the comments posted by readers to the SafetyAtWorkBlog.

“These ads may be appropriate for industrial oh&s training programs, but not for the general community, for whom they serve no purpose other than to shock and horrify.”

“I was injured at work were I lost my entire eye ball, I think work place safety is very important, to spread the word is vital, however the scene of burnt flesh is going to upset and remind people who were injured at work the horror they suffered, I know I can’t watch it, and I wasn’t burnt.”

The ASB Case Report includes details of focus group surveys undertaken by WorkSafe Victoria in developing the advertisements. These details illustrate some of the marketing thinking of WorkSafe. Continue reading “WorkSafe’s approach to marketing safety to teenagers revealed”

Australia’s safety education arrangements need clarity

On 18 June 2012, the Safety Institute of Australia (SIA) distributed two media announcements on behalf of the Australian OH&S Education Accreditation Board (AOHSEAB). One announcement states that RMIT University

“…was first cab off the rank as part of a pilot program for the accreditation of OHS professional education programs”.

That announcement continues to say that

“As universities progress through the accreditation process employers and recruiters will have confidence that OHS professional education programs adequately prepare graduates to enter the workplace as an entry-level OHS professional and potential students will have a point of reference when selecting a program of study.”

This sounds very positive but who is this accreditation board? The Board’s website lists the Board’s Members and states its purpose as

“accredit[ing] OHS professional education programs that meet the accreditation criteria and holders of accredited qualifications are then deemed to meet the knowledge requirement for certification as generalist OHS professionals.”

So the Board provides some additional credibility to OHS professional education programs through accreditation. Can OHS courses exist without this accreditation? Certainly. The media release says that universities are “lining up” but only Latrobe University is in the accreditation process at the moment.

The state of tertiary OHS education in Australia is confusing. Some universities are promoting OHS courses while academics at other universities (and the SIA) are bemoaning the closure of OHS courses.* Continue reading “Australia’s safety education arrangements need clarity”

Through Wilful Blindness I begin to see

Put your hand over your ears and start saying La La La La La La La. That is willful blindness (or, technically,deafness, but let’s not quibble).

Margaret Heffernan, author of a new paperback edition of “Wilful Blindness – Why we ignore the obvious at our peril“, discovered wilful blindness while researching the trial of the Enron executives. Heffernan says that

“Judge [Simeon] Lake was applying the legal principle of wilful blindness: you are responsible if you could have known, and should have known, something which instead you strove not to see.” (page 1)

Heffernan’s book is not simply a new book on business management. Heffernan acknowledges that wilful blindness is not limited to a workplace, person or management theory. She also says wilful blindness is not always a negative. It is this breadth of approach to the topic that increases the worthiness of her book. Continue reading “Through Wilful Blindness I begin to see”

OHS inspections save businesses money

A recent article in Science about OHS inspections has gained considerable attention after Michael Blanding wrote about the findings in a Harvard Business School blog. According to the executive summary:

“In a natural field experiment, researchers [ Associate Professor Michael W. Toffel and colleague David I. Levine] found that companies subject to random OSHA inspections showed a 9.4 percent decrease in injury rates compared with uninspected firms.

The researchers found no evidence of any cost to inspected companies complying with regulations. Rather, the decrease in injuries led to a 26 percent reduction in costs from medical expenses and lost wages translating to an average of $350,000 per company.

The findings strongly indicate that OSHA regulations actually save businesses money.”

That research should give enormous heart to OHS regulators around the world and reduce criticism from business groups. The findings have been defined as “definitive” but this is like saying that research into Scandinavian workplaces and society can be relevant to other countries. Research in OHS and workers compensation in the United States is relevant to the United States with mostly curiosity value to other nations. Continue reading “OHS inspections save businesses money”

Tag: research

“Loose” workplace bullying statistics published

Like this:

Unanswered questions on Safety Institute activities

Like this:

Public hearings into Workplace Bullying to commence in Australia

Like this:

WorkSafe’s approach to marketing safety to teenagers revealed

Like this:

Australia’s safety education arrangements need clarity

Like this:

Through Wilful Blindness I begin to see

Like this:

OHS inspections save businesses money

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: