Australia needs a sound and credible OHS organisation

Any organisation that claims to be “considered by Industry and Governments to be the premier membership based organisation for the Safety Professional” establishes very high expectations in the community and its members.

At the end of November 2010 the Safety Institute of Australia (SIA) concluded what could be described as its annus horribilis with its 2010 Annual General Meeting in Melbourne.

2010 has been busy for the SIA on the home front with its Western Australia Division morphing into a new OHS organisation (with a loss of 4,000 members according to the National President’s report in the Annual Report), a National Secretary being suspended, a Fellow being accused of contempt of the National Board, legal action continuing over SIA-related matters and special general meetings occurring, or being organised by longstanding and disgruntled members.

The various ructions in the last 12 months have been described in the SIA Annual Report [not available publicly online] by the outgoing National President, as “ill-informed” and reflective of “a suburban tennis club”.

The National President also briefly discusses breaches of ethics.  It is good to see, in one way, that “most [ethical breaches] were dismissed as frivolous or vexatious”, but the fact that the perceived breaches were even lodged should indicate that the SIA needs to devote a great deal more resources into educating its membership on due process in this area, or in reviewing the administration of the Code of Conduct.

Annual General Meetings are an important element of corporate and organisational accountability.  Indeed, a quick description of AGMs says that

“An AGM is held every year to elect the Board of Directors and inform their members of previous and future activities.  It is an opportunity for the shareholders and partners to receive copies of the company’s accounts as well as reviewing fiscal information for the past year and asking any questions regarding the directions the business will take in the future.” Continue reading “Australia needs a sound and credible OHS organisation”

WorkSafe’s Homecoming Advertisements

‘Why is the most important reason for good workplace health and safety standards not at work at all?’ asks the Homecoming advertisement by implication.  Because the injured or killed worker will leave his/her family behind, or harm them if they are injured or killed.  S/he needs to think about them and the workplace H&S standard; about their pain and the OHS standard.  About them and his/her possibly unsafe behaviour at work so s/he can return home in one piece; return to them. And the imagery is of a patiently waiting young boy, waiting for his father at the front of the house holding a ball.  How desperate, lost and lonely that little boy would be if his father (in this case) was killed at work.  Your heart goes out to him and thereby an emotional driver has been activated.  And, in truth, tragically, such occasions do happen, too often.

Then the father appears and the boy smiles from ear to ear, we can feel the happiness permeating the ambrosia of human wellbeing.  Father has come home safe and sound, boy is happy, family is whole, healthy and safe.  I can’t remember, does mother peak smilingly from behind the corner as dinner simmers in the kitchen?  Your heart swells.  Good advert wouldn’t you say?

It’s very hard to change people’s behaviour.  It’s hard to get people to effectively achieve sustained improvements in anything.   Therefore, haven’t the marketers achieved a lot with this series of advertisements?

Let’s see:  first, are there likely to be any OHS improvements at work as a result of any of these ads?  I haven’t seen any, have you?  Think hard, what exactly has changed?

Secondly, have managers been touched by these ads so that they will now rush out and make dramatic OHS improvements?  Continue reading “WorkSafe’s Homecoming Advertisements”

Montara oil spill report finally released

On 24 November 2010, the Australian Government finally released the investigation report into the 2009 Montara oil spill in the Timor Sea that has similarities to the oil rig explosion of BP in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010.

The Energy & Resources Minister, Martin Ferguson, has sat on the report since the Board of Inquiry presented its findings in June 2010 even though there could have been industry-wide safety and design lessons.  Significantly, the report was released after the recent Federal election  and, according to the Minister’s media release, has found :

“At the heart of this matter is the failure of the operator and the failure of the regulator to adhere to this regime.  Montara was preventable.  If either – or preferably both – PTTEP AA or the Northern Territory Designated Authority had done their jobs properly and complied with requirements, the Montara Blowout would never have happened.”

For those readers in America and the Gulf of Mexico, these words may echo what they have heard only a few months ago.

The Government response supports the Report’s finding states:

“…that PTTEP AA’s widespread and systemic procedural shortcomings were a direct cause of the Montara incident.  In addition, the Report identified concerns relating to the integrity of the remaining wells (H2, H3, H4 and GI) at the Montara Wellhead Platform.  The Commissioner concluded that PTTEP AA did not achieve proper control of any of the five wells at the Montara oil field, and that PTTEP AA’s internal systems were insufficient to achieve a high quality of assurance in respect of well operations.” [link added] Continue reading “Montara oil spill report finally released”

Controlling Christmas party risks is a year-round activity

Every year, around this time, law firms and OHS regulators release statements and good OHS advice about the risks of Christmas and end-of-year work parties.  But companies who wait until now to introduce control measures and policies for the risks of occupational violence, sexual harassment and reputational damage have, largely, missed the opportunity to effectively manage these risks.

The need to enforce safe behaviours at work functions is not a seasonal process but one that is integral to the establishment of a safe workplace culture the year round.  This is not to say that a friendly reminder is not useful but, if managed well, it should be nothing more than a reminder.

Of all the OHS advice for parties, Workplace Health & Safety Queensland is most succinct:

The intersection of OHS and public liability becomes more urgent

In mid-November 2010, a gymnasium in Queensland was fined A$70,000 following the death of a 19-year-old Michelle Maitland.  Ms Maitland fell and hit her head on a part of the floor that was not covered by a safety mat.  The case has been regularly reported in Queensland media since the death in June 2009 and the reports provide additional details of the fall and the hazard control measures that could be considered.

Workplace Health & Safety Queensland was unable to provide SafetyAtWorkBlog with details of the case or comment as the gymnasium has lodged an appeal against the judgement.

This tragic death is the latest illustration of a challenge that businesses and OHS regulators have faced regularly – the line between public liability and occupational health and safety law.   Businesses have applied a rule of thumb where injuries related to work activities are OHS matters but risks presented to customers or visitors who are in the workplace have been dealt with through public liability insurance.  The Maitland case shows that businesses may face an insurance payout as well as an OHS prosecution.

The significance of this demarcation will greatly increase with the introduction in Australia of new laws that redefine a “workplace” as wherever work is being undertaken.   Continue reading “The intersection of OHS and public liability becomes more urgent”

Lessons Learnt…?

I would like to pose a question, or questions: are OHS professionals and the community in general, in all honesty, learning and applying the lessons we are being taught from workplace events?

Are we, or our organisations, being truly effective in preventing the recurrence of events in our workplaces, work processes or activities?

Do we, in truth, actually prevent risk before it has the opportunity to arise, or do we at best eliminate it once it does?

Most, if not all, will answer “yes, yes and yes”.  And mean it.  But let us take a good, hard look in the mirror.

Almost every day, most of us will become aware of another work-related fatality, another court case won or lost, another event which has resulted in significant harm to person, property, environment – or a combination thereof.  What makes these events of note?   Continue reading “Lessons Learnt…?”

New safety culture diagnostic tool

Scandinavia has been the region of choice for many OHS and industrial relations reforms but now something has come from the other side of the world, New Zealand, which should excite OHS professionals.

The Department of Labour (DoL) has released a “self-help diagnostic tool” to identify safety culture.  The DoL Workplace Services Group Manager, Maarten Quivooy, says

“One of the best ways to improve a safety culture is to start measuring it. This tool gives businesses the guidance they need to understand what’s working well and where there is room for improvement…

“It can be used by any industry or business that is motivated to improve its health and safety performance. Ultimately it will help a business make a start diagnosing its culture and, most importantly, planning for change.  Building a better safety culture builds a better business.”

The basis of the tool is a short survey which includes 24 simple questions that will generate important discussions individually but could provide a fairly decent indication of a company’s safety culture if the workplace honestly completes it.  Continue reading “New safety culture diagnostic tool”

Concatenate Web Development
© Designed and developed by Concatenate Aust Pty Ltd