Now is the time for all good OHS lobbyists to come to the aid of their country

Now is the time for the OHS fraternity to lobby local politicians on the importance of workplace safety for the community and business.

Australia is facing a hung Parliament following the 21 August 2010 federal election.  OHS was mentioned early in the campaign but not since even though there were opportunities.  Industrial relations was raised in the election campaign by the Australian Labor Party but the Liberals chose not to play and its IR spokesperson, Eric Abetz, was missing in action.  But OHS law reform has been less about improving the law than about reducing the cost on business (even though the significance of this is argument is highly dubious) and this is where discussion on OHS could have occurred.

The Liberal Party is continuing to assert that “stop the waste” is a positive message as it relates to government spending.  It projects itself as the friend of business and the free-market and has reluctantly accepted the reality of OHS legislation although not the cost of effective compliance.  The Liberals could have used the OHS harmonisation process as an example of an economic reform IT began* but has been supported and progressed through the Rudd/Gillard Labor government.

Now, in a political climate where the Australian Greens and some Independents will hold the balance of power in the Senate and have the chance to form a coalition government with either party, the IR policies of smaller party miners and independents will be crucial for OHS and workplace relations.   Continue reading “Now is the time for all good OHS lobbyists to come to the aid of their country”

Root Cause is always found in decisions not things

Australian unionists are justifiably angry at the death of a worker at the construction site of a desalination plant in South Australia last week.  The worker was crushed when a beam slipped from a sling on a crane and crushed him.  The soft sling was being used so that the beams would not be scratched according to one report in The Australian newspaper.

It is hard to understand the sacrificing of the safety provided by the standard practice of chains for the aesthetics of the beams.

The media attention on the death is increased due to the incident occurring on a desalination plant site as many oppose the use of desalination plants to ease Australia’s water shortages. Continue reading “Root Cause is always found in decisions not things”

I felt the job was driving me nuts: Stressors and Stress

For two decades now the occupational stressors/stress regulatory debate in Australia has limped along with the same arguments, same objections, same type of discussions.  The same largely impractical documents mentioning psychological effects, physical effects, ‘good stress’ and what is or isn’t a disease and, of course, finger-wagging advice about risk assessments.

Exactly how has all this benefited workers?  So far as I can see across many industries very little indeed.  I can actually identify individual workplaces where 20 year old stressors have still not been eliminated nor controlled, others are worse even though managers have come and gone.

There was a period in this debate when the bio-medical models were prominent (The Fluid Phase) with a focus on the ‘stress hormones’ – adrenaline, noradrenaline, cortisol and dopamine.  Melatonin and serotonin were also discussed, but not nearly as much.  Result?  No benefit to workers.  There was a period of debate about words (The Semantic Phase): what exactly did ‘stress’ mean?  What about ‘strain’?  Or ‘eustress’ (euphoric stress)?  What about ‘distress’?  Or the more insidious ‘good’ or ‘positive stress’ and ‘hardiness’, remember them?  Result?  No benefit to workers at the job.  Then there was forensic interest in ‘which exactly contributes more to occupational stress: life generally, genetics, personality or things at work’ (The Multiplex Phase)?

Changes in organisation, in numbers of workers, in rosters, in workloads (vis a vis process and machinery changes) have resulted in improvements, but these have been rare.  The matters of shorter shifts, longer breaks (say, at 3 am), genuine reductions in levels of fatigue and fear of job loss have generally become worse. Continue reading “I felt the job was driving me nuts: Stressors and Stress”

A gut feeling for workplace risk

We all do it, we use language to both inform and at times mislead.  However, when the latter happens in the field of OHS it can be a very damaging to standards.  I’d like to draw attention to one such (class of) circumstance but I’m not sure that the very language I need to use as demonstration will be acceptable within this communication domain.

Some years back I tried to provide a means for linguistic interaction between some academic language and that of workers.  I hoped that parcels of theory and practice could interact to highlight strengths and weaknesses, as a kind of OHS reality check.  Once a word or a concept is understood communication has only started as an approximation.  I was trying to allude to other, subtler tools of language that must also be understood.  For example, it’s important to take note of tone, irony, sarcasm, analogy and metaphor.  These are all tools used in ordinary conversations, they not only deliver information, but may in fact provide pointers to essential meanings intended.  It’s hardly news to state that even a pause or a comma can make all the difference.  Try, “What is this thing called ‘Love’?” and “What is this thing called, Love?”

I asked a worker on a large demolition project (that within a year killed a man) how good was the local OHS system and how well was it supported by management.  The response was less than enthusiastic.  I then tried to get a sense for actual OHS practice, I needed a real example.  I asked this measured, neck-tattooed forklift operator of about 56 how he decided what size and type of forklift to use for which load.  Was there a policy?  Was there a standard operating procedure (SOP)?  Was there any written document…….. or what?  He was sitting at the time in one of the heavy forklifts on the site, a large machine about to lift and shift a huge load. Continue reading “A gut feeling for workplace risk”

OHS: The Pearl Harbour Syndrome

OHS:  The Pearl Harbour Syndrome[i]

– Poverty of Expectations –

The Japanese attack on US forces at Pearl Harbour in the Hawaiian Islands on Sunday 7th December 1941 was a military disaster for the US described as a totally unforseen and unforeseeable attack.  It shocked the American people and brought the US into WWII (essentially the next day).  The element of total surprise (‘Why were our forces so ‘unexpecting’ and unprepared?’) was defended with the implication that, ‘we were still negotiating with the government of Japan and its Emperor in good faith’ and there was no state of war between the two nations.  In a speech to congress the next day President Franklin Roosevelt called it, “… a date which will live in infamy – the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan”.

Controversy surrounds various aspects of the attack[ii] but it has become synonymous with surprise and astonishment.  However, research over the years suggests that in fact it was preceded by a large number of misunderstood or ignored warnings and missed signs.   The reason these were so completely missed, according to one scholar, is because of ‘poverty of expectations’ – routine attention to the obvious and reduced horizons for imaginative projections. Continue reading “OHS: The Pearl Harbour Syndrome”

When information supply is NOT consultation

In Australia there is a purposely created commonality between the developing OHS law and industrial relations law on certain issues.  Consultation is one of those matters and, although a decision by the Federal Court of Australia on 11 June 2010 relates to the Fair Work Act, safety professionals and business owners should take note.

On 22 June 2010, Justice John Logan fined Queensland Rail $A660,000 for not consulting its workforce on the company’s privatization plan which would have affected employees’ jobs. (An ABC podcast of the matter is available online)  One media report paraphrased Justice Logan:

“[he]told the court that workers were never given the opportunity to discuss if they would be moved into the new private business, how the privatisation would occur, or if they wanted privatisation in the first place.”

The most pertinent comments from 11 June 2010 judgement by Justice Logan are also quoted in various media reports:

“This change so radical, a breach so comprehensive, the occasion for consultation so obvious that anything less than maximum penalties would not do justice to the case and the need to ensure public confidence in the adherence to industrial relations bargains.”

The Australian quotes Justice Logan as saying

“Benign dictatorship is not to be equated with consultation…” Continue reading “When information supply is NOT consultation”

Safe Work Australia at Senate Estimates – harmonisation latest

Rex Hoy of Safe Work Australia (SWA) spoke on 1 June 2010 at the Australian Senate Estimates hearing (around page 44) and confirmed progress on the draft OHS regulations and codes of practice.  The draft Hansard reports Hoy saying:

“Just to cover the areas we are working on: there will be model regulations covering administrative arrangements to support the model act, major hazards facilities, licensing of high-risk work, workplace hazardous chemicals, occupational diving, noise, working in confined spaces, performing manual tasks and induction training for construction work.  There may well be more, depending on finishing this process. Continue reading “Safe Work Australia at Senate Estimates – harmonisation latest”

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