Tag: workplace

Workplace bullying needs prompt and concise action to be effective

It is very important to treat media reports of bullying with a great deal of scepticism.  An article in the Herald-Sun on 20 July 2010 is a good example of the collation of new and old information intended to generate alarm or outrage.

Werribee Secondary College has had several incidents of occupational violence and school violence.   All schools will have bullying incidents of student to student but these can be minimised and controlled with effort, commitment and vision.  Bullying between staff is different, although the controls are similar, and inhabits the  different legislative context of OHS.  WorkSafe Victoria has been involved with workplace bullying incidents in the education sector in the past.

The Herald-Sun builds on the myth that teachers have it easy because of the amount of leave that is scheduled. The current article entitled “Teacher seeks bullying payout” has a headline about workplace bullying but the article mixes up student bullying and workplace bullying as if they are the same issue but to different degrees and with different participants.

The Victorian Education Department has addressed the issue of workplace bullying to some extent.  The department has several sites devoted to bullying issues and occupational violence but much of it refers back to policies and reactionary responses.  Continue reading “Workplace bullying needs prompt and concise action to be effective”

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”

BHP Billiton receives minimal OHS penalty – time for a new approach

Some time ago a penalty concept circulated in Australia where OHS penalties were implemented as a percentage of as company’s revenue or profit.  The concept gained renewed topicality in mid-July 2010 as BHP Billiton was penalised $A75,000 after the death of a worker, Scott Rigg. (Video report available)

The fine seems paltry for a fatality and more so when the company’s OHS record is taken into account.  As the video report states, BHP Billiton could have been penalised $A200,000 but even this is a relatively small fine for such a company.

The Australian Government has been willing to apply a 40% tax on the mining industry’s profits but is unlikely to apply a percentage penalty in relation to OHS.   Continue reading “BHP Billiton receives minimal OHS penalty – time for a new approach”

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”

A radicalised OHS profession may meet future social needs

The Australasian Faculty of Occupational and Environmental Medicine (AFOEM) has uploaded to the internet an hour-long discussion of their Position Statement on “Realising the Health Benefits of Work“.

Firstly  AFOEM should be congratulated for sharing such a resource.  Although the paper itself was launched in May 2010, to have access in July 2010 is a great achievement and an indication of the openness of the organisation and the importance the organisation places on the document.

Dr Robin Chase, President of AFOEM, says in his launch introduction that the dominant social perspective is that work is somehow bad for one’s health.  This is a perspective that OHS professionals will struggle to counter as they are always on the look-out for hazard, the potential for harm, risks.  Similarly HR people often are seen as providing services to assist workers in coping with workloads and workplace issues. Continue reading “A radicalised OHS profession may meet future social needs”

Psychological advice on handling people that is broadly applicable

The latest edition of Lawyers Weekly includes an article ostensibly about managing bullies in the legal profession written by psychologist, Dr Chris Day.  The article provides some general tips, though, that are useful to any of us who need to make decisions refreshingly she reflects two options that I offer to my OHS clients on safety matters that do not include bullying.  Dr Day says that any problem can be solved by these actions

  1. “Leave…
  2. Change the situation…
  3. Accept the situation…
  4. Do nothing….”

Leave and change are included in the OHS Hierarchy of Control under different terminology.  Doing nothing is advice that few OHS consultants will give but is a strategy that many small businesses apply.  Their risk management strategy is to press their luck and in some cases this can work.   Continue reading “Psychological advice on handling people that is broadly applicable”

Oil rig workers speak about BP/Deepwater incident

The worker impact of the BP/Deepwater incident in the Gulf Of Mexico has finally been provide a mainstream media airing in 60 Minutes.  Workers Comp Insider blog provides some commentary and embedded video of the show.

It is a curiosity of American television that everything is open for discussion even though an official inquiry is underway.  This may be to do with the fascination of all things television but may also be reflective of a country whose legal structure allows for greater and more immediate self-analysis than the United Kingdom and its Commonwealth colleagues.

From the information available about the events preceding the disaster and immediately after, there was an increased production pressure on the oil rig’s workers.  There was some confusion on the authority for decision-making on process matters.  Emergency procedures were not well-developed or the practicalities anticipated.

Clearly there were flaws in the safety management system regardless of any design issues.  The governmental inquiry will be able to provide a much more detailed and dispassionate report of these events but it is clear that at this one oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico, safety management was not clearly understood or applied by workers at the frontline.

The world is looking forward to the “big picture” report.

© Workplace Safety Services P/L (ABN: 68091088621) and SafetyAtWorkBlog, 2008-2025. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Kevin Jones and SafetyAtWorkBlog with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

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