Quantcast
Channel: small business – SafetyAtWorkBlog
Viewing all 107 articles
Browse latest View live

Dummies can equal clarity

0
0

ohs-dummies-coverIt took a long time but Wiley has published a Dummies guide on Health and Safety At Work. The lack of an occupational health and safety (OHS) book in this series has always been a mystery particularly when the Dummies” market seems to be, primarily, small- to medium-sized businesses.  This edition is written for the UK market but the vast majority of the book is applicable to any jurisdiction that is based on the original UK OHS laws. But is it any good?

SafetyAtWorkBlog dipped into several chapters of the book to see if it was on the right path.

This article is not going to discuss the Dummies format which has evolved over many years with textboxes, icons, tips etc. and with which most people are familiar or, if not, go to a local book shop and dawdle in the Dummies aisle.

As mentioned above this Dummies book matches the business sector who most often asks for help in OHS and usually from a minimal level of knowledge or, even worse, been tainted by the “elf ‘n’ safety” of the English tabloid media.  The book’s first line immediately establishes a rapport with the reader by saying:

“Health and safety is a surprisingly interesting topic”.

This acknowledges that OHS is rarely the core consideration of any business and implies that the authors have been equally surprised. The first page provides useful information intended to grab the attention of a potential buyer and reassure the business reader of the fundamentals of safety management.  These include

  • “Risk Assessment is a core tool for health and safety…
  • Safety management systems are much easier to set up that to maintain, review and improve,….
  • Using consultants can be an efficient and effective use of resources…
  • No two safety experts will ever agree on the detail….” (pages 1 & 2)

The first formal chapter of the book tackles the tabloid hype which was a must for the UK readership as the hype has been so pervasive over the last decade.  The authors, David Towlson, Vicki Swaine and Terry Robson, state that most of the “elf ‘n’ safety” reports are not about safety and OHS is often used as a smokescreen “to hide a decision that has already been made for other reasons.” (page 8)  They also state that, as the Health and Safety Executive has said,

“one of the reasons cited for disproportionate interpretations of safety requirements is a fear of being sued”. (page 9)

However this is highly unlikely and the fear is partly a result of the seemingly increasing presence of the no-win, no-fee lawyers, a reality occurring in Australia as much as in the UK.

In discussing the Lofstedt Review, the authors write about ‘disproportionateness” of risk assessments.  Risk assessments were intended for significant risks, a point made by WorkSafe Victoria some years ago which dropped the assessment requirement for established risks for which suitable controls had already been identified.  It is useful to note the following when companies recommend a safe work method statement for everything:

“Unnecessarily complex risk assessments create a disproportionate administrative burden.  This greatly undermines the cause of safety and encourages the view that health and safety gets in the way, tying up valuable resources in efforts that don’t benefit the business.” (page 10)

(So we create our own red tape??!)

Every so often the authors slip in paragraph that makes you wish you’d written it.  The following is a terrific summary of the current state of OHS that also hints at the fear of OHS that many business people have:

“Modern health and safety isn’t some strange, mystical art.  In fact, you can argue that it isn’t really a subject in its own right at all.  Instead it’s a collection of topics brought together with a safety emphasis; that is, to avoid injury or ill-health. In a wider sense, health and safety is also a key aspect of business risk management.” (page 11)

If we accept this position, we should restructure tertiary OHS courses to be fully multi-disciplinary.  Basic OHS training can address the legislative requirements but advanced courses should be structured around health and safety management rather than being dominated by theory.

The authors spend a couple of pages addressing the safety vs profit argument by using simple examples of how a small action can create large direct and indirect costs and how unpreparedness for such events can threaten business success.  What is missing, at least from this section, is how OHS can increase productivity and profitability.

In fact there is little attention to productivity in the book, just as there is only brief mention of culture – 2 paragraphs on page 360.  The latter is an excellent move because the academic argy-bargy over safety culture does not help a small- to medium-sized business manage the type of safety issues they face daily.  It would have been good to see some discussion on the organisational and worker benefits (productivity) of showing that safety is being managed well.

The chapter on developing an OHS policy is notable for the extra information included.  The authors discuss the need building a risk profile of the business which leads, although it is not mentioned, to the establishment and management of a safety risk register.  Safety Risks should be acknowledged in enterprise risk registers but it is much easier to administer if there is a safety module or slightly separated OHS risks.

Significantly, and this is indicative of the book as a whole, the policy chapter ends with the subheading:

“Making sure the resources are available”.

Too many companies establish safety processes but do not commit to an appropriate level of resources – people, time and technology – to maintain and upgrade those processes.  So the commitment to safety can be shown to have existed at some point but this is severely undercut if the safety management system is not maintained.  The authors wisely advise for a balanced approach:

“The middle path uses the available budget to adequately resource a prioritised health and safety programme wisely.  If you have confidence in the rest of the policy setting and planning programme, your decisions for action will be well thought out and warrant financial backing without the need for justification from a precise cost-benefit analysis.” (page 45)

This paragraph needs careful reading to understand the decisions that are required elsewhere in the business to strengthen  the safety management approach.  Many would also quake at the lack of a cost-benefit analysis but if the business is structured appropriately to encourage trust, this lack should not be a surprise and substantial costs could be saved.

There are a fair few references to UK safety and regulatory resources (particularly in the chapter about moving to a recognised safety management system) but it would not be difficult to find equivalents in different jurisdictions.  In fact it would not be difficult to produce local versions of this Dummies guide by simply replacing these references.  It would be good if Wiley considered this, if they are not already working on it.

For OHS professionals this book can be a refreshing experience and may even fill some knowledge gaps, particularly in how to talk about OHS simply and to maintain focus on safety management rather than safety theory. It would be a good addition to the OHS bookcase.

Kevin Jones


Filed under: book, business, communication, consultation, economics, government, hazards, health, law, OHS, red tape, risk, safety, small business, workplace Tagged: Dummies, OHS, Wiley

Inconsistent quad bike safety advice in WA

0
0

agricultural_health_safety_checklist_01-pdf_extract_page_1On 18 January 2017, WorkSafeWA released an agricultural safety checklist which includes some hazards associated with quad bike operations. West Australia’s occupational health and safety (OHS) regulator stresses the checklist only lists common hazards and refers to a handbook.  The only agricultural handbook available on its website is from 2014 and the quad bike safety information seems outdated or, at least, inconsistent with the advice from South Australia and elsewhere.

The checklist includes these quad bike and motorbike related hazards which it is reasonable to take as what WorkSafeWA sees as those hazards which should attract specific attention:

  • “A helmet [labelled AS/NZS 1698] which fits the rider; and substantial footwear is a mandatory requirement when riding motor or quad bikes.
  • Maximum speed limits established for all areas of the property.
  • Bikes carry loads in accordance with the manufacturers’ instructions.
  • Persons operating motor or quad bikes in the workplace have received training and instruction.
  • Motor or quad bikes have been maintained and are in good working condition.
  • Towed accessories do not exceed the towed or tongue weight limit.
  • Accessories utilised meet the requirements of the manufacturer of the agricultural bike to which they are attached.
  • Terrain is assessed and hazards identified.
  • Consider operator skills, slope, weather, surface structure etc has been addressed.
  • Persons transporting bikes have been trained in loading, tying down, and unloading procedures.
  • All safety and warning decals on bikes are to be legible.
  • Keys to bikes stored in a place where they cannot be accessed by children (to prevent unintended use).
  • No passengers to be carried unless the plant has been designed to do so; and if so – carried according to the manufacturer’s recommendations.
  • Risk assessments are conducted and adequate hearing protection is worn when exposed to noisy activities.”

A noticeable omission is any mention of making sure the quad bike is the most suitable equipment for the task or the consideration of crush protection devices (CPD).  Curiously Roll Over Protective Structures (ROPS) are used in the examples for completing the checklist, but nothing about similar structures on quad bikes.

According to recent research, Western Australia had four farming fatalities and four non-fatal injuries reported in the press for 2016. Safe Work Australia reports one WA recreational quadbike-related death for 2016.

Given that the same brands and models of quad bikes are sold across Australia, it is odd that the safety advice is not uniform. Lucky most farmers only work in one jurisdiction at a time.

Kevin Jones


Filed under: agriculture, ATV, government, guidance, hazards, law, OHS, quad bike, risk, safety, small business, transport Tagged: ATV, farm safety, OHS, Premium

Outsourcing inductions may not support good safety management

0
0

new_young_induction-pdf_extract_page_1SafetyAtWorkBlog has been critical of the use and sale of generic Safe Work Method Statements (SWMS) for work tasks that can be managed through simpler and freely available job safety analyses (JSAs) and face-to-face communication. On 27 January 2017, the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Western Australia (CCI) launched generic inductions.

The CCI asks and answers, in its media release:

“So why is it that so many workplaces don’t provide an induction? Our Members are telling us that they don’t really know what information they should be giving to a new starter.”

An internet search of the WorkSafeWA website would have led one to its “Checklist for new and young workers – Safety induction” which provides a good list of the categories of workplace safety information the safety regulator believes would be appropriate. (Similar checklists are available from WorkSafe Victoria and WorkSafe Tasmania) So why charge for something that is freely available online?

CCI recommends a two-part induction process:

  • “General component introducing new employees to their general safety obligations, providing them with the essential theoretical and practical knowledge
  • Workplace and job specific component.”

The first part is a two-hour class-based session.  The second part is a

“Workplace specific OSH induction checklist to be completed by new employee with their supervisor at your workplace”.

As with SWMS and JSAs, the major benefit comes from the tailoring of information to the specific workplace and work tasks required of the job on the day of the job and in consultation with the work team.

WorkSafeWA’s checklist also operates to a two stage induction involving an introduction to key people in the workplace and an explanation of the basic OHS information that is essential for all employees to work in a safe and healthy manner.  Regardless of the CCI induction structure, employers are going to need to introduce new starters to the relevant safety and managerial personnel and supervisors in the workplace.

WorkSafeWA includes the provision of personal protective equipment, tools and lockers, if available.  This process, plus the staff introduction, offers the opportunity for employers to become familiar with the new starter and vice versa; to build a rapport.

Some of the information that WorkSafeWA recommends includes discussing

  • OSH policy
  • Duty of care: employer and employees
  • Consultation: OSH committee and safety and health representative (if any)
  • Safe work procedures and instructions for each task
  • Any hazards and the control measures
  • Slips, trips and falls prevention
  • Vehicle safety
  • Procedures for working outside such as skin protection
  • Use, maintenance and storage of personal protective clothing and equipment including, where required, eye, hand, foot and hearing protection
  • Maintenance requirements and who has responsibility
  • Issue resolution procedures
  • Injury/incident reporting procedure

The level of information in each one of these categories will vary with every workplace.  Further variance will come from the organisational structure of each workplace, supervisory contacts and geographical location.  Even more will come from the type of work to be undertaken.  It is difficult to see how a generic two-hour training course can provide a better level of consultation and induction than what can, and is legally required to, be provided at each workplace.

SafetyAtWorkBlog supports satisfying niche markets or information shortfalls but struggles to understand why one would charge for information that is already available for free elsewhere.

CCI has said that the courses are in response to the question “So why is it that so many workplaces don’t provide an induction?”  CCI members should perhaps ask whether a two-hour training course is really the answer to the induction question.

SafetyAtWorkBlog has several answers to the CCI question.

Business owners are not aware of their legislative obligation.

The legislative obligation has existed in Western Australia as long as the OHS laws have been in place, at least from the 1980s.  There are few, if any, valid excuses for not being aware of OHS obligations.  Any industry association would also be regularly reminding members of these obligations and, perhaps, providing templates and other simple tools to assist.  They could perhaps remind members of the free information available on the websites of the local safety regulator.

Business owners see inductions as a nuisance and something to be addressed in the shortest possible time.

Be wary of any business owner that cuts corners on, or does not provide an adequate, OHS induction.  Induction is a fundamental underpinning of worker safety.  Those business owners who ignore or downplay inductions are also displaying  a disregard for OHS laws which does not provide confidence in their safety management practices.

Many employers try to streamline inductions through the use of videos and other mechanisms.  This is understandable  when new starters are infrequent but it is not necessarily effective.  An induction is a good opportunity to familiarise oneself with the new worker or site visitor and to display one’s commitment to their health, safety and welfare by ensuring they are clear on their obligations and to answer any questions the inductee may have.

Repeating the same induction frequently can be boring for the presenter and causes many to speed through it.  But this is doing safety a disservice and may increase the likelihood of a new worker doing the wrong thing.  If a company believes that safety is everybody’s responsibility then have everyone take turns in providing the OHS induction.  Not only does this reinforce that safety is everybody’s responsibility, it refreshes the presenters’ OHS knowledge that they may not have thought about since their induction some months or years earlier.

Business owners who see inductions as a nuisance are likely to embrace the generic induction courses that CCI is providing.  It may achieve technical compliance but it can also be argued that this is contrary to OHS legislative obligations about information sharing and consultation.  Enforcement of OHS laws is moving (slowly) from tick-and-flick compliance to assessing the quality and effectiveness of the safety process. Companies are missing out on the best opportunity to provide effective OHS communication with new starters and to embed the safety values and practices of the company into those workers who statistics identify as in a high risk category.

Outsourcing OHS induction will do little to reduce the high risk of new starters doing the wrong thing because they have not fully understood what they have to do to work safely.  WorkCover Queensland states that

International research has shown that, over a 10-year period, the risk of work injury for workers employed for a short time has consistently remained higher compared to those employed at a job for more than one year.

The study shows that risk is particularly elevated among those in the first month on the job, with over three times the risk of a lost-time injury as workers with over a year’s job experience.”

Workcover Queensland identifies Inductions and Support as crucial ways of reducing these risks.

guide_for_employers_casual_work-pdf_extract_page_1WorkSafeWA’s guide for safety of casual workers has this to say on inductions:

“Written procedures and signs should not be the main source of safety information, as there may not be time for people to take them in or there may be difficulties in understanding them.

Employers must ensure that discussions and demonstrations have been held on the safe work procedures. As part of this, a safety induction for each worker is very important as all workers who are new to a job are at risk of injury.

Before they start work, all workers need information, instruction and training with follow-up supervision. They also need to understand the emergency procedures and how to seek help if there is an accident.

The employment arrangements need to allow adequate time for an induction to occur before work commences and adequate time for workers to read and understand any written information or instructions.”

That guide also has an induction checklist (pictured right).

Inductions are a wonderful opportunity to assess the suitability of the new worker and their ability to learn how to work safely. Building a relationship between worker and employer is strengthened by caring for the worker, giving the worker the right start, often, in their first job, ensuring that workers understand what is expected, making sure that workers’ literacy and language skills are adequate to the task, and making the worker feel welcome and proud of their new job.  This is best achieved at the workplace of the new worker by the employer.

Kevin Jones


Filed under: business, consultation, culture, death, government, law, OHS, Premium, risk, safety, safety culture, small business, training, workplace, WorkSafe, young Tagged: Premium

More work needed on public evacuation protocols

0
0

On 12 July 2017 a kitchen fire broke out in a densely packed restaurant and cafe sector of Melbourne, Australia.  This article illustrates some of the localised response and firefighting attempts.  Earlier that day I was in a cafe in Melbourne’s northern suburbs when the building’s evacuation alarm sounded (pictured right).  There was no fire in the cafe and patrons were confused when directed to evacuate by a voice on the speaker/alarm system.  This confusion was not helped when the young waiters told patrons to stay, kept serving patrons and  continued to take orders.  This experience illustrates significant misunderstandings about emergency protocols in public areas.

The ground floor cafe was in a four-storey building on the edge of an industrial/retail estate.  The first stage of the evacuation alarms sounded for several minutes.  Patrons looked to the waiting staff for guidance but confused looks were everywhere.  Business continued as normal but with loud alarm noises. After a few minutes, the alarm sound changed and a voice instructed everyone to “evacuate now”.

I, and around half of the patrons, got up to leave.  I wasn’t sure whether I was allowed to leave without paying my bill so I joined six others at the cash register and waited patiently to pay.  In the queue were other patrons wanting to place orders.  The waiter serviced everyone in turn regardless of the specific purposes, all the while telling patrons that there was nothing to worry about and that there was no need to leave.

What voice should we follow?  The alarms indicated that there is some sort of emergency in the building. The voice telling us to “evacuate now” was soon supported by streams of workers exiting the building and assembling across the road and then by the arrival of a fire engine.  Still patrons were advised to remain in the cafe by the waiters.

It is reasonable to expect the same process to occur in a cafe or any similar small business.  The cafe is as much a workplace as any other occupying a multi-tenant building and should have evacuation processes that are consistent with the other tenants.  That instructions given to patrons to remain during an evacuation process was confusing and, arguably, in breach of their safety obligations and, it is suggested, the conditions of their tenancy.

A good summary of Australian fire/evacuation requirements, plans and processes can be found HERE.  But it seems that the cafe’s evacuation responsibility most strongly comes through the OHS duty to look after the health safety and welfare of those who may be affected by your work.  Perhaps this duty seems too distant for safety planning in cafes.

Kevin Jones

Prosecution over fallen tree threatens small business viability

0
0

A recent occupational health and safety (OHS) prosecution in New Zealand illustrates many issues and attitudes to safety held by small business operators around the world.

Copyright: WorkSafeNZ

Stumpmaster was prosecuted after a bystander was injured and then hospitalised when the tree it was felling hit her. (WorkSafeNZ has issued a media release in the wake of the prosecution)  The company was penalised a total of $NZ108,500.  In January 2018, the owner of the Company, James Isaac, was in the newspapers stating that the penalty could end his business.

This content is for Monthly, Annual (PayPal only), Annual (credit card), Annual (corporate – up to 5 users), Annual (corporate – up to 10 users) and Annual members only. Visit the site and log in/register to read.

New farming incident statistics

0
0

The latest statistics of farm injuries from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare provide a useful insight in to the workplace risks of Australian farms. Given the workplace focus of the SafetyAtWorkBlog, and the articles written about the risk of working with quad bikes, the following statistics are of great interest:

For quad bikes, almost 90% of injuries were sustained by the driver in people aged 15 and over.” (page 9)

For injuries involving quad bikes, males accounted for two-thirds (66%) of all hospitalisations for children aged 0–14 and almost 80% of all hospitalisations for people aged 15 and over.” (page 9)

This content is for Monthly, Annual (PayPal only), Annual (credit card), Annual (corporate – up to 5 users), Annual (corporate – up to 10 users) and Annual members only. Visit the site and log in/register to read.

Concerns over ISO45001 voiced but no details provided

0
0

The publication date for the first truly international Standard on occupational health and safety (OHS) management systems, ISO45001, the rhetoric is heating up in Australia.

ISO45001 is due for publication on March 12 2018. Three days before the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (ACCI) released

This content is for Monthly, Annual (PayPal only), Annual (credit card), Annual (corporate – up to 5 users), Annual (corporate – up to 10 users) and Annual members only. Visit the site and log in/register to read.

Business Bullshit – and how this relates to workplace health and safety

0
0

This is an edited version of my presentation to delegates at the inaugural NSW Regional Safety Conference & Expo in Newcastle, Australia on March 17, 2018.

The current approach to occupational health and safety (OHS) is that we shouldn’t separate it from business operations. One of the motivations for achieving success in business is to build a strong organisational culture that integrates safety.

Companies often start this task by developing Mission Statements or Pledges.  Quite often these are done by talking to a lot of different people in the organisation.  And I don’t know of any mission statement that hasn’t been already run through Legal and Marketing – they don’t always get run through Safety.  What happens is that these statements can become more florid and more inexact, and more unclear.  Some of them descend into Business Bullshit.

This content is for Monthly, Annual (PayPal only), Annual (credit card), Annual (corporate – up to 5 users), Annual (corporate – up to 10 users) and Annual members only. Visit the site and log in/register to read.

A WorkCover book that works

0
0

Many consultants publish books on the understanding that a published work provides legitimacy and authority to their advice.  Sometimes these books are vanity productions but increasingly, and particularly in the safety sector, small-run publications are appearing that are well-written, well-edited and well worth reading.  The latest of these, in Australia at least, is “Workcover That Works” by Mark Stipic.

Stipic has been planning this book for some time and developed a clear strategy for this book to address the workers compensation processes in just one Australian State – Victoria.  It is not a workplace safety book but it acknowledges the role of occupational health and safety (OHS) and devotes one of its four parts to “Foundations of Success” in which Stipic discusses safety climate and culture and those management practices that minimise the likelihood of a workers compensation claim being lodged.  He writes:

“The more you understand how WorkCover works, the more you’ll realise that the best strategy is to not have to rely on the system – ideally because injuries have been prevented.  Most of the issues that arise with claims can be avoided if you take the appropriate actions long before any injury occurs.” (page 117)

This Section is probably the shortest of the book but it reflects the priorities of the reader and intended audience who want to know about how to best handle workers compensation claims, not manage safety.

OHS professionals, this author included, have often dismissed workers compensation in the past, not because it is not important but because it is easier to compartmentalise it as the post-incident insurance-related activities managed by someone else.  This approach is embarrassingly narrow but understandable, to some extent, as workers compensation is rarely discussed in OHS training and education, even though a worker’s experience may include work – injury – rehabilitation – work. For those OHS professionals of that mindset, Stipic’s book could be a revelation.

Because the book is based on Stipic’s experiences as a business adviser on workers compensation for insurance companies  and through his own consultancy, his use of first-person narrative works.  The book reads like a conversation with the author rather than a lecture from a patronising expert, and the tone is always helpful.

Company Doctor

Stipic’s short discussion of the use of company doctors is a good example of the book. Having a company doctor is of enormous benefit in the management of safety and of injured workers as that doctor usually has an understanding of the tasks being undertaken and the risk involved.  They know the managerial weaknesses of the business and the priorities.  Stipic suggests:

“…you might even send yourself to the company doctor for a pre-employment medical examination, so you have personal knowledge of the experience you are asking your workers to participate in.” (page 224)

A great example of knowledge-gathering and leadership in one visit.

Using company doctors has been a contentious industrial issue for some years as some employers try to manipulate treatments to meet key performance indicators and contractual obligations.  However, a lot of good can be gained when company doctors are used as intended.  Stipic links these services to injury prevention:

“You might also use the clinic for other services that can add value to your business, such as flu shots, annual health checks, pre-employment medical examinations and drug testing.  When you use a single clinic for all your needs, you can expect excellent service.” (page 30)

This works well for large organisations but equally for small.  A worker may visit their own doctor over a work-related injury but a company doctor will likely include information that allows the OHS person to better control the hazard or task that lead to the injury.  That information could be vital in an incident investigation and the process of continual improvement, particularly in relation to occupational health or psychological matters.

Early indications, such as this Tweet, are that Stipic is on a winner with this book.  It fills an important gap in the market for clear simple explanations and solutions.  Workers compensation is not a regular activity for most businesses and when it is needed one scrambles for information and procedures that may be outdated.

The book is a comfortable read that can be completed in an afternoon but its lessons will linger much longer.  You will put this book down with a list of questions for your staff, your insurers and your OHS advisers.  The answers may surprise you but the conversations will improve your overall safety management system, your safe systems of work and your profitability.

Kevin Jones

A bad day for ACCI at the Senate Inquiry into Industrial Deaths

0
0

Jennifer Low, Associate Director of the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry addressed the Senate Inquiry into Industrial Deaths in Perth on August 30 2018.  Much of her presentation would be familiar to occupational health and safety professionals as it reflects the ideological position that the ACCI has put to countless inquiries over almost 20 years.  It is fair to say that the ACCI did not have a good day at the Inquiry.

Low’s presentation commenced with a restating of the general commitments to safety and that the ACCI and its members hold the importance of OHS as a “fundamental belief”. This was followed up with

“Our employer network feels strongly that the prevention for workplace incidents, injuries and fatalities is a shared responsibility.” (page 1, emphasis added)

This blog has pointed out previously, in an article discussing the Harvard Business Review, how this phrase is often used by business groups

This content is for Monthly, Annual (PayPal only), Annual (credit card), Annual (corporate – up to 5 users), Annual (corporate – up to 10 users) and Annual members only. Visit the site and log in/register to read.

Is OHS suffering from policy AND structural capture?

0
0

The Grattan Institute has released a report about the political influence of lobbyists.  Understandably the media is giving the report a lot of attention, particularly as it identifies lobby groups that have more access to politicians than other groups and how public interest policies have failed after intense lobbying. But the report also addresses the matter of “policy capture”.  Although the report analyses the activities of lobbyists, perhaps research could be undertaken into the high level of policy influence on workplace health and safety matters from a tripartite consultative structure that no longer reflects the Australian workforce.

In its Overview the Grattan Institute writes:

This content is for Monthly, Annual (PayPal only), Annual (credit card), Annual (corporate – up to 5 users), Annual (corporate – up to 10 users) and Annual members only. Visit the site and log in/register to read.

Multidisciplinary analysis of safety culture

0
0

Managing occupational health and safety (OHS) is most successful when it considers a range of perspectives or disciplines in identifying practicable solutions.  Books are often successful in a similar multidisciplinary way but it is becoming rarer for books to contain a collection of perspectives.  A new book has been published on Safety Culture which matches this multidisciplinary approach.

This content is for Monthly, Annual (PayPal only), Annual (credit card), Annual (corporate – up to 5 users), Annual (corporate – up to 10 users) and Annual members only. Visit the site and log in/register to read.

Two exemptions to Victoria’s Industrial Manslaughter laws

0
0

Every industry sector should have its own occupational health and safety (OHS) conference.  This allows for specific OHS topics to be presented but also provides for a broader context. The recent conference conducted by the Victorian Branch of the Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation (ANMF) was a great example.

So close to a State election and in the lead-up to a Federal election it was not surprising that the trade union movement’s Change The Rules campaign gained attention, as did the push for the introduction of Industrial Manslaughter laws, in the presentation by Dr Paul Sutton.

The main points of his presentation are familiar and have been reported on previously but this presentation included news about two exemptions to the laws which may raise uncomfortable questions. 

This content is for Monthly, Annual (PayPal only), Annual (credit card), Annual (corporate – up to 5 users), Annual (corporate – up to 10 users) and Annual members only. Visit the site and log in/register to read.

Mental Health Issues Paper provides opportunity for OHS to pitch for legitimacy

0
0

Australia’s Productivity Commission (PC) has released its first Issues Paper to assist people in understanding the purposes of the Inquiry and to lodge a submission. The Report provides opportunities for the occupational health and safety (OHS) profession and advocates to explain the relevance of OHS principles in preventing psychological harm. It includes specific work-related questions for people to address in submissions.

This content is for Monthly, Annual (PayPal only), Annual (credit card), Annual (corporate – up to 5 users), Annual (corporate – up to 10 users) and Annual members only. Visit the site and log in/register to read.

AS/NZS ISO45001:2018 status update

0
0

Australia, as are many other countries, is in the transition phase for the latest Standard for Occupational Health and Safety Management Systems – ISO45001. The Standard has been accepted by Australia as relevant to its jurisdiction and discussion seem quiet. However, the work of the technical committee on this Standard (SF-001) continues. The Head of the Delegation for Standards Australia responsible for the 45001 series of Standards, David Solomon, provided the following status update.

ISO (International Organization for Standardization) has formed a new International Technical Committee (TC283) that has been charged with the responsibility of developing the following standards that are in the suite of international Standards that ISO45001 leads.

This content is for Monthly, Annual (Corporate) and Annual members only. Visit the site and log in/register to read.

In an industry where there are no employers, who is responsible for workplace health and safety?

0
0

The Victorian Government has been running an inquiry for a little while on the “on-demand workforce”, a term which seems to be a synonym for the gig economy. The government recently extended the deadline for public submissions. This is often a sign that inquiries are struggling for information which is almost an inevitable consequence if you schedule an inquiry over the Christmas/New Year break.

This inquiry has direct relevance to occupational health and safety (OHS) and vice versa.

This content is for Monthly, Annual (Corporate) and Annual members only. Visit the site and log in/register to read.

Robbing Peter to pay Paul – the “WorkSafe Tax” is challenged

0
0

More details of the “WorkSafe Tax” and WorkSafe Victoria’s new infringement notices and specialist construction inspectors emerged with the appearance of the Minister for Workplace Safety, Jill Hennessy, at the Public Accounts and Estimates Committee hearing on June 14 2019.

Liberal Member of Parliament, Richard Riordan went to town on the Minister. He opened with this question:

“….I refer to budget paper 5, page 23, which shows you are ripping $700 million out of the WorkCover Authority over the forward estimates. How does taking such a massive dividend tax to the government help workplace safety?”

page 5, Verified Transcript

But this issue has been bubbling along since at least 2011 when the now Premier, Daniel Andrews, vehemently opposed it.

This content is for Monthly, Annual (Corporate) and Annual members only. Visit the site and log in/register to read.

Industrial Manslaughter submissions

0
0

The issue of Industrial Manslaughter laws continues in Victoria. Several organisations were invited to provide submissions to the Victorian Government’s task force formed to look at the implementation of these laws. Three of those submissions have been seen by SafetyAtWorkBlog:

Joint Submission

The joint submission states that

“The laws will also improve health and safety outcomes in workplaces by providing a real deterrent to employers who are tempted to cut corners on health and safety.”

This content is for Monthly, Annual (Corporate) and Annual members only. Visit the site and log in/register to read.

COSBOA is outraged over mental health and jail

0
0

On September 24 2019, the Council of Small Business Organisations Australia (COSBOA) called for the withdrawal of the Boland review into Australia’s work health and safety (WHS) laws.

In a media release COSBOA’s CEO, Peter Strong, states:

“The report solely focusses on workers, giving zero consideration to the mental health of employers and the self-employed….”

This content is for Monthly, Annual (Corporate) and Annual members only. Visit the site and log in/register to read.

Ethics, safety and fingertips

0
0

Last week the Australian Institute of Health and Safety (AIHS) launched its Body of Knowledge Chapter on Ethics in Melbourne to a small group of occupational health and safety (OHS) professionals. Participants were asked to outline an ethical challenge they had faced as OHS professionals.

In that same week, WorkSafe Victoria issued a media release that showed a poor follow-through by a business on advice from an OHS professional.

This content is for Monthly, Annual (Corporate), and Annual members only. Visit the site and log in/register to read.
Viewing all 107 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images