The final report into quadbike safety has finally been released by the University of New South Wales in a series of five papers and in the wake of Queensland coronial findings into nine quadbike-related deaths. (A New South Wales inquiry is currently underway)
It has been a rocky road to get to this report as a search of this blog will show but the recommendations are solid with many already being flagged by various safety regulators and others requiring much more consultation. The trick will be to accept the evidence and progress safety – not likely on the experience of the last four years.
The research recommendations that will get the most media attention will be those that involve increased safety for children but the workplace context of the quadbikes is stressed by the researchers early in the report:
“The Authors also note that Quad bikes and Side by Side Vehicles (SSVs) are classified as mobile plant in the Work Health and Safety legislation. The hierarchy of controls for managing risks within that legislation specifies that engineering controls which design out the hazard are considered more effective control measures than administrative controls such as training courses which seek to change human behaviour and personal protection measures (e.g. helmets).” (page 7 – link added to earlier article on this issue)
A major tool for the assessment of the safety of these vehicles – a star rating system – had already been indicated in earlier reports. It will interesting to see if the quadbike manufacturers complain or try to make the best of an unfavourable situation. In particular, the following image in support of the star rating system is provocative in a consumer protection, and occupational health and safety (OHS), context although it simply reflects the research findings.
Figure 1: Final Points and Star Rating of the 16 production Quad bikes and SSVs tested.
It will be difficult for an employer to argue that they have done all that is reasonably practicable to ensure the safety of their workers on quad bikes when all the quad bikes are not even three-stars.
Operator Protection Devices
The recommended helmets may help with an operational rating but the big “winners” in this research are likely to be the suppliers of Operator Protection Devices (OPDs – formerly Crush Protection Devices) such as Quadbar and Lifeguard, particularly after the ill-judged campaign against such devices supported by the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries (FCAI). A central point of the campaign was the statement that:
“Roll bars, crush protection devices and roll over protection systems when fitted to All Terrain Vehicles or quad bikes (ATVs) can cause more injuries than they prevent.”
The UNSW research states
“Operator Protection Devices (OPDs). The static stability and dynamic handling tests identified that the Quadbar and Lifeguard … were not detrimental while a third (Quickfix) was found to be detrimental to the stability or handling of the Quad bikes.” (page 11 – emphasis added)
and
“In regard to injury prevention in rollovers for the workplace environment, two OPDs (Quadbar and Lifeguard) are likely to be beneficial in terms of severe injury and pinned prevention in some low speed rollovers typical of farm incidents. They do not reduce the incidents of rollover. In some specific cases injury risk could be increased although there is currently no real world recorded evidence of this. The findings support the view that multiple controls need to be applied. Of course there is scope for improvements to OPD designs in future.” (page 11 – emphasis added)
It is likely that the ATV Safety website will be reviewed shortly.
Queensland Coronial Findings
One of the recommendations of the Queensland Coroner that is likely to have long term effect is:
“…that Safe Work Australia… manage or oversee the development of an Australian Standard, or the like, for crush protection devices fitted on sit-astride quad bikes in Australian workplaces.” (page 61)
However, to do so will require a much greater level of maturity and cooperation by all the members of the working party than we have seen in recent years. The recommendation implies going through the Standards Australia process but it is significant that Safe Work Australia (SWA) is given the responsibility for managing the process.
On the, possible, flip side the quadbike manufacturers have been recommended to
“… initiate the process of developing an Australian Standard through Standards Australia, in consultation with relevant stakeholders, for the design, manufacture, import and supply of quad bikes and side by side vehicles to Australia.” (page 62)
This is a much greater task than Safe Work Australia has been given and based on previous working groups of manufacturers and stakeholders on quadbike issues, unless a specific timeline is set, an Australian Standard covering all the matters listed is highly unlikely. At least for the OPD standard mentioned above, SWA can be the referee.
SafetyAtWorkBlog has heard that the NSW Coronial Inquiry has been rigorous, with manufacturers being challenged over safety. Australia/Victoria and New Zealand have had many such inquiries over the years and most have recommending tweaking safety at the edges rather than establishing sustainable change. No one is likely to outlaw quadbikes on the basis of an inherent lack of safety but there is now sufficient evidence of safety deficiencies and an increase in viable alternatives to push purchasers to buy safer.
The recognition of the legitimacy of OPDs by researchers and the Queensland Coroner has provided purchasers with a transitional purchase strategy before upgrading to a side-by-side vehicle.
As with many elements of OHS, sustainable regulatory change is likely to come through Court decisions rather than the courage of the safety regulators. This means that there will be more deaths, more arguments and a slower change process.
In a time when State and Federal politicians are being asked for vision and longterm thinking, it would take only one politician to commit to changing quadbike use for the sake of current and future farming families, in particular. Good evidence from which solid policy decisions can be made is now readily available. More evidence will come if both types of findings and recommendations are acted upon.
UPDATE 5 August 2015 – NSW Workcover has uploaded a video explaining some of the research
