New safety laws to better protect workers in WA

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]The McGowan Government have announced they will invest $12.9 million in new initiatives, to enhance workplace health and safety.

As part of this initiative an additional 24 full time equivalent staff, including 21 additional inspectors, will be employed by WorkSafe. This will bring the total number of inspectors to 120 to conduct more safety inspections, enforce workplace safety and provide more education and awareness support.

A new worker safety campaign called Better Worker Safety, which aims to put safety at front of mind and improve workplace safety and health outcomes in Western Australia, will also be developed as part of the McGowan Government’s increased workplace safety initiatives.

To strengthen Western Australia’s workplace safety laws, the McGowan Government will introduce a new Work Health and Safety Bill that will modernise workplace safety laws, better protect workers and hold those responsible for any workplace deaths.

This is a result of significant public concern and from recommendations of two recent Federal reviews – the Boland review and the recent Senate Standing Committee on Education and Employment report.

One of the main features of the legislation is the introduction of two new offences of industrial manslaughter:

  • Industrial manslaughter class one: the most serious offence, this includes a maximum penalty of 20 years’ imprisonment for an individual conducting or undertaking a business.
  • Industrial manslaughter class two: this includes a maximum penalty of 10 years’ imprisonment for negligent behaviour.

The new offences will also carry a fine of up to $10 million for a body corporate.

In a joint statement, Premier Mark McGowan and Industrial Relations Minister Bill Johnston said the new Bill would modernise workplace safety laws, better protect workers, and hold those responsible for any workplace deaths to account. Work health and safety laws haven’t been updated since 1984 and are long overdue for change.

Premier Mark McGowan said “The death of one worker is one too many, it’s time we introduce industrial manslaughter laws to make sure Western Australians are protected at work.

“Prison time sends a powerful message, but we don’t want it to come to that.

Source: Govt of WA, 24 August 2019[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

New guidance for labour hire

Safe Work Australia have released a new guide Labour Hire: Duties of Persons Conducting a Business or Undertaking which is now available for download from their website.

The guide has practical information for labour hire and host PCBUs on their roles before and during the placement of labour hire workers.

Labour hire often involves a host organisation using workers from a labour hire agency, for a short period of time. These arrangements are sometimes referred to as “on-hire” or “agency” arrangements.

Typically, labour hire workers are engaged by a labour hire agency which then on-hires them to do work for another organisation (the host organisation). Both the labour hire agency and the host organisation are persons conducting a business or undertaking (PCBUs) responsible for the health and safety of the labour hire worker.

Labour hire arrangements can be complex. Sometimes, there may be more than one labour hire PCBU or host PCBU. Labour hire PCBUs and host PCBUs must work together in a cooperative and coordinated way so risks are eliminated or minimised so far as is reasonably practicable. A PCBU cannot contract out of or transfer their work health and safety obligations to another party.

Businesses using or providing labour hire should read the guide for information about their WHS responsibilities and consider how the model WHS laws apply to them.

For more information and to download the labour hire guide, please visit the Safe Work Australia website.

Source: Safe Work Australia, 16 August 2019

Be a safety champion

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Be a Safety Champion. That’s the theme for the upcoming 2019 national safe work month which runs for the month of October.

This year’s theme demonstrates that anyone, both employers and workers from any occupation or industry can be a champion for work health and safety. Safe Work Australia are encouraging everyone to support a safety culture at their workplace and promote best practice work health and safety initiatives.

Grab your free campaign kit from the National Safe Work Month website. You can download resources to support your own events and promote best practice work health and safety initiatives.

This year, the kit includes:

  • National Safe Work Month brand kit
  • posters
  • editable posters
  • flyers
  • web graphics
Safe Work Month is a great time to reiterate your safety messages. If you’re looking for Safety Training, we still have some availability during October. Please call us on 1300 585 128 or email us at [email protected] for group bookings. 

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Workloads affecting Australian workers ability to connect with colleagues

The second Australian Workplace Psychological Safety Survey, surveyed 1,093 Australian employees and found that just under a quarter (23%) do not currently do any activities to connect them with colleagues. One of the biggest barriers found was not having time due to workload.

Workplace mental wellness expert and R U OK? Board Member Graeme Cowan is calling on workplaces to address this, pointing to both the social and economic benefits to organisations when a workforce feels connected and psychologically safe.

“A ‘psychologically safe’ workplace is characterised by a climate of interpersonal trust and mutual respect in which people feel comfortable being themselves and to ask for help,” says Cowan.

“Organisational workload will always be a barrier, however those who create opportunities for employee connection such as morning teas or celebrations for birthdays foster a positive culture”

“While there are benefits to individuals and a duty of care from organisations, psychologically safe teams have also been shown to be the most innovative – and in a worrying development, only 28% of respondents said they felt safe to take a risk in 2019 compared to 34% in 2017.

“Today’s results demonstrate more needs to be done to educate organisations on these benefits, to ensure all Australians are seeing the rewards of psychologically safe workplaces.”

The Australian Psychological Safety Survey is the result of a collaboration between R U OK? and Amy Edmondson, the pre-eminent global thought leader on psychological safety and Novartis Professor of Leadership & Management at the Harvard Business School.

For more information on free targeted workplace resources to support organisations and get the conversation flowing, please visit the R U OK? website.

Source: R U OK? 15 May 2019

Top 10 pattern causes of death and serious harm at work

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]There are 10 top pattern causes of death and serious harm at work, according to Michael Quinlan Emeritus Professor of Industrial Relation in the School of Management at UNSW.

Quinlan examined a large array of work-settings and found they applied to everything from aircraft or shipping disasters to amusement parks like the Dreamworld incident as well as Pike River.

He found that the 10 top pattern causes of death and serious harm at work are:

  • Design, engineering and maintenance flaws;
  • Failure to heed clear warning signals;
  • Flaws in risk assessment;
  • Flaws in management systems and changes to work organisation;
  • Flaws in system auditing;
  • Economic/production and rewards pressures compromising safety;
  • Failures in regulatory oversight;
  • Supervisor and worker expressed concerns prior to the incident;
  • Poor management/worker communication/trust; and
  • Flaws in emergency procedures and resources.

“I found the failures also applied to single-fatalities not just multiple fatalities and this point has been reinforced by people I have met, researched with or worked with,” said Quinlan.

“The 10 pattern failures apply because in a way they represent the generic failure points within human organisation, where and why the elaborate defence mechanisms were built breakdown and therefore what we need to target to avoid this.”

There are a number of steps to follow in building safer workplaces across a range of industries, Quinlan added.

“First, failure can be a great teacher of how in practice human organisations fail and why,” he said.

“Problem solving relies on identifying patterns/repetition because in terms of risk-management we can only deal with patterns not entirely aberrant events.”

Quinlan said the problem is major incident investigations are too often treated as unique and while every incident has some distinctive feature it is the commonalities, the similar events in the past, that help to identify what is critical if things are too change.

“I am not a fan of the Black Swan hypothesis,” said Quinlan, who also wrote Ten Pathways to Death and Disaster: Learning from fatal incidents in mines and other high hazard workplaces (Federation Press, Sydney).

“In all the incidents I have examined the incident was predictable and prevention practical – almost all involved clear warning signals prior to the event and compromises to key systems due to a combination of profit/production overriding safety, disorganisation and failures in existing regulatory oversight.”

Second, Quinlan said the 10 pathways also provide an audit-checklist which can be used to identify, investigate, assess and redress limitations known to cause serious harm.

This includes determining what needs to be done to build more robust and sustainable safety programs – which can also be extended to the area of health.

“Reasons notion of latent failure and his Swiss-Cheese model is a valuable tool in understanding how catastrophic events occur even where defence in depth is in place,” he said.

“What my work does is identify which latent failures are repeatedly responsible for such disasters helping to focus attention.”

Quinlan explained that industry, regulators, training providers and unions are using 10 pathways to do this, and demonstrating it is practical.”

Third, as Andrew Hopkins has noted, the more thorough the investigation into incident, the more pattern failures are found.

“Pike River is a good example – it was thorough and found all 10,” said Quinlan.

“The more you have the more likely the incident is and the more ‘catastrophic’ the organisational failures.”

Having said this, two failures – namely production/cost pressures and regulatory failure – can be seen to contribute to other failures such as ignoring warning signals.

Quinlan said these failures are hard because they require courage and application, and a commitment to social sustainability “which might annoy some powerful interests”.

“However, we need to address all the failures, not just the easier ones,” he said.

Quinlan’s book also warned about the need to distinguish between routine and catastrophic risk in terms of minimising harm, and the limitations of both top-down systems and an over-emphasis on behaviour management.

“While the latter are popular, especially given how fashionable psychology is today, and have their place if you don’t deal with the underlying structural causes no amount of behaviour modification will paper over this over,” he said. 

Michael Quinlan Emeritus Professor presented at the Safety Institute of Australia’s 2019 Dr Eric Wigglesworth AM Memorial Lecture, which was held on Tuesday 21 May 2019. For the full interview with Professor Quinlan please see the SIA June edition of OHS Professional magazine.

Source: Safety Institute of Australia 2 May 2019[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Comparative Performance Monitoring Report – Key Findings

An infographic summary of key findings from the Comparative performance monitoring report 20th edition–Part 1 analyses trends in work health and safety and workers’ compensation scheme performance across Australia and New Zealand.

The report facilitates the improvement of work health and safety, workers’ compensation and related service outcomes in Australia and New Zealand by:

  • monitoring the comparative performance of jurisdictions over time, and
  • enabling benchmarking across jurisdictions and the identification of best practice to support policy making.

Review of the Model WHS Laws: Final Report

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]

The review of the model WHS laws is now complete and the report is available on the Safe Work Australia website.

The review report makes 34 recommendations designed to enhance the WHS framework. Key recommendations relate to the model WHS Regulations and Codes of Practice, including making regulations on psychological health, higher penalties and other measures to strengthen the compliance and enforcement framework and enhance deterrence, and clarifying requirements for meaningful WHS consultation, representation and participation to improve safety outcomes.

The review report is with WHS ministers for consideration and their response to the recommendations is expected later in the year.

Independent reviewer and former Executive Director of SafeWork SA Ms Marie Boland said “The model WHS laws are largely operating as intended but I am recommending some changes to provide clarity and to drive greater consistency in the application and enforcement of the laws across jurisdictions”.

The three-tier legal framework is widely supported, and there is a view that it is sufficiently flexible to accommodate the evolving nature of work and changing work relationships,” said Ms Boland.

In 2018 Safe Work Australia appointed Ms Boland, a leader in WHS policy and regulation and former Executive Director of SafeWork SA, to conduct a review of the model WHS laws in consultation with key stakeholders including regulators, businesses and the general public.

More information about the review can be found on the Safe Work Australia website.

Source: Safe Work Australia, 25 February 2019

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Director Sentenced to Jail and Fined $1 Million

A company director on Queensland’s Sunshine Coast has been sentenced to a year in prison and his company fined $1 million in the state’s first category 1 prosecution under the Work Health and Safety Act 2011.

The category 1 charge of reckless conduct related to a 2014 fatality when 62-year-old roofer Whareheepa Te Amo fell almost six meters to his death while working on an unprotected roof edge.

This was the first charge of reckless conduct to be successfully tested at trial in any Australian state or territory working under similar work health and safety legislation.

The Maroochydore District Court heard company director Gary Lavin had been motivated by money when he made the decision not to install edge protection on the roof.

Lavin was convicted in a majority verdict by the jury, which was unable to reach a decision on similar charges brought against Lavin’s brother and his company.

Multi-Run Roofing was engaged by Lavin’s brother’s company, the principal contractor, to re-roof large sheds at old brickworks west of Noosa, and Te Amo was one of five workers subsequently engaged by Multi-Run to undertake the work.

The court heard that the defendants, without reasonable excuse, omitted to ensure edge protection was installed, exposing individuals to the risk of death or serious injury.

The defendants were alleged to have been reckless to this risk, and it was not in dispute that the defendants each owed a health and safety duty and that each had engaged in conduct in the form of omitting to ensure that edge protection was installed.

Evidence was heard from various witnesses, including roofers and workers who had been at the site, as well as from Queensland Police Service and Workplace Health and Safety Queensland.

Other roofers described discussions with the sub-contractor alleging he had said (in effect) that it would be too expensive to install edge protection.

Instead, as part of the task, one worker would be positioned near the edge of the roof to straighten the roofing sheets. This was the work being carried out on the day by the fatally injured man.

A method was adopted by the roofers (with the knowledge of the defendants) where the rails of scissor lifts were used as a barrier alongside the roof edge, with the man working near the edge to wear a safety harness. At the time of his fall, the worker apparently tripped or stumbled. He was not wearing a harness.

The court found that while the workers involved were competent, the risk was significant, as those working at the ‘roof edge were working with a narrow margin for error.

The method adopted also relied on the diligence of the workers, in circumstances where they were engaged in repetitive work.

Importantly, edge protection would have stopped the fall and the lack of it could have been easily addressed, given it was agreed the defendants would be paid to install it and there was edge protection on site (although there was conflicting evidence as to how much).

Despite pleading not guilty, it was accepted that the sentenced director was remorseful. None of the defendants had a record of any relevant breaches of work health and safety laws.

The court ruled that the sub-contractor be fined $1 million, to be paid within six months, with the director sentenced to 12 months’ jail, to be suspended after four months.

Source: Safety Institute of Australia, 19 February 2019