Thread: OHS GONE MAD

Originally Posted by rangietragic

Years ago before we did anything risky we thought about it and made sure we were careful

Unfortunately being able to use your brain is no longer a necessity for employment these days.......or so it would seem.


While I agree that some OH&S stuff is good, there comes a point where someone employed to do a job has to be capable of making a simple "will this hurt me" decision without their hand being held.


I'm pretty sure most could do this, maybe the rest should seek employment more deserving their skills....


Or maybe I just see things in a over simplified version

Originally Posted by 1976_michelle

the most disheartening thing about it is that it's not all about the safety. Its arse covering...

Mostly. However it's easy to become totally cynical, I know this because I have been. I watched it evolve from the 90's underground, right up to now through open cut, remote exploration oil & gas. I was so negative that I used to argue the whole vitamin D thing and how the angle of incidence of solar radiation on legs in shorts when standing was negligible, that fatigue and heat illness were going to become the result of this ill prepared assault on covering all skin.

But what it really comes down to is "Vicarious Liability".

Board members are responsible if the company (under their control) could have prevented any employee becoming injured or worse, a fatality.

So to ensure as best they know how or sometimes are advised how by legal consultants...that this doesn't happen, is to allow the workplace to become so controlled through policy, procedure, health screening, drug & alcohol screening (except for politicians, judges, police, doctors, nurses, teachers, taxi drivers, priests, childcare workers etc.) back on track - safety audits, risk assessments, take 5s, JSA, JHA, JHEA, JSEA (s) etc...

Taking it back a step, it's state and federal legislation that is strengthening the liability link between supervisors and senior management and ultimately company directors, where an employee comes to grief.

Then when you look at the lowest common denominator in the work place, we've all seen them, Duty of Care puts the onus on everyone to watch out for this individual and not let any of their actions or "in-actions" contribute to his/her welfare. Conversely someone who for whatever reason does something silly or doesn't do the right thing cause they're silly, and someone is injured or killed as a result, the liability through Duty of Care becomes easier to pin on an individual or group of individuals, rather than on the board of directors.

Hence all those signatures often after days of inductions, where you are legally declaring you have been inducted in and understand the legislation and company policy that relates to yours and others welfare, the role you play in that potent mix and that everything you do in the workplace requires training and adherence to procedure.

It's not that directors have pushed this, they've been pushed to push this, can't blame them, we'd all do the same given the choice. Until the legislation changes, we're stuck with the bureaucracy...

The picture I am getting here is that OHS is something that is put in place by control freaks that have neither money nor management skills.
.

Originally Posted by wrinklearthur

The picture I am getting here is that OHS is something that is put in place by control freaks that have neither money nor management skills.
.

Possibly, the same control freaks we vote for, that enact legislation without diverse consultation.

There's a good story from DuPont who are one of the biggest explosives manufacturers in history - the factories in the late 1800s early 1900s had many oh crap moments where an explosion here and there would wipe out a few dozen employees every other week. So senior management ended up making the radical decision to house the manager AND his family in the explosives manufacturing compound permanently. Pretty quickly work practices became safe and none of the families came to grief

Sadly, it has got a little out of control in some areas. But the "intent" that every worker should go home to their family in the same condition (or better) than they commenced their shift, is a great concept.

Often (not always) those in the position of safety officer/coordinator/trainer/superintendent don't understand the background or the practicality of their policy/procedure development and enforcement, and just become overbearing for the sake of justifying their position. Age and experience (& personality) are big factors.

I could be wrong...

Originally Posted by Greatsouthernland

Possibly, the same control freaks we vote for, that enact legislation without diverse consultation.

There's a good story from DuPont who are one of the biggest explosives manufacturers in history -

Du Pont safety management systems are now considered the "Gold Standard" Worldwide and have been contracted to assist many large multinational corporations, including QANTAS Airlines, in developing safety systems tailored to the corporations own needs and environments.

Originally Posted by Lotz-A-Landies

Du Pont safety management systems are now considered the "Gold Standard" Worldwide and have been contracted to assist many large multinational corporations, including QANTAS Airlines, in developing safety systems tailored to the corporations own needs and environments.

Yes, that's right. They've pioneered the business of safety consulting, with real experience and success behind them, the rest of the big corporates still look to DuPont for guidance.

I've sat through one of their presentations/workshops when I was with BHP. They're good guys....for Americans.

Originally Posted by Lotz-A-Landies

My father was the son of a builder, was on building sites before he was even a teenager. He became a builder himself and like my dad I was on building sites, dragging a hammer around before i was even 1 year of age.

Perhaps if he'd taken some of the working at height WHS rules he wouldn't be dead from the fall from a ladder.

My great aunt, married a man who worked for the family transport company. He fell off a paper roll being stored before being sent to the SMH. Perhaps if there were WHS rules in those days my great aunt wouldn't have been a widow from her early twenties.

Perhaps if the people involved looked after their own safety the incident would not have happened.

Greatsouthernland wrote:

"So to ensure as best they know how or sometimes are advised how by legal consultants...that this doesn't happen, is to allow the workplace to become so controlled through policy, procedure, health screening, drug & alcohol screening (except for politicians, judges, police, doctors, nurses, teachers, taxi drivers, priests, childcare workers etc.) back on track - safety audits, risk assessments, take 5s, JSA, JHA, JHEA, JSEA (s) etc..."

Delete teachers from that list. Contracts specifically prohibit drug and alcohol consumption affecting work in any way.

We had a one hour talk on how to use a ladder! Good reason for it though - a couple of years ago one of the maintenance guys fell off a ladder and broke his neck. The school went down for it because he hadn't been properly trained in using ladders.
Four years ago a friend of ours fell off a ladder in the business she worked for in Perth, broke her neck, and was dead within five minutes. So it can happen.
What business wouldn't try to reduce its costs for workers compo. by training people? Its just commonsense.
WHS can be annoying at times, but its better than people getting injured and killed.