11:14 pm, Thursday 31 May, 2012

Three companies and two persons landed in court this month for serious repeat workplace safety offences.

Lisa Sturzenegger, WorkSafe’s General Manager of Operations, said the courts took workplace safety issues seriously, particularly when there had been prior offences.

“If you have been dealt with by the courts once, they and the community expect you to learn a lesson and take action to avoid a repeat offence.

“It is disappointing that we have had to take action against companies and individuals who should know better.

“Safety must be a priority for directors, managers and supervisors who must look for, and deal with, potential safety issues.

A meat processing company and a labour hire firm were each convicted and fined $100,000 with costs of $2,463 on Tuesday after a worker lost his fingers in an inadequately guarded machine in 2010.

Both companies pleaded guilty to workplace health and safety charges at the Werribee Magistrates Court.

In June 2010, the victim, an employee of the labour hire firm working at the meat processing company crushed three of his fingers in the spinning rollers of a machine he was cleaning and oiling.

An investigation conducted by WorkSafe revealed that the machine’s guards had a gap of 20cm which was wide enough to allow hands and fingers to come in contact with the rollers. It was also not locked-out or isolated from the power supply and the work instruction was inherently dangerous.

Magistrate Fitzgerald heard that the possibility of the incident happening was high as the casing machine was cleaned and oiled every day and that a basic interlock guard could have prevented the incident.

The labour hire firm was aware of the problem and informed the meat processing company through a letter a few months before the incident.

Both companies had prior offences for workplace safety issues. In July 2009, the meat processing company was convicted and fined $45,000. The labour hire firm was convicted and fined $40,000 in 2005.

Just this month, an Epping-based company and its director were convicted and fined $124,000 on two counts after being charged under the Occupational Health and Safety Act over incidents which happened in August and December 2009.

On Wednesday, a person was prosecuted the second time at the Geelong Magistrates Court for the second time for working as an unlicensed asbestos removalist and was fined $13,250.

Ms Sturzenegger said that making sure machines were adequately guarded and that workers had the right training and systems of work were the most fundamental obligations if running a business.

“Apart from the effect on the individual who is hurt or exposed to risk, a conviction and fines can have significant financial consequences for businesses and their reputations.

“Dealing with safety issues is an investment in the business and your people. Get it right and many problems and avoidable business costs are avoided.”

More information on preventing workplace injuries and matters on workers compensation can be found at the WorkSafe website.

Report by Haydee - Do you have an OHS News Story - Let us know

10:43 pm, Thursday 31 May, 2012

WorkCoverv Queensland has recently released a 90 second animation Understanding who’s a worker to help employers understand what is deemed a worker according to the Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003.

While there are many elements used to consider if someone is deemed a worker according to the Act, meaning you will need to cover them under your workers’ compensation insurance policy, WorkCover Queensland enumerates three points to consider:

• Is the person employed under a contract of service?
• Is the person employed for substantially labour only; and
• Does the person meet the results test.

If the answer is ‘no’ or the criteria is not met for the first two points, the results test is then applied.

WorkCover Queensland Customer Service Manager, John Kinnane explained some of the complex indicators drafted in the Act to help employers work out if someone they’ve hired should be covered under their policy.

“The first step, a contract of service…. generally represents the relationship between an employer and an employee; you’re paying wages for that person (PAYG),” said Mr Kinnane.

“For example, a worker comes to you, they have an injury, we get a claim. We first look at are they working under a contract of service, so a standard employer- employee relationship, which makes up a larger part of the workforce. If they’re not because they invoice as a sole trader, they’ve got an ABN and they’re being paid pursuant to that regime, so the first point hasn’t been met, we will then look at the next step: do they work for substantially labour only.”

This step includes identifying if a worker is engaged for labour only or substantially labour only.

“If you have a sub-contractor who comes on site and provides labour only, he’s going to be considered a worker and you will need to declare those wages. We determine this by looking at what the person is paid for, not how they are paid,” said Mr Kinnane.

If the payment is basically for the return of services provided such as labour, the person will be considered a worker.

“A sub-contractor invoices you, the invoice says Michael Jones, ABN billed for 45 hours work at $2,000, that’s a fair indicia the person is engaged for substantially labour only and you need to declare their wages.

“However, using the case of a plasterer, if they’re invoicing you for a set job and they’ve provided the plaster board, all of the plaster and other materials needed to complete the job, it would indicate the job isn’t for substantially labour only; it’s for the provision of plant, equipment and materials as well.

The person is not engaged for substantially labour only and is not a worker under this test if the overwhelming proportion of the remuneration is for the provision of substantial plant, equipment and materials.

“Then there’s the results test, which comes into play when a person is not working under a contract of service or for substantially labour only.”

Below are the three elements that must be met to exclude a person from being a worker:

• Is the person paid to achieve a specified result or outcome, and
• Do they have to supply the plant, equipment or tools of trade needed to perform the work; and
• Is, or are they liable for costs to rectify any defects in the work they perform.

“If you answer no to one or more of these questions, the person is likely to be a worker. If you answer yes to all three questions, then you will not need to cover them for workers’ compensation,” said Mr Kinnane.

Report by Haydee - Do you have an OHS News Story - Let us know

02:11 pm, Thursday 31 May, 2012

A Worksafe spokeswoman said the man was carrying out maintenance on a road grader machine, when part of it fell and struck him on the head.

The man was flown to Royal Perth Hospital by Royal Flying Doctor Service.

Report by Julia Alder - Do you have an OHS News Story - Let us know

07:14 pm, Wednesday 30 May, 2012

A food distribution business in Adelaide was fined $73,000 over a forklift accident which seriously injured a worker.

The worker sustained serious injuries in 2009 when a forklift he was driving tipped over as it struck a loose metal grate. ABC news reports that the worker was trapped under the forklift and suffered leg injuries, which resulted to his confinement to a wheelchair.

The Industrial Court heard that the worker who was the company’s first aid officer coordinated his own rescue by instructing staff on how to free him.

The company pleaded guilty to violating workplace safety laws. The court heard that they provided support to the victim during his rehabilitation. Industrial Magistrate Stephen Lieschke who said the offence was very serious imposed the fine.

Report by Haydee - Do you have an OHS News Story - Let us know

07:10 pm, Wednesday 30 May, 2012

An unlicensed asbestos removalist was convicted and fined $13,250 for doing unlicensed work, his second offence in two years.

In November 2010, the unlicensed asbestos removalist told a renovation company he was licensed by WorkSafe to conduct asbestos removal at an Anglesea property. He was convicted and fined under the Occupational Health and Safety Regulations today in the Geelong Magistrate’s Court. The incident which led to his current prosecution came two weeks after he was prosecuted the first time, in similar offences.

He was convicted on two charges and fined $35,400 after a WorkSafe inspector caught him doing unlicensed work.

Lisa Sturzenegger, WorkSafe’s General Manager of Operations said that the penalties were significant and that the courts took workplace safety issues seriously, especially when there had been prior offences.

“If you have been dealt with by the courts once, they and the community expect you to learn a lesson and take action to avoid a repeat offence.

“It is disappointing that we have had to take action on so many occasions with companies and individuals which should know better.

“This is particularly the case with asbestos which has known health risks and requires people dealing with it to have appropriate skills and understanding.

“Dealing with safety issues is an investment in the business and your people. Get it right and many problems and avoidable business costs are avoided,” she said.

Ms Sturzenegger advised businesses and home-owners looking to hire an asbestos removalist to check on their credentials.

“If you’re hiring someone to do asbestos removal work, make sure you see their licence or contact WorkSafe to ensure they’re licensed. Don’t just take their word for it.

“There are people out there trying to make a quick buck and it’s often by putting themselves and others at risk.

“This prosecution isn’t just about safety – we want the asbestos removal industry to operate on a level playing field.” said Ms Sturzenegger.

Information on requirements for asbestos removal:

In most cases, asbestos removal must be done by a WorkSafe licensed removalist or trained employees of a licence-holder.

Class B licence-holders are only permitted to remove non-friable asbestos such as asbestos cement sheets, eves or pipe; and must comply with a number of requirements. These include appointing a supervisor to oversee work, using specific using specific methods for removal, waste containment and waste disposal, using signs and barricades, and wearing appropriate personal protective equipment.

Class A licence-holders are permitted to remove higher-risk friable and non-friable asbestos. They must comply with the same requirements outlined above for Class B licence holders, but must also implement a range of specific measures to carry out the work safely and control the risk, including using enclosures and always having the nominated supervisor on site.

Removing asbestos without a license: In very limited circumstances, some asbestos may be removed without a licence if done so safely. This is possible if the area of asbestos-containing material does not exceed 10 square metres in total, and the total time spent by the employer on any removal work (including their employees) is less than one hour over the space of any seven days.

Information on licensed asbestos removalists can be found on WorkSafe’s website.

Report by Haydee - Do you have an OHS News Story - Let us know

06:59 pm, Wednesday 30 May, 2012

Photo: NT WorkSafe

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) issued an electrical safety recall for Cesco Greenpower LPG/NG Portable Generators. These generators were sold in the Northern Territory between December 2010 and May 2012.

According to NT WorkSafe Executive Director Laurene Hull, the defects in the product could cause the generator to become live, which may lead to electric shock or electrocution.

The defective components in the product are the DC battery recharge lead and the accessory AC plug.

Those who have purchased the generator are advised to immediately stop using the DC battery recharge lead and the accessory AC plug and isolate the lead from use anywhere.

The DC battery recharge lead and accessory AC plug should be returned to Cesco Australia Ltd for a free replacement.

More information can be found in the Product Recall Safety Notice.

Report by Haydee - Do you have an OHS News Story - Let us know

01:53 pm, Tuesday 29 May, 2012

WorkSafe is conducting a week-long inspection campaign in Traralgon to check on businesses’ workplace health and safety compliance.

The Safe Towns campaign which started on Monday involves a team of inspectors visiting a regional area to check on health and safety compliance as well as return to work laws. Businesses found to have not addressed workplace health and safety issues will be issued with a safety improvement notice requiring them to deal with the matter within a set timeframe.

WorkSafe’s General Manager for Operations, Lisa Sturzenegger said that it was in everyone’s interest to address issues sooner rather than later.

“In the course of our investigations we often find that businesses were aware of a safety issue, but failed to fix it. In many cases this has resulted in an injury and ultimately led to a conviction and a large fine if the matter goes to court,” said Ms Sturzenegger.

“Not addressing health and safety matters can have devastating effects for workers and businesses. We urge businesses to stay on top of potential hazards, no matter how small or large they might be.”

“Even if they have not had a serious incident in the past, we encourage businesses to look at their workplaces for known hazards and address basic issues.”

According to statistics, 1948 injuries were reported to WorkSafe from the Latrobe region over the past five financial years. Treatment and rehabilitation costs exceeded $64 million. More than half of these claims came from the construction, manufacturing, agriculture, forestry and fishing industries.

“These are basic issues that should have been attended to before WorkSafe’s intervention. Don’t wait for us to arrive before changes are made or wait for an incident to happen, make safety a priority.”

“The consequences of not doing so can be devastating for all involved.”

The Safe Towns Campaign visits businesses across regional areas which had high injury rate or which had not been visited before. More information can be found at WorkSafe’s website.

Report by Haydee - Do you have an OHS News Story - Let us know

01:44 pm, Tuesday 29 May, 2012

WorkCover NSW conducted today a free workplace safety webinar for small businesses and workers to help them understand the recent changes in work health and safety laws.

This webinar is part of WorkCover’s program which aims to support NSW business, industry and workers in adjusting to the new laws. The webinar will cover how the new legislation applies to small businesses and what they need to know and consider.

John Watson, General Manager of WorkCover’s Work Health and Safety Division said that it was vital for small business owners and their workers to understand their obligations under the new work health and safety laws.

“On 1 January 2012 new work health and safety laws commenced in NSW as part of harmonised national laws,” said Mr Watson.

“WorkCover recognises the challenges small businesses face in addressing work health and safety in their workplaces.

“The webinar will provide an opportunity for small business owners and workers adjusting to the new laws to ask questions and seek clarification on how they affect their workplace.

“The webinars are very popular, and because all you need is an internet connection, they are perfect for time-poor small business owners.

Those who were not able to participate in today’s webinar can register for a repeat webinar on 20 June from 10.00am – 11.00am.

“Given the demand from regional small businesses for information on the new laws, WorkCover will host the webinar again in three weeks’ time,” he said.

As an additional incentive, small business owners who have 20 or less full-time employees may also be eligible to claim a Small Business Rebate of up to $500 to be used in purchasing and installing safety equipment after attending the webinar.

Interested participants are encouraged to visit the WorkCover website or call 13 10 50 for more information.

Report by Haydee - Do you have an OHS News Story - Let us know

11:39 am, Tuesday 29 May, 2012

Workcover is investigating an accident last week where a teenager sustained head injuries after falling from the roof of a home at Stanwell Tops, north of Wollongong.

The 14-year-old boy was taken to Sydney’s St George Hospital in a serious condition after falling three metres.

A hospital spokeswoman says the teenager is in a stable condition.

A Workcover spokesman says two workers were carrying out roof work when the accident happened.

New South Wales Police are also investigating.

Report by Julia Alder - Do you have an OHS News Story - Let us know

01:10 pm, Monday 28 May, 2012

Australian projects’ safety standards are below world standards due to cultural tolerance of risk, says a foreign engineering contractor.

Brian Kelly, Kentz country manager said that lost-time injury (LTI) rates in the country were worse than in other countries. The West Australian reports that Mr Kelly said while safety performance was a common topic of business discussions, locals would be mistaken if they believed standards were high.

“The main thing we find in Australia is there’s a high tolerance for risk,” says Mr Kelly. It’s across the board at the moment. It’s a cultural thing.”

According to Mr Kelly, he had been a part of projects in the Middle East and South-East Asia which achieved millions of man hours without an LTI.

Kentz is an engineering solutions business operating in 29 countries across the globe. It provides specialist Engineering, Procurement and Construction (EPC) services, Construction, and Technical support services.

A safety conference will be hosted by Kentz chief executive Christian Brown in Perth on Wednesday, 20 May. Senior executives from Woodside, Chevron, Rio Tinto, Exxon Mobil, Thiess and Clough will be speaking for this activity.

Report by Haydee - Do you have an OHS News Story - Let us know