06:12 pm, Wednesday 2 January, 2013

SafeWork SA reminds workplaces to ensure they have established ways to protect workers from heat as temperatures are forecast to rise above 40C over the coming days.

A/Executive Director Robin Scott said hot weather should always be considered when planning work activities.

“Heat stress can afflict workers at outdoor locations such as construction sites, storage yards, tarmacs, roads and farms,” said Mr Scott.

“It is also important to recognise that heat poses a risk in confined spaces. Temperatures in industrial sheds can exceed 50 degrees, placing workers at risk.”

“Working in a hot environment can impair workers’ concentration and judgement, which heightens the chances of other harmful incidents occurring,” said Mr Scott.

Symptoms of heat stress may include headaches, fatigue, dizziness or fainting, increased sweating, mood changes such as irritability or confusion, and possible an upset stomach or vomiting.

“Continuing to work when you experience the symptoms of heat stress can lead to serious illness and in extreme cases, death,” said Mr Scott.

The following measures are recommended to protect workers from heat-related risks:

• Schedule work so that more physically demanding tasks are done during the cooler times of the day
• Rotate workers who have to work in direct sunlight – doing so can help reduce the length of sun exposure for each person
• Where possible, provide artificial shade such as umbrellas or a sunshade
• Keep well hydrated. South Australian workplace safety laws require that fresh drinking water be provided at all workplaces
• Ensure adequate ventilation. Wherever possible, the work environment should be ventilated by the use of fans or other means
• Provide UV protection – sunblock and wide-brimmed hats should be supplied as part of personal protective equipment.

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

09:50 pm, Wednesday 21 September, 2011

Workplace Health and Safety QLD has issued a safety alert to highlight the risks associated with using small meat processing machines for slicing, mincing, grinding or tenderising meat.

There are a number of imported meat slicing machines that can expose operators to a serious risk of injury. They are often found in takeaway outlets and restaurants.

The main hazards are:

1.The rotating cutting blades can be accessed through the feed hopper and the dispenser chute. Contact with the moving blades can cause severe injuries.

2.The cutting blades are susceptible to rusting and food residue can build up on surfaces, which are difficult to access for cleaning and sanitising. Where the surfaces contacted by food are not effectively cleaned, food health issues can arise.

3.The conductive metal body poses a greater risk of electric shock if the unit has not been manufactured and maintained in accordance with relevant electrical standards, particularly when using water to clean the machine while it is connected to the power socket.

4.There is no emergency stop device to quickly stop the machine in an emergency.

Importers, suppliers and persons in control of a workplace have an obligation to ensure that meat processing machinery is safe and without risk to health when used properly.

Any person who imports plant (instead of purchasing the plant from a local supplier) for use in a business or undertaking, takes on the obligations of a supplier even if importing or supplying plant is not their usual business. Under workplace health and safety legislation, a supplier has the additional obligation to test and ensure that the plant is safe to use.

A risk assessment should be conducted on a meat processing machine – when it is new, relocated or following an incident.  Consideration should be given as to whether the equipment has the following controls:

1.Guarding from exposure to moving parts using:

(a)appropriate fixed guarding, for example distance guards (a feed chute);

(b) interlocked moveable guards that cannot be opened until the machine has come to a stop. The control system should not allow the machine to be started while the guards are removed.

2.Test the area: check for hidden voids or compartments that may share the same airspace. This may be a hidden source of flammable vapours. If tests demonstrate that flammable or combustible gases are present, these must be eliminated by cleaning, ventilating and/or inerting the space before hot work activities can begin.

3.The existence and appropriate location of emergency stop device(s).

4.The safety-related parts of control systems, such as interlocks and emergency stops, must comply with appropriate technical standards.

5. The design and construction of the machine must ensure safe access for maintenance, effective cleaning and sanitisation.

6.The machine must comply with the relevant legislation for electrical safety.

7.The machine must be accompanied by information about the way it must be used to ensure health and safety.

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

09:55 am, Sunday 8 May, 2011

WorkSafe is inspecting construction sites in regional Western Australia to ensure mobile equipment is being used safely.

Inspectors will focus on lifting equipment, including telescopic handlers, elevating work platforms and mobile cranes.

The inspections were prompted by a fatal accident at a cement plant in Boulder, Western Australia last December. A man was catapulted to his death due to not using a harness and lanyard.

Acting WorkSafe WA commissioner Lex McCulloch said: “The inherent dangers involved with such equipment means safety standards need to be strictly enforced. They not only require particular classes of licenses to be able to operate them, but under our regulations, a number of things need to be in place, when operating such equipment and it will be those things that we will be checking off as we inspect the plan.”

This safety blitz is one of a series of highly targeted inspection pushes by Worksafe WA this year.

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

12:31 pm, Monday 8 November, 2010

A demolisher has been fined after it was found that it was performing asbestos removal without the required licence.

The Geelong Magistrates Court was told the demolition company had potentially exposed workers, at least one client and nearby properties to asbestos due to its questionable practices.

The owner of the company pleaded guilty failing to ensure employees were not exposed to risk and removing asbestos without a licence and to the unlawful assault lodged by a 65-year-old customer. He was fined $35,400 and ordered to pay costs of $2141.

According to Worksafe Victoria prosecutor Virginia Whalen, the defendant advertised in the Yellow Pages that his company was qualified to remove asbestos despite not holding a licence.

Ms Whalen said the company was hired to demolish a section of a house at Corio in January 2009.

“[The defendant] assured the owner he was licensed to remove asbestos,” she said.

The court heard a Worksafe Inspector went to the home but did not see any signage and barriers to prevent airborne fibres entering the house. He also found workers were not wearing any personal protective clothing.

Ms Whalen said a similar incident happened in September 2009 at a garage of a house at Torquay. The home owner informed the defendant about the asbestos, but was assured that the necessary licence was obtained.

“While demolition was going on the owner saw three young men… loading a couple of trucks with asbestos,” she said.

“Again they were not wearing any type of protective clothing.”

Magistrate Michael Coghlan said the defendant had exposed employees and other people to asbestos.

“People die that is what happens with this stuff,” he said.

“I have personally known people who died through exposure to asbestos and I can tell you, it is a cruel death.”

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

03:21 pm, Monday 4 October, 2010

WorkSafe WA has launched a campaign to improve health and safety in garden centres and nurseries.

WorkSafe inspectors have started visiting gardening outlets in metropolitan and regional areas to ensure health and safety laws are being complied.

According to WorkSafe Director Manufacturing, Transport and Service Industries Joe Attard, it is important for gardening retailers to have good safework systems in place for managing risks especially in the spring – a traditionally busy period for gardening outlets.

“Nurseries are likely to take on additional staff at this time of the year and many of these new workers will be students or young people entering the workforce. It is especially important they are given a thorough safety induction,” he said.

“Despite being perceived as harmless work environments, nurseries deal with a range of occupational safety and health issues including manual tasks, heat stress, Legionnaires’ disease and hazardous substances.”

According to Mr Attard, their previous inspections showed operators lacked understanding of common hazards.

“Some were content with practices that failed even to identify risks,” he said.

“Due to the physical demands of nursery work, employers should identify all the hazards that arise from manual tasks and assess the risk of injury or harm from each.

“Even simple everyday tasks, such as moving plants and other stock between varying working-level heights, can put workers at risk of serious back and other musculoskeletal injuries.

“Other causes of injury, common in the nursery industry, include lifting, slips, trips, falls and vehicle accidents.”

He said many nurseries stored hazardous substances such as pesticides and herbicides, so it was importance that they are aware of the requirements for the safe storage and handling of these materials.

Legionnaires’ disease – a virulent and sometimes fatal form of pneumonia – can be contracted if soils are improperly handled, and is another issue for nursery employees.

Mr Attard said staff must not be complacent just because they are wearing personal protective equipment. Proper hygiene practices must also be in place for the workers to avoid contracting the disease.

“Staff should also be alert to the flu-like symptoms of Legionnaires’ and we are advising all nursery workers to inform their doctors of the type of work they do,” he said.

Mr Attard said the safety campaign’s main aim is to raise awareness, but inspectors would require improvements to be made if the situation calls for it.

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

08:49 am, Tuesday 14 September, 2010

WorkSafe WA has turned its attention to powder coating operations following a recent survey revealing a lack of awareness of the hazards associated with the procedure.

Joe Attard, WorkSafe’s Director Manufacturing, Transport and Service Industries, said the safety watchdog conducted a targeted inspection of 34 metropolitan and regional businesses. They found many businesses had limited knowledge of the risks involved and were conducting powder coating activities without taking adequate safety measures.

“The problem seems to be mostly with businesses that had previously contracted out their powder-coating needs to specialist operators,” Mr Attard said.

“But with rising costs, they are now doing the work in-house, using staff not adequately trained or equipped to do the work safely.

“Triglycidyl Isocyanurate (TGIC), for example is a very hazardous substance that is used in some powders to enhance finish and durability.”

He said most brands have removed the hazardous substance from their products, although it is still found in some powders available in WA.

“It is vital that businesses using these brands are aware of the extra precautions that need to be taken to ensure their workers are not put at risk.

“Other chemicals that are commonly used in the coating process, such as hydrofluoric acid, are extremely dangerous.

He added that electrical hazard associated with electrostatic spray painting must also be taken into account.

“For example, by earthing the equipment and the objects being coated, you can ensure maximum coating efficiency and reduce the level of free dust. This will prevent the build up of static charges capable of igniting the powder dust clouds.

Mr Attard said for businesses that involve powder coating activities, they need to facilitate safety training for their workers, have relevant measures in place including personal protective equipment, and specific first-aid procedures.

“Without these safeguards workers are at risk of serious health problems.”

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

07:18 pm, Friday 10 September, 2010

The Wodonga Magistrate Court has fined a packaging company yesterday over an industrial accident involving a forklift n its Wodonga plant in 2008.

The firm pleaded guilty to failing to ensure a workplace exit was safe. It was fined $112,500 and has been put on a 12-month bond.

Magistrate John Murphy heard a woman was working at the Melrose Drive plant on December 8, 2008 when she was struck by a forklift.

She sustained serious injuries to her leg and had to undergo skin grafting and other extensive medical treatment.

The court was told the woman was wearing ear protection because of the noise of the site, while the forklift driver was going forward with a pallet of cans obstructing his view.

“It was probably a matter of good luck that this worker was not killed,” Prosecutor Trevor Wraight said.

The company’s lawyer said new traffic management plans have been put in place in its facilities, costing the firm $680,000.

Magistrate Murphy said the the plant had inadequate safety precautions when the incident took place, but added that it has acted responsibly and professionally ever since.

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

02:06 pm, Monday 26 July, 2010

The Industrial Relations Court of South Australia has convicted and fined the owner of a defunct scrap metal business over a workplace explosion in 2007.

The former scrap dealer was fined $11,250 on July 22 for violating s19(1) of the Occupational Health, Safety and Welfare Act 1986. The incident left an employee with severe burns to his body.

Industrial Magistrate Michael Ardlie  heard the employee was operating an oxy-cutting equipment to dismantle an air conditioning unit in November 2007.

It was found the air conditioner refrigerant had not been removed from the unit. The explosion occurred when the refrigerant came into contact with the spark of the cutting equipment.

The man, who had been working for the company for only four days, suffered burns to his face, neck, hands and forearms.

The court heard the company did not provide any personal protective equipment other than a pair of rigger gloves. The employee was wearing his own safety sunglasses and other personal protective equipment when the incident took place.

The company has already ceased operations.

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

01:27 pm, Tuesday 13 July, 2010

WorkSafe is letting the farming sector know that the safety watchdog is undertaking a year-long crackdown on workplace safety.

Seven fatalities have been recorded in farms across the state in 2010.

According to executive director Cath Bowtell, WorkSafe inspectors will check on Victorian farms starting this month.

Ms Bowtell said they will focus on the usual causes of fatalities and injuries.

“Making sure that you’ve got a roll-over bar on your tractor, that people are using a helmet when they’re driving a quad bike, that people are storing their chemicals correctly, that they’re maintaining their equipment, that they’re using their equipment properly,” she said.

“That’s the sort of work that our inspectors are going to go out and talk to farmers about.”

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

06:07 pm, Tuesday 8 June, 2010

Volunteer firefighters in north Queensland lack basic safety equipment, the rural fire brigade says.

The Scotts Rural Fire Brigade’s Ron Shaw says their members’ boots melted last fire season due to lack of proper personal protective equipment (PPE).

Mr Shaw fears the incident last year might happen again this year.

“Because we didn’t have our PPE, we ended up having our personal work boots melted, we had eyes that were stinging because we didn’t have goggles,” he said.

“I had massive headaches for a couple of days afterwards because I didn’t have a mask to filter out the smoke particles and my second officer had problems with his hands because he didn’t have any gloves.”

According to Mr Shaw, their plea for help to state departments have not been heeded for three months, and he is getting worried for his members’ safety.

“We just haven’t had those proper essentials supplied to us,” Mr Shaw said.

“That’s with some fairly regular following up and the point, I guess, is that it isn’t an isolated incident.”

North Queensland regional manager for rural operations, Ken Beasley, said he did not know about the brigade’s request for equipment until late last week.

According to Mr Beasley, the cause of delay is most likely attributable to an administrative error. He adds that the lack of response is unacceptable and the issue will be addressed.

“We certainly apologise for any breakdowns but we’re determined to, where the breakdown’s occurred, it’ll be identified and the equipment that is required will be supplied,” Mr Beasley said.

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