The Model Act, Regulations and Draft Codes of Practice are available on the www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au website. Links are provided below.

The Act, Regulations and Codes

Model Work Health and Safety Act (revised draft 23 June 2011)

Model Work Health and Safety Regulations 

Model Codes of Practice

Interpretative Guidelines

• the meaning of ‘person conducting a business or undertaking’
• the health and safety duty of an officer under section 27
• the meaning of ‘reasonably practicable’

Guidance material on the Safe Work Australia website

Resources

Free Education Sessions on new WHS laws

Workshop and seminar presentation notes

Fact sheets and publications

Information by topic

• Duty of care
• Consultation changes
• Health and safety representatives
• Discriminatory conduct
• Offences and penalties
• Entry permit holders
• Regulator and inspectors
• Incident notification

Workplace Standards Tasmania

Helpline

(03) 6233 7657 (Outside Tasmania)
1300 366 322 (Inside Tasmania)

As with the Work Safety Act 2008, the new legislative regime comprises 3 formal elements with a fourth, non-legislative element sitting below that. These are:

• the principal Act, the Work Health and Safety Act 2011, which takes effect from 1 January 2012
• the Regulations that sit below the principal Act, namely the Work Health and Safety Regulation 2011
• Codes of Practice
• National and Australian Standards
• Guidance Material.

The Act sets out the overall framework for work safety and a range of duties designed to ensure work health and safety.

The Regulation spells out minimum standards for the duty holders to ensure work safety in relation to specific hazards and risks (such as the performance of manual tasks). Regulations have the force of law and MUST be adhered to. Failure to comply may result in a criminal penalty or an infringement notice.

Codes of Practice provide practical guidance on how to comply with legal duties. Codes have formal status, allowing courts to consider whether a Code has been complied with in deciding whether legal duties have been met. The steps set out in a Code are not compulsory, but you should follow the Code or an equivalent [or better] alternative.

National Standards and National Codes of Practice are developed by Safe Work Australia and its predecessors (NOHSC, ASCC). Once adopted in each jurisdiction, they are then legally enforceable. Australian Standards are separate technical guides which may also assist a person to comply with a particular work safety duty.

The Work Health and Safety Act 2011 has brought health and safety laws in the ACT into harmony with similar legislation adopted by most of the other Australian states and territories.  This harmonisation process has significantly narrowed the differences in work health and safety legislation across borders within Australia.

Key features of the new legislation include:

• continuation of the definition of ‘worker’ under the previous Work Safety Act 2008 as including more than just employees, e.g. contractors, volunteers, etc.
• continuation of the emphasis in the previous Work Safety Act 2008 on those who engage workers in the conduct of a business or undertaking [a 'person in control of a business or undertaking, or PCBU, noting that 'person' in this context can include a whole business or government agency] as the primary safety duty holder
• continuation of the inclusion in the Work Safety Act 2008 of upstream and other similar duty holders amongst PCBUs
• a duty for a PCBU to, as far as is reasonably practicable, provide a safe workplace and a safe systems of work
• where a PCBU has a safety duty, an ‘officer’ [e.g. a director or senior manager] within the business has a ‘due diligence’ requirement to take steps to assist the PCBU in meeting its obligations
• the primary means of providing a safe working environment is through eliminating or, if elimnination is not possible, minimising risk
• employers must consult with workers to allow them to contribute directly to the management of risk and creation of a safe working environment. 

The new legislation also introduces some new terminology, including:

• ‘work safety’ becomes ‘work health and safety’ or WHS
• ‘worker consultation units’ become ‘work groups’
• ‘work safety representatives’ and ‘work safety committees’ become ‘health and safety representatives’ and ‘health and safety committees’
• ‘authorised representatives’ become ‘WHS entry permit-holders’.

Transitional Arrangements

Part 20 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 contains a number of transitional provisions which will ease the move from the Work Safety Act 2008 to the new Act.

In particular, the Act provides that:

• existing ‘worker consultation units’ automatically become ‘work groups’
• existing ‘work safety representatives’ become ‘health and safety representatives’
• existing ‘work safety committees’ become ‘health and safety committees’
• existing ‘authorised representatives’ become ‘WHS entry permit-holders’.

This means that there is no need for businesses to hold new elections, for example, for HSRs or to reorganise their consultative arrangements as a result of the new legislation coming into effect.

Section 2 of the Work Health and Safety Regulation 2011 also provides for transitional arrangements including:

• Division 4.7.4 [electrical work on energised electrical equipment] commences 1 July 2012
• Sections 168-170 [certificate of fitness for diving work] commence 1 July 2012
• Section 53 [storage of flammable or combustible substances] commences 1 January 2013
• Sections 164 and 165 [residual current devices] commences 1 January 2013
• Sections 171-175 [competence of workers for diving work] commences 1 January 2013
• Divisions 4.8.3 and 4.8.4 [diving work] commences 1 January 2013
• Divisions 5.2.2 and 5.2.3 [design of plant] commences 1 January 2013
• Section 235 [inspection of mobile and tower cranes] commences 1 January 2013
• Part 5.3 [registration of plant designs and items of plant] commences 1 January 2013
• Sections 309-311 [WHS management plan for construction work] commences 1 January 2013
• Section 313 [WHS management plan for construction work] commences 1 January 2013
• Schedule 3 [high risk work], table 3.1, Item 23 commences 1 July 2013
• Schedule 4 [high risk work], Table 4.1, Item 23 commences 1 July 2013.

The Commonwealth has not provided sufficient time for all Western Australian businesses to come up to speed with the new requirements.  The model WHS regulations are still minus the mining component.  These regulations have an important bearing on the implementation of the overall WHS laws package.  The Government has concerns that having a different commencement date for mining laws will create an uncertain regulatory environment which could conceivably have a negative impact on safety standards in this high risk industry.  Western Australia is of the view that implementation of the model WHS laws requires the complete package for implementation which includes all the mining regulations.

The Commonwealth Government’s Regulation Impact Statement (RIS) for the model WHS regulations is inadequate for Western Australia.  As a result, a local RIS including public consultation in relation to the implementation of the model WHS regulations in WA is required.  The process, which should take up to six months, has commenced.  It is anticipated that the public consultation element of the process will be started around February 2012.  In order to aid its decision making, this process will provide the Government with information and analysis about the consequences the model WHS regulations would have on workers, businesses, government and the economy if applied to Western Australian workplaces. 

In view of these circumstances, the date of implementation for the model laws in WA has not been determined and will need to be reassessed.

Beyond the timing issue, the process for implementing model WHS laws will involve the development of some WA specific transitional laws. Some guiding principles have been agreed through the harmonisation process to deliver a consistent transition process in each jurisdiction. However, as each jurisdiction has a different set of current laws, the transitional provisions in each jurisdiction may need to cover different topics and therefore will not be identical.

Once the WA version of these transitional provisions has been finalised, WorkSafe will make more information available on how they will operate. But by way of example, the transitional provisions will deal with numerous administrative issues such as – 

• Continuity of currently elected Safety and Health Representatives so as to avoid the need for unnecessary election processes.  
• The rules for the continuation of existing investigations.

SA Government has every confidence that the nationally harmonised legislation will be approved by Parliament when it resumes in the New Year. The exact date is naturally a matter for the Parliament.

SafeWork SA’s planning for implementation of the new legislation will continue. This will build upon our extensive programme of preparation for the 1 January launch date, all of which remains entirely valid. Our WHS training will continue as will our engagement initiatives and preparation of administrative arrangements.

1. There are 11 new codes of practice adopted by Queensland through the national harmonisation process.

2. The Recreational Diving, Recreational Technical Diving and Snorkelling Code of Practice 2010 will be remade under the Safety in Recreational Water Activities Act 2011.

3. There are 24 preserved codes of practice with 23 being amended to be consistent with the Work Health and Safety Act 2011.

4. Four codes of practice under the Workplace Health and Safety Act 1995 will be repealed from 1 January 2012.

A code of practice provides practical guidance for people who have work health and safety duties about how to achieve the standards required under the Act, and about effective ways to identify and manage risks.

 New codes of practice commencing 1 January 2012

Confined Spaces Code of Practice 2011 (PDF, 502 kB)
Hazardous Manual Tasks Code of Practice 2011 (PDF, 2.4 MB)
How to Manage Work Health and Safety Risks Code of Practice 2011 (PDF, 510 kB)
How to Manage and Control Asbestos in the Workplace Code of Practice 2011 (PDF, 880 kB)
How to Safely Remove Asbestos Code of Practice 2011 (PDF, 706 kB)
Labelling of Workplace Hazardous Chemicals Code of Practice 2011 (PDF, 931 kB)
Managing Noise and Preventing Hearing Loss at Work Code of Practice 2011
Managing the Risk of Falls at Workplaces Code of Practice 2011 (PDF, 2 MB)
Managing the Work Environment and Facilities Code of Practice 2011 (PDF, 287 kB)
Preparation of Safety Data Sheets for Hazardous Chemicals Code of Practice 2011 (PDF, 710 kB)
Work Health and Safety Consultation, Co-operation and Co-ordination (PDF, 244 kB)
Recreational Diving, Recreational Technical Diving and Snorkelling Code of Practice 2011 (PDF, 391 kB)

 Preserved codes of practice commencing 1 January 2012

The codes of practice below have been amended to be consistent with the Work Health and Safety Act 2011. The changes to these codes of practice are minor and ensure the continued efficient and effective operation of Queensland’s health and safety arrangements.

Abrasive Blasting Code of Practice 2004 (PDF, 414 kB)
Commencement date:1 July 2004
Amended: 28 April 2006, 5 December 2008 and 1 January 2012

Cash in Transit Code of Practice 2011 (PDF, 307 kB)
Commencement date: 5 February 2011
Amended: 1 January 2012

Children and Young Workers Code of Practice 2006 (PDF, 244 kB)
Commencement date: 1 July 2006
Amended: 5 December 2008 and 1 January 2012

Concrete Pumping Code of Practice 2005 (PDF, 516 kB)
Commencement date: 1 April 2005
Amended: 28 April 2006, 5 December 2008 and 1 January 2012.

First Aid Code of Practice 2004 (PDF, 320 kB)
Commencement date: 8 March 2004
Amended: 28 April 2006, 5 December 2008 and 1 January 2012

Forest Harvesting Code of Practice 2007 (PDF, 921 kB)
Commencement date: 2 February 2007
Amended: 5 December 2008 and 1 January 2012

Formwork Code of Practice 2006 (PDF, 707 kB)
Commencement date: 1 January 2006
Amended: 28 April 2006, 5 December 2008 and 1 January 2012

Foundry Code of Practice 2004 (PDF, 348 kB)
Commencement date: 1 July 2004
Amended: 28 April 2006, 5 December 2008 and 1 January 2012.

Hazardous Chemicals Code of Practice 2003 (PDF, 349 kB)
Commencement date: 1 May 2003
Amendment date: 28 April 2006, 5 December 2008 and 1 January 2012

Horse Riding Schools, Trail Riding Establishments and Horse Hiring Establishments Code of Practice 2002 (PDF, 319 kB)
Commencement date: 1 January 2002
Amended: 28 April 2006, 5 December 2008 and 1 January 2012

Manual Tasks Involving the Handling of People Code of Practice 2001 (PDF, 896 kB)
Commencement date: 1 March 2002
Amended: 28 April 2006, 5 December 2008 and 1 January 2012

Mobile Crane Code of Practice 2006 (PDF, 648 kB)
Commencement date: 1 July 2006
Amended: 5 December 2008, 13 August 2010 and 1 January 2012

Occupational Diving Work Code of Practice 2005 (PDF, 194 kB)
Commencement date: 1 May 2005
Amended: 28 April 2006, 5 December 2008 and 1 January 2012

Plant Code of Practice 2005 (PDF, 376 kB)
Commencement date: 1 April 2005
Amended: 28 April 2006, 5 December 2008 and 1 January 2012

Prevention of Workplace Harassment Code of Practice 2004 (PDF, 271 kB)
Commencement date: 1 June 2004
Amended: 28 April 2006, 5 December 2008 and 1 January 2012

Rural Plant Code of Practice 2004 (PDF, 401 kB)
Commencement date: 10 September 2004
Amended: 28 April 2006, 5 December 2008 and 1 January 2012

Safe Design and Operation of Tractors Code of Practice 2005 (PDF, 431 kB)
Commencement date: 1 April 2005
Amended: 28 April 2006, 13 August 2010 and 1 January 2012

Scaffolding Code of Practice 2009 (PDF, 746 kB)
Commencement date: 3 July 2009
Amended: 1 January 2012

Steel Construction Code of Practice 2004 (PDF, 640 kB)
Commencement date: 10 September 2004
Amended: 28 April 2006 and 1 January 2012

Sugar Industry Code of Practice 2005 (PDF, 272 kB)
Commencement date: 24 May 2005
Amended 5 December 2008 and 1 January 2012

• Sugar Mill Safety – Supplement to the Sugar Industry Code of Practice 2005 (PDF, 551 kB)
• Cane Rail Safety – A supplement to the Sugar Industry Code of Practice 2005 (PDF, 433 kB)

Tilt-up and Pre-cast Construction Code of Practice 2003 (PDF, 538 kB)
Commencement date: 1 June 2003
Amended: 28 April 2006, 5 December 2008 and 1 January 2012

Tower Crane Code of Practice 2006 (PDF, 511 kB)
Commencement date: 1 July 2006
Amended: 5 December 2008 and 1 January 2012

Traffic Management for Construction or Maintenance Work Code of Practice 2008 (PDF, 317 kB)
Commencement date: 1 September 2008
Amended: 5 December 2008, 13 August 2010 and 1 January 2012

Tunnelling Code of Practice 2007
Commencement date: 8 June 2007
Amended: 5 December 2008, 13 August 2010 and 1 January 2012

There is little doubt from reading the myriad of comments made on various sites that workplace bullying and harassment continues to fuel discussion.

In fact, I have just finished reading a number of comments made by some obviously very traumatised workers from the public and private sector. There are some common threads relating to:

• management and communication practices
• failure to address the issue
• lack of knowledge about where to go for support on resolution options
• workplace culture
• apparent failure to treat workplace bullying and harassment as a work health and safety hazard

Some of the comments also appeared to indicate that some of those targeted had been subjected to bullying for periods of up to three years, and some had left their employment because of the bullying behaviours.

Words of wisdom and wit are added, and in some cases, the discussions raise new issues, or simply reaffirm old issues.

It does seem that many of the discussions reinforce the ideology that workplace bullying and harassment may be one and the same in the minds of some, and completely different (although related) in the minds of others.

The past two years have seen considerable discussion on the emergence of the new harmonised work health and safety laws that are coming into effect in some States as of the 1 January 2011.

Will it be a case of more of the same in relation to organisational responses, or will the various discussions that have occurred prompt a new approach?

Sins of the past, penalties of the future

It seems that many organisations have well documented policies and procedures in relation to the prevention, detection and resolution of workplace bullying. However, it also seems that despite organisations espousing commitment to a workplace free from bullying and harassment, it is still happening.

It might be the case the officers are not aware of the extent of bullying because individuals have no confidence in internal reporting systems, or they have seen how some targets/victims have been treated.

Recent discussions on various forums suggest that workplace bullying and harassment is very clearly defined in literature and through to Codes of Practice. However, discussions with workers gives a completely different idea. In some cases, reasonable management actions are perceived by some as unreasonable, whilst in other cases, bullying is seen as a way to manage people.

Take this case. Recently, I was discussing bullying with a new acquaintance. He said “Well, how do you get them to work if you don’t bully them?” to which I replied “There must be other ways of getting them to work.” His response was “No, you have to bully them, they are very lazy people.”

After a long and involved discussion, it appeared that what this person was really talking about was using assertive language to motivate or direct workers to undertake their allocated tasks.

What one perceives as reasonable, another may construe as unreasonable e.g. bullying. It is absolutely critical that a common understanding is developed regarding the definition of bullying as it applies in your workplace. It is also critical that workers have the face to face opportunity to discuss (without fear) their understandings of the definition. It is not much point having a definition that workers think means one thing, when it really means something else.

It is important that systems or processes be in place to maintain currency of knowledge of trends and issues, and of Court, Commission or Tribunal decisions that may impact on your policies and procedures.

Imagine a situation whereby you have been called to appear in a Court, Commission or Tribunal and you are confronted with evidence that shows that your organisational policies are out of date, and not only that, those who have responsibility for developing and presenting workshops on bullying, have not kept up to date.

So where do the sins of the past come in? Despite the existence of reporting systems and processes e.g. complaint or resolution processes, it seems that there are a number of workers who lack confidence in those systems. Experience suggests that when some workers understand what is involved in the resolution processes, they decide to do nothing. In some cases, they go away and start making more detailed notes, biding their time until an opportune moment presents itself.

I would suggest that this opportune moment will occur after the 1 January 2012.

The penalties of the future may result from those cases that are slowly gaining momentum now. Even though workers have not taken any action other than seek advice, it may well be the case that over a considerable time, they have been bullied, they have been gathering evidence, taking advice, or seeking support and just waiting.

Will these cases come to finalisation in a Court, Commission or Tribunal? It depends on a number of variables such as the:

• willingness of the individual to take action
• how resilient they are
• whether they understand what is actually involved
• what evidence they possess
• whether they seek legal advice

At this stage, the criminal standard of proof is not required i.e. beyond reasonable doubt, unless criminal offences are involved and this could include stalking, sexual assaults or other acts of violence. In some cases, the victim/target might make the decision not to report the criminal acts and only want action taken in relation to the ‘bullying behaviours’ where a lesser standard is required i.e. civil standard – on the balance of probabilities.

The resultant penalties than could occur might be more than financial or jail terms. Damage to individual or organisational reputations may also occur.

Mitigating the risks

Managing workplace bullying and harassment is not easy especially if you have no proactive or preventive strategies in place.

You need to know what policies, procedures and strategies your organisation has in place. Workplace bullying and harassment incidents can occur even when some of the basics have been addressed.

You might be in an organisation where a workplace bullying or harassment incident has been reported.

How many times have you heard the comment “You could see that coming”. Why was it allowed to escalate?

Some basic questions

How important are risk assessments?

I would say extremely important provided you ask the right questions, and know what the right questions are to ask. The following questions can be used as prompts to help guide when preparing for the risk assessment.

A number of the questions use the traditional who, what, when, why, where, and how model. It is important to understand that a question framed around these words may lead to a response that requires another question.

For some officers and workers, the following questions might push a few boundaries. That is the intention so that you can at least try to plan a response if these questions are put to you in a Court, Commission or Tribunal.

Does your organisation have proactive and preventive strategies that help you answer the following questions?

• Do you avoid or defer difficult conversations about workplace bullying and harassment?
• Do you resist the need to resolve counterproductive behaviours before they escalate into workplace bullying and harassment?
• Does your workplace have a culture of tolerance or acceptability when it comes to workplace bullying and harassment?
• Are you confused about what is and what isn’t workplace bullying?
• Do you know what is and what isn’t reasonable management?
• How does your workplace organisation define counterproductive behaviours that could cost you your job?
• What price do you put on your personal reputation or that of your organisation?
• How has workplace bullying and harassment been addressed in your risk management, business continuity, health and safety, audit or fraud and corruption prevention plans?

‘Officer’ questions

You may have some very good policies in place to prevent, detect and resolve workplace bullying and harassment. The advice that you get about the incidence of workplace bullying and harassment may not reflect the true situation.

Changes in work health and safety legislation, and increased publicity about workplace bullying and harassment could mean that different questions will be asked.

Litigation in Australia is taking some interesting approaches to age old issues. Individuals are engaging legal professionals who will use various strategies to test your knowledge in a Court, Commission or Tribunal. The responses that you provide could very well determine your current and future employment. Adverse publicity generated because you were not prepared could affect your personal credibility and reputation.

The following questions were developed as indicators of what could be asked in a Court, Commission or Tribunal. Of course, the media might also take it upon themselves to ask you the same questions.

How much:

• income did your organisation earn as the result of a single workplace bullying or harassment incident?
• did workplace bullying or harassment contribute towards achieving the aims and objectives of your organisation?
• business does a workplace bullying or harassment incident generate?

How does workplace bullying or harassment:

• improve customer service?
• increase productivity?
• benefit shareholders, investors or taxpayers?
• add value to your brand name or reputation?

What:

• does the preparation, dissemination, storage and archival of workplace bullying or harassment records cost your organisation?
• could your employees be better doing if they weren’t spending time addressing workplace bullying or harassment?
• are your competitors doing whilst workplace bullying or harassment is taking place in your organisation?
• could your employees be doing more productively if they were not involved generating paperwork for Court, Commission or Tribunal hearings?

How does your organisation benefit from the adverse publicity generated from workplace bullying or harassment?

What are the short, medium and long term effects on other employees who are witnesses in grievance and tribunal proceedings?

Who and what are you defending?

What will have you achieved at the end of it?

Will any of your actions result in allegations of unfair dismissal?

Does everyone in your organisation know and understand the personal consequences of workplace bullying or harassment?

Do you know how to respond to these questions?

Do you know why you should be able to respond to these questions?

How will you respond if your claim or allegation is to be resolved in a Court, Commission or Tribunal?

Will you be prepared?

Will you respond in haste and pay the penalty?

Will your actions result in findings of unfair dismissal, breach of employment contract or financial penalties being imposed by a Court, Commission or Tribunal?

These are very important questions that might be put to you in a Court, Commission or Tribunal. These questions could only be the start of what you might be confronted with.

There might be a number of other questions that will be asked of you depending on how you respond to these.

If you are reading this as either a target/victim or as a person who may have been accused of being a workplace bully or harasser, you might like to consider these questions.

Do you know:

• what to do when you have been bullied or harassed?
• what to do if you are accused of being a bully or a harasser?
• how to defend an allegation of workplace bullying or harassment?
• know what questions to ask?

Does your organisation have a workplace bullying or harassment detection, prevention and resolution policy?

If so, do you know where to find it or access it?

Sometimes, you may need to lodge a workplace injury claim because of the workplace bullying or harassment. You may also seek advice from a legal professional.

As either a target/victim or even alleged bully/harasser, you may not realise that the medical and legal professionals will ask you questions.

Do you know what type of questions:

• you will be asked when you seek medical assistance?
• your legal professionals will ask you?

Workplace bullying and harassment has direct and indirect implications on a wide range of people. It is not just a workplace issue. You may seek advice, guidance or support from your family, friends and associates.

Do you know what to say to your family, friends and associates?

If you lodge a workplace injury claim, an investigation will be conducted. You may find this process confusing or even threatening.

Sometimes the investigation will be conducted when you are still traumatised by the incident or even when you are receiving medical or psychological support.

• Do you know:
• why investigations are conducted?
• how the investigation process works?

Do you know:

• what to say to support your claim?
• what not to say, and why?

You may work in an organisation where workplace bullying or harassment is rife. The more likely there is sexual content in the incident, the more chance the media will be interested. Even if you are not directly involved, the media might ask you for your views.

You might even take it upon yourself to use one of the popular social networking sites to discuss the incident.

Do you know how to respond to media interest in workplace bullying or harassment allegations?

Employment conditions

When you started with your organisation or even when you were promoted, you may have attended an induction program. You might have been asked to sign some paperwork.

When you started work, you may not have had time to think about all the paperwork. Practical experience tells me that you need to think about these questions.

• Do you have a current job or position description?
• Do you take part in the performance management process?
• Do you know and understand your conditions of employment (including compliance with Codes of Conduct)?
• Do you know why these questions are relevant for preventing, detecting and resolving workplace bullying?

Legal professionals will ask you many questions. They will generally want to know about your conditions of employment, your workplace policies and procedures and many other issues that you may not realise are relevant.

OHS HARMONISATION

Many of you know that the OHS Harmonisation process has been underway for some time. It has been stated that the new Work Health and Safety Act 2012 will come into effect on the 1st January 2012. There are some important changes in this legislation that you need to be aware of. It does apply to the public and private sector.

The new Act may have some impact on how you respond to allegations of workplace bullying and harassment. In the worst case scenario, you could face prosecution for a breach of workplace health and safety and perhaps even imprisonment. You need to think about your preventive and proactive strategies to reduce this risk. You should be able to answer the following two questions.

Will you be an ‘officer’ under the Work Health and Safety Act 2012?

Do you know what you will have to do to meet your obligations and show that you can meet due diligence requirements?

The prevention, detection and resolution of workplace bullying and other forms of inappropriate behaviours depends on the action that you take. The questions and issues that you have been reading about are only part of the response. You should be aware that there are many left field questions that I have not included. You should know that your answer may provide a lead as to another question.

Trends and issues

Despite some interesting media articles regarding allegations of counterproductive behaviour resulting in out of Court settlements, there is little publicly available information on specific cases. From time to time, some cases are published on the Fair Work Australia website. However, a perusal of media

websites and other support networks, and even sites such as LinkedIn, HR Daily or Human Capital Online, indicates that there is increased commentary on what organisations and individuals should do to prevent or resolve workplace bullying.

Recent discussions also raised the issue of risk assessments for people wanting to work at home, and whether or not domestic violence should be considered. There has been some interesting discussions on how far a workplace extends, what should be considered and what are the implications.

Over the past two years, there have been some interesting reports have been prepared following Reviews or investigations into allegations of bullying. It is in my view, important for public and private sector organisations to at least read these reports and see whether or not there any issues that warrant attention.

Where to in the future

It is not long until the 1st January 2012 and despite all the discussion about whether or not the legislation and regulations will actually become operative from that date, workplace bullying continues to be a concern of workers across the public and private sector.

Waiting for the implementation to occur without actually addressing existing issues about bullying may not provide officers with an excuse. At the same time, workers can play a key role in preventing and detecting workplace bullying.

Standing up and speaking out about bullying may be frowned upon in some workplaces. However, given the physical and psychological trauma that can occur, and the financial costs, it is important to take a preventive role.

I have indicated in previous articles that the following systems and processes should be evident and supported through documentation:

• Clear understanding of due diligence requirements
• Clearly defined responsibilities for Officers
• Commitment to work health and safety – evidence that the CEO and other executives do site inspections – safety leadership
• Risk management policy and procedures
• Copies of risk management plans, directives, instructions, training records
• Workplace bullying policy and procedures
• Copies of documentation, evidence of consultation, risk assessment
• Training for all workers including executives
• Good support networks
• Current list of Contact officers, training, brochures, contact numbers
• Regular reviews of policies and procedures that take into consideration changes to legislation, Court/Commission or Tribunal decisions, and Review findings
• Investigation processes
• Management and Supervisory training in relation to conflict management/resolution
• Management reviews and audits regarding effectiveness or otherwise of various policies and procedures e.g. risk management and workplace bullying

Lessons to be learned

There is little doubt that no matter how hard one tries, one might end up involved in a workplace bullying incident. It is entirely possible that you could be the:

• victim/target,
• one accused of bullying behaviour

• officer/s of an organisation where bullying has occurred
• medical or legal professionals providing advice to the victim/target, the alleged bully or even to one of their family members
• family/friends or associates of the victim/target or the alleged bully
• investigator/s
• media

So, if you fall into one of those categories, you should be prepared. You might have some good systems and processes in place at your workplace. However, you might also like to consider the following:

• Prepare for a day in Court
• Practice responses
• Create scenario based training with role plays
• Test organisational documentation
• Anticipate worst case scenarios and develop risk management plans
• Address workplace bullying through risk management, fraud and corruption plans, audit plans, safety plans
• Identify left field questions
• Engage professionals to assist in developing appropriate responses
• Conduct „spot? audits and checks in the workplace
• Demonstrate evidence of consultation
• Know how risk assessments were conducted and what was considered
• Understanding what is due diligence and what is required
• Do your planning

Summary

It is important to know exactly what your level is risk exposure is in relation to workplace bullying. I would suggest that understanding systems and processes is only part of addressing the issue. It is important to understand why people are not reporting the incidents.

As workplaces change, and individual perceptions about what is and what is not bullying, it pays to constantly evaluate the level of exposure.

Proactive strategies and management practices might not completely eliminate workplace bullying. However, it might help to mitigate any fallout that may occur when an incident occurs.

Bernie Althofer AFAIM 2011 ©

EGL I ASSESSMENTS PTY LTD

P: 0419 661 421

W: www.egliassessments.com

E: enquiries@egliassessments.com

M: P.O. Box 776

Spring Hill Qld 4004

ABN: 67 126 789 884

A worker was killed while a formwork shutter was being raised to about one metre above the ground by crane. Lengths of timber were being used as lifting points for the shutter when one of the pieces of timber broke. The formwork shutter dropped to the ground and fell over, striking the worker.

Could this happen anywhere your employees are working?

This alert is a reminder for you and your organisation to consider the effectiveness of your safety management systems in preventing an incident like this from occurring at a workplace.

For more information on how we can help click here

Unsafe storage has resulted in an industry-wide warning from WorkSafe after dairy products manufacturer, Fonterra Australia Pty Ltd was today convicted and fined $300,000 in the Melbourne County Court.

WorkSafe’s General Manager for Operations, Lisa Sturzenegger, said all businesses had to ensure they could safely store bulk products or other stock.

Fonterra Australia pleaded guilty to one charge* after a forklift driver died at its Stanhope cheese factory in September 2009.WorkSafe’s investigation found the man died when a one tonne bag of salt fell on him.

Judge Frank Gucciardo said the system for stacking bags at Stanhope was unsafe.  

He said it was not until after the man’s death that a safe racking system was put in place and a written procedure developed. Had it not been for its guilty plea, Fonterra would have been fined $400,000.

WorkSafe’s investigation found the practice of stacking bulk salt bags at Stanhope was unsafe as the tops of lower bags may not be sufficiently level to safely accommodate those on top.  

The danger was such that if the surface of a bag was not level, even a small disturbing force could cause the stack to topple.

Marking the start of WorkSafe Week Ms Sturzenegger said common safety failings involving routine tasks cause the overwhelming majority of workplace injuries and deaths.

“In this case the bags of salt were delivered and stacked every week. The lesson for others is to understand the potential safety issues, consult with the workforce and fix problems.

“It’s extraordinary how quickly things can change in the workplace so it’s important that regular reviews are carried out and ensure people stay up-to-date.

“When disaster strikes, there’s no going back. Fixing issues after the event is not the solution.

“Incidents like this one hit families, businesses and communities hard. They have long-term-effects.

“Getting safety right means no one has to go through what this family and this company have had to,” Ms Sturzenegger said.

My passion for safety began when I was a refrigeration and air conditioning mechanic and an industrial accident left me partially paralysed for six months. Since then I have been a passionate advocate for the safety of installers, service personnel and end users. In my experience a lot of safety problems are caused because people don’t think about installation, maintenance or end-use. I have seen 100kg air conditioning compressors installed on laser light roofing which is not load rated to hold this weight. No thought went into the long-term durability of the unit, safety of the end-user or safety of maintenance personnel. Installers use cranes, hoists, lifters and other equipment to safely lift condensing units/compressors into position. However, installers need to think about future maintenance requirements because improperly positioned units can place servicing personnel at risk.

Under the 2008 Plumbing Regulations, equipment must be accessible for service and maintenance. If the Plumbing Industry Commission’s investigators consider maintenance access is unsafe, the investigators will issue rectification notices, and the person who signed the certificate of compliance will have to pay to fix the issues. It’s always more expensive to rectify than to do it safely in the first place. One recent Plumbing Industry Commission investigation of an air conditioning unit installed on a house resulted in a principal contractor being held responsible for rectification costing more than $100,000.

Tips for safe installation of air conditioning units are:

1. Put yourself in the shoes of the maintenance person. Position the unit so it’s easy to access for installation and future maintenance.

2. Think about what you are installing it on – make sure the surface is secure and can safely hold your weight and the weight of the equipment.

3. Think about how to get the equipment to the height you need including servicing equipment.

4. Think about how to securely fasten the unit to the base structure and be prepared for bad weather conditions. 5. Be safety conscious. Ensure you walk away from each job and so do future service personnel.

Please feel free to share any comments or experiences.

 Background

In the first half of 2011, NT WorkSafe received in excess of 20 notifications of fires in vehicles and other mobile plant. The incidents have occurred throughout the Territory, with the bulk of incidences occurring in the mining industry. The majority of the fires have been attributed to component failure and/or inadequate maintenance.

 Contributing factors

-  Inadequate scope and/or scheduling of maintenance and inspection of vehicles and plant.

-  Hydraulic oil contact with hot engine areas.

-  Poor maintenance leading to a buildup of combustible material (lubricant and fuels) near

heat or ignition sources.

-  Ineffective isolation of ignition sources such as battery terminals.

 Action required

Recommended control measures to prevent similar incidents occurring include:

-  Systematic inspection of all components within a hydraulic or fuel supply circuit during outine part replacements.

-  Proactively monitoring of hydraulic hoses including checks on hose connections, clamps and pressure relief valves.

-  Adopt a risk based hydraulic hose management system.

-  Verify internal maintenance systems with additional quality checks by manufacturers or

authorised service providers.

-  Evaluate isolation techniques such as shielding for potential engine heat sources or insulation of hoses near hot components.

-  Routine inspection of electrical systems for corrosion or insulation fatigue.

-  Consider the location and rating of protective devices such as fuses and wiring control.

-  Install, maintain and systematically inspect fire detection and automatic fire suppression

systems on vehicles or plant operating at a higher risk of fire.

-  Install portable fire extinguishers on all mobile plant.

-  Provide appropriate training to all mobile plant staff on hydraulic hazards, fire detection  and response procedures.

 Further information

Australian Standard

-  AS 5062 – 2006 Fire Protection for Mobile and Transportable Equipment.