A man has died after falling nine metres to the ground at a worksite in South Perth on Tuesday.

According to reports, two men were using a cherry picker to prune a 50-metre tree when the boom snapped, sending them nine metres to the ground. The 47-year old tree lopper landed on a metal carport and died at the scene. The second victim survived the fall.

The Sydney Morning Herald reports that the cherry picker had a mechanical fault, sending the basket plunging to the ground.

WorkSafe inspectors are conducting an investigation over the incident and have started interviewing witnesses.

Police will prepare a report for the Coroner.

OHS News

The new TV commercials for WorkCover NSW “Here to help” campaign will focus on the importance of occupational health and safety. In a report published by the Liberal Party of Australia, Minister for Finance and Services, Greg Pearce, said that while work-related injuries are at their lowest levels in more than two decades, thousands of workers suffer from workplace injuries in NSW.

“During the period 2009-10 there were 41,460 major claims reported in NSW costing the Workers Compensation System $ 879 million,” said Mr Pearce.

“The ‘Here to Help” awareness campaign is also designed to reinforce the aims of the new Work Health and Safety laws to make workplaces’ safe.

“The campaign to be rolled out in phases throughout the year will present a timely reminder to businesses, workers and their families to learn more about how the new Work Health and Safety laws function, and how they can apply them in the workplace.

“Following the government’s new Work Health and Safety laws the advertisements also remind the wider community about how meeting workplace health and safety obligations can save lives.

“WorkCover has a range of free advisory services and guidance material as well as a dedicated claims assistance service and an award-winning Customer Information Centre.

“I urge everyone to seek advice directly from WorkCover and to take advantage of the range of services on offer.”

To view the videos and to learn more about the “Here to help” campaign, please visit http://smallbusiness.workcover.nsw.gov.au/Tools-and-Guides/video-room/Pages/default.aspx.

OHS News

SafetyCulture proudly announce the release of iAuditor, the iPad auditing app that is helping people work smarter and safer.

iAuditor means that people conducting audits no longer need to carry clipboards, notepads, checklists, forms, sign-off sheets or cameras. All of these features are built into iAuditor, and more!

Audits are vital to successful safety management, and can cover thousands of industries throughout the world, including ISO14001, OHSAS18001, AS4801, Electrical Safety, Construction and Fall Prevention.

By using the iPad’s camera, users can take pictures of risks on their work sites, and deliver a higher level of detail than has ever been seen in the safety industry. Workers can also use the intelligent touch-screen to sign-off on audits, or create drawings that can later be printed.

A simple form-building interface gives users the power to create their own audits, allowing them to quickly convert their own paper audits into digital templates for unlimited use. SafetyCulture also provides a variety of ready-to-use audit templates on the SafetyCulture Secure Online Cloud free of charge. iAuditor means users can be performing audits in a matter of minutes.

iAuditor also gives users the option to share their auditing templates with the SafetyCulture Cloud, for other iAuditor users to download and use in their own audits. This collaborative approach to safety means that industries can learn from best practice and avoid making the same mistakes that other industries have made in the past.

The Internet is built into the core of iAuditor, with the ability to instantly email completed audits, along with any photographs and drawings, to open on any computer, tablet or smartphone. By sharing safety information in real-time, teams can work safer and more efficiently than ever before.

iAuditor takes a collaborative approach to safety, by removing barriers to implementing safety in the workplace. Safety can now be practised in a fast and concise manner, allowing the sharing of safety information to help the world work safer.

Within hours of being listed in Apple’s App store, the app has been download over 2000 times and users are sharing a range of templates from across the world. SafetyCulture’s Managing Director, Luke Anear says, “We have seen people using the app in ways we never imagined. From hospital checklists for defibrillators to hotel quality control audits and much more. It is very exciting to see people adopting innovations such as this and working together to improve workplace safety.”

iAuditor can be downloaded free of charge from www.safetyculture.com.au/iAuditor

iAuditor builds upon the success of the risk assessment app iJSA for iPhone in October 2011, and iJSA for iPad in December 2011.

OHS News

The incident happened on 30 July 2010. The court heard that the worker was packing frankfurts on the company’s processing machine when the plastic wrapping got stuck and had to be removed. The machine was switched off and the guarding was removed. The victim was clearing the blockage when a workers who was unaware that work was still being done, turned the machine on. Her hand was trapped between a hot plate and the top of the machine. The victim suffered crush injuries and burns to her hand.

An investigation found out that the company was aware that the machine did not comply with Australian standards.

Magistrate Cottrell considered the company’s guilty plea, cooperation with the investigation, subsequent remedial measures and the fact that it was in the process of addressing safety issues when the incident happened.

The court was told that changes to the machine’s guarding were made by the company immediately after the incident.

WorkSafe Manufacturing, Logistics and Agriculture Director, Ross Pilkington said that appropriate guarding is important in many businesses, especially in the manufacturing industry.

“Appropriate guarding is one of the easiest steps that can be taken to ensure workers do not injure themselves,” said Mr Pilkington.

“Equipment maintenance often comes at little to no cost and ensures workers get home safely at the end of the day.”

“This incident could have been easily prevented if there was an effective lockout-tag out (LOTO) system in place to effectively prevent the accidental starting of machinery.”

“Businesses need to constantly look at ways they can make their workplaces as safe as possible.

“If there are instances where guarding is not doing its job, or machines can operate without, employers need to fix this as a matter of urgency. Not doing so is just not worth it.”

OHS News

The company was also ordered to pay court costs of $ 2,894.52.

The Bayswater-based company pleaded guilty to one charge of failing to provide or maintain systems of work under Section 21(1)&(2)(a) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act.

In March 2010, the company director, three apprentices and a sub-contractor were replacing roof tiles on a storm-damaged house.

An apprentice was carrying buckets of cement up a ladder to the roof where the director was working.

Once on the roof, the apprentice lost his footing and fell to the ground. There was no guard-railings or fall protection in place.

Although he was not injured from the fall, wet cement splashed into his left eye and he ultimately lost sight in that eye.

The court was told the fall and the splashing of the wet cement into his eye was not responsible for the loss of the eye, but set off a chain of events that led to it.

The Magistrate said the $ 7500 fine would be a serious impost on a small business that made only a ‘modest profit’.

The acting director of WorkSafe’s Construction Division, Allan Beacom, said the provision of safe systems of work, including fall protection, was among the most fundamental of construction industry safety measures.

“It is enormously frustrating that this most fundamental of issues in construction work, and roof tiling in particular, must still be a focus of WorkSafe’s law enforcement activity.

“Despite WorkSafe inspectors issuing notices requiring safety improvements or outright prohibiting dangerous work and many prosecutions, there is still a core of people in this industry who think the law does not apply to them or that a particular situation does not require compliance.

“The outcome in this matter was a very serious injury to a young worker who was owed a much higher duty of care by his employer.

“Apart from the many deaths that have happened as a result of falls from height, the risk of brain damage, ending up in a wheelchair, broken bones or other injuries is high if fall protection is not used.

“In this case the company knew or should have known that the work being undertaken was high risk construction work requiring fall protection.”

OHS News

The company was also ordered to pay court costs of $ 2,894.52.

The Bayswater-based company pleaded guilty to one charge of failing to provide or maintain systems of work under Section 21(1)&(2)(a) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act.

In March 2010, the company director, three apprentices and a sub-contractor were replacing roof tiles on a storm-damaged house.

An apprentice was carrying buckets of cement up a ladder to the roof where the director was working.

Once on the roof, the apprentice lost his footing and fell to the ground. There was no guard-railings or fall protection in place.

Although he was not injured from the fall, wet cement splashed into his left eye and he ultimately lost sight in that eye.

The court was told the fall and the splashing of the wet cement into his eye was not responsible for the loss of the eye, but set off a chain of events that led to it.

The Magistrate said the $ 7500 fine would be a serious impost on a small business that made only a ‘modest profit’.

The acting director of WorkSafe’s Construction Division, Allan Beacom, said the provision of safe systems of work, including fall protection, was among the most fundamental of construction industry safety measures.

“It is enormously frustrating that this most fundamental of issues in construction work, and roof tiling in particular, must still be a focus of WorkSafe’s law enforcement activity.

“Despite WorkSafe inspectors issuing notices requiring safety improvements or outright prohibiting dangerous work and many prosecutions, there is still a core of people in this industry who think the law does not apply to them or that a particular situation does not require compliance.

“The outcome in this matter was a very serious injury to a young worker who was owed a much higher duty of care by his employer.

“Apart from the many deaths that have happened as a result of falls from height, the risk of brain damage, ending up in a wheelchair, broken bones or other injuries is high if fall protection is not used.

“In this case the company knew or should have known that the work being undertaken was high risk construction work requiring fall protection.”

OHS News

Under the new work health and safety harmonised laws, incident notification requirements have changed. Each State faces varying degrees of change based on their pre-existing health and safety laws. One major area of change concerns reporting dangerous occurrences – in particular, collapse, overturn, failure or malfunction of “authorised’ plant.

During this time of transition, earthmoving machinery operators may be confused about when to notify under the requirements for authorised plant and the different notification requirements for States that have not yet adopted the new laws. This article provides a summary of incident notification requirements under harmonised laws and an outline of the requirements for each State that has not adopted the new laws.

 The Model Work Health and Safety Act (2011) requires Persons Conducting a Business or Undertaking (PCBU) to notify their Regulator in the event of a death, serious injury/illness or dangerous incident that arises out of the conduct of the business of undertaking.

This means that the PCBU (that could include an employer, manager, Director, CEO etc) must immediately notify (via telephone, email or other electronic means), if an incident occurs that fits the definition of “notifiable”.

For example, the Principal Contractor should notify the State Regulator if a notifiable incident occurs as a result of the work being conducted on the work site. The death or serious injury could include any person (including self-employed persons and members of the public).

Under the harmonized laws, a serious injury includes those which require immediate treatment as an inpatient (which means being admitted to the hospital, not just waiting in the emergency room) and immediate treatment for amputation to any part of the body, serious head, eye, burn, laceration injuries, separation of skin (such as scalping or de-gloving), spinal injury, loss of bodily function, or medical treatment required within 48 hours of exposure to any substance.

As the Model laws closely resemble Victoria’s existing notification requirements under the OHS Regulations (2007), it is useful to look at the definitions of these incidents provided by WorkSafe Victoria.

For example, a serious injury includes mechanisms such as penetration or fracture to skull/spine, penetration to eye, injury to head/eye from chemicals or hot metal burns, and lacerations that may involve one or more deep cuts or tears to flesh or tissue that requires stitches or treatments to prevent blood loss and infection. Loss of bodily functions may include loss of sight in one eye (or both), loss of other senses such as taste, smell, hearing, loss of consciousness (including from a blow to the head), any paralysis to limbs and loss of the function of an internal organ.  Interestingly, if a worker decides to battle on without receiving medical treatment, notification must still take place if the injury would reasonably warrant the treatment.

A PCBU must also notify their State Regulator in the event of a “dangerous incident”. Under the harmonized laws, this includes the following:

-       Uncontrolled escape, spill or leak of a substance

-       Uncontrolled implosion, explosion or fire

-       Uncontrolled escape of gas or steam

-       Electric shock

-       Fall or release from height, any plant, substance or thing

-       Collapse, overturn, failure or malfunction, damage to any plant required to be authorized for use (by license or registration) under the Model Regulations.

-       Partial/Total collapse of structure

-       Partial/Total collapse of excavation, or shoring supporting an excavation

-       Inrush of water, mud gas in an underground tunnel/excavation

-       Interruption of ventilation in an underground tunnel/excavation

-       Any other incident as prescribed in the Regulations.

Once a PBCU notifies the Regulator, the Regulator must give receipt of the call or advise that written notification must be provided with 48 hours. Further to this, instructions may be given to ensure the site is preserved.

Preserving the site includes any plant, structure, substance or thing associated with the incident, except where it is necessary to remove deceased persons, helping injured persons, essential activities to make the site safe, assist with police investigations and where an Inspector gives permission.  Records of the incident notification must be kept for 5 years.

Failing to report notifiable incidents under the harmonized laws can be costly.  Individuals can face a $ 10,000 fine and this increases to $ 50,000 for a Body Corporate.  These same amounts also apply to those who fail to preserve the site after an incident occurred.  Failing to keep records could end up costing an individual $ 5,000 and a Body corporate $ 25,000.

At present, New South Wales, Northern Territory, ACT and the Commonwealth have adopted the harmonized laws as they appear above for incident notification. Queensland has adopted the new laws with modifications including notification for serious illnesses for any infection where work was the contributing factor.

This includes illnesses arising from micro-organisms, providing treatment to others, contacting blood/body substances and contact with animal/animal parts (and subsequent zoonoses).

As Victoria, Tasmania, South Australia and Western Australia have not adopted the harmonized laws, their exiting legislation applies in each State.  It is important to note that each State has varying requirements for incident notification under their existing laws.

Although the incident  notification requirements under the Model legislation does reflect Victoria’s existing laws closely, there are some differences. Victoria’s legislation includes notification under the OHS Act, Regulations and the Equipment (Public Safety) Regulations for prescribed plant (including earthmoving machinery).

The main differences for Victorian workplaces are that if an incident occurs that may expose persons to an immediate risk to health and safety (similar to a dangerous incident although the persons must be in the area that is affected by the incident) and only an employer or self-employed person was exposed to the risk, it does not need to be reported. Another major difference is that written notification is automatically required within 48 hours and an Inspector can issue a Non-Disturbance Notice to preserve the site for up to 7 days for further investigation.

Under Tasmania’s Workplace Health and Safety Act (1995) an Inspector must be notified if persons are killed or suffer serious bodily injuries/illness or a dangerous occurrence takes places where persons in the vicinity could have been killed or suffered a serious bodily injury/illness. Follow-up written notification within 48 hours is also required.

A dangerous occurrence includes items similar to the harmonized laws, expect for the inclusion of damage to pressure equipment, load-bearing members of lifting machinery, scaffolds or amusement structures.

South Australian legislation is similar Tasmania but also includes reference to malfunction of breathing apparatus where persons were deprived of breathing air when working in an atmosphere that endangered their health.  SA legislation includes a catch-all reference to any other unintended or uncontrolled incident arising from operations at a workplace.

Incident notification requirements under the OHS Regulations (1996) for Western Australia differ to other States somewhat. A serious injury is defined as a fracture to skull, spine or pelvis, or any bone in the arm (apart from the wrist or hand) and any bone in the leg (apart from the ankle or foot).  Furthermore, it includes any other injury where a medical practitioner is likely to prevent an employee from working within 10 days of the injury.  The report must be made to the “Commissioner”, and a form with certain particulars of the injury/illness must be completed.

An area that may lead to some confusion involves the notification of a dangerous incident that includes the collapse, overturn, failure, malfunction and damage to any plant required to be ‘authorized for use’ under the Model WHS Regulations.  This means authorized for use by license, permits, registration or other authority.  Harmonised laws have followed Victoria’s lead in terms of not requiring licenses for operation of earthmoving machinery. Queensland has also removed the requirement for licensing to operate earthmoving machinery as part of their harmonized laws.  The only State that requires a license to operation earthmoving machinery is SA as they have not yet adopted the new laws. South Australia requires notification for damage to /malfunction of ‘other’ (non-load bearing equipment) plant. In summary, notification is not required in any State for collapse, overturn, failure of malfunction and damage to earthmoving machinery where a license is not required to operate and registration with relevant Authorities is not required.

For workplaces based in Queensland, ACT, New South Wales and Northern Territory, it is important to understand the changes to WHS laws and how they may affect incident notification requirements. Visit the website for the State/Territory (as detailed below) to find more information.

-       http://www.deir.qld.gov.au

-       http://www.worksafe.nt.gov.au

-       www.worksafe.act.gov.au

-       http://workcover.nsw.gov.au

OHS News

The bill seeks to replace the Office of the Australian Building and Construction Commissioner (ABCC) with the Office of the Fair Work Building Industry Inspectorate.

The bill also seeks to compulsorily obtain information or documents relevant to investigations.

Federal Independent MP Bob Katter has argued against the coercive power provisions in the bill. He said in parliament that he would move amendments to remove such provisions and restore the right to silence.

He supported other aspects of the bill, however. He said the existing laws brought in by the Howard Government made it difficult for workers to complain about safety problems.

The Australian Greens also oppose the coercive powers in the bill.

The ALP has argued that safeguards in the bill, such as the right to have a lawyer present and the right to refuse to give information on the grounds of legal professional privilege and public interest immunity, will ensure the powers are not abused. Also, the coercive powers are subject to a three-year sunset clause.

The Opposition wants to retain the ABCC.

The bill is also before a Senate Inquiry, which reports on February 29.

OHS News

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) district president, Steve Smyth said that the week-long strike will be the biggest in ten years. Workers coming from the company’s mines in Goonyella Riverside, Broadmeadow, Peak Downs, Saraji, Norwich Park, Gregory Crinum and Blackwater will participate in the demonstrations. The strike happens after a 15-month enterprise bargaining dispute between CFMEU and the company. Mr Smyth says that negotiations have broken down over the key issues of safety representatives, housing and equal work for equal pay.

“We’re apart in relation to local content, housing, safety, critical roles, flexibility of operations, equal pay/equal work.

“Obviously in the recent years it’s probably the largest dispute we’ve had dating back to probably even the late 1990s.”

In a statement, the company expressed its disappointment over the union’s action. They will not change their position on things that are vital for “ongoing competitiveness.”

In a report by ABC News, equities analyst Tim Morris said that the industrial action will have a significant impact on the world supply of coking coals, with customers in Asia affected the most.

“You’ve already got flooding affecting output from the east coast and Australia is one of the world’s largest suppliers to Asia, so it could have an impact on short-term pricing.

“If the tension continues, you could see some medium-term issues evolve.”

OHS News

Falls from earthmoving equipment may result in death or serious injury such as fractures, spinal cord injuries, concussions and brain damage. Plant operators and service personnel may be at risk of falls from earthmoving equipment during on- site inspection, maintenance or repairs. These risks must be managed.

WorkSafe considers the most practicable and economical method to protect workers from falls from earthmoving equipment is to have physical fall protection fitted. Where it is not reasonably practicable to do so, other control measures must be in place.

Identifying the Hazard

Workers may be at risk of a fall from earthmoving equipment when they perform tasks such as:

• accessing service and inspection points • refuelling • scheduled maintenance and cleaning (eg fluid checks and servicing) • unscheduled or breakdown repairs • removing or replacing vandal proof covers • carrying items to service points (grease guns, fluid containers) • adjusting operator controls, roofs, mirrors and seating.

Control Measures

Control measures to manage fall risks should follow the hierarchy of control and in many instances a combination of approaches will result in the best solution. Controls should be reviewed regularly and modified, if necessary, to ensure they remain effective.

1. Elimination

Eliminate the risk by working from the ground or a solid construction. For example:

• Relocate gauges and inspection points for pre-start checks to locations accessible from the ground.

• Use long handle tools to do cleaning tasks from the ground.

• Use designated ‘park-up’ areas that allow for safe access during service, maintenance and pre-start checks.

• Select equipment that removes the risk of falls through good design, such as: gauges and inspection points accessible from the ground; centralised greasing systems; steps that are designed to prevent the build up of dirt; and flexible greasing hoses accessible from ground level.

• Regularly maintain steps to repair damage and remove dirt build-up to reduce the risk of slips, trips and falls.

2. Physical fall protection

If not possible to eliminate the hazard, use physical fall prevention such as:

• intergrated guardrails • scaffolding • elevating work platforms • fixed work platforms • specialised service vehicles to provide safe access.

Integrated guardrails provide physical fall protection that is present at all times and does not rely on people to do the right thing when inspecting, servicing or repairing the equipment.

3. Work Positioning System

If it is not reasonably practicable to apply one of the above controls, use a work-positioning system such as a travel restraint system. If considering a work positioning system, you must also provide:

• designated anchor points (15kN capacity) • a harness and suitable length lanyard (rated fall arrest) • storage for harness and other system equipment • training for workers • a detailed safe work method statement (SWMS) for the task

(including inspection, set-up and use of the system) • increased supervision • procedures for the prompt rescue of a worker in the event of a fall.

Work-positioning systems are not the preferred option for earthmoving equipment as these controls rely on people to do the right thing when inspecting, servicing or repairing the equipment.

Note: Generally, harness systems must be used in fall restraint mode, not fall arrest mode, as fall heights from earthmoving equipment are too low for the system to arrest a fall.

4. Administrative controls and ladders

Administrative controls and ladders can also be used for some tasks; however these controls are the least effective in controlling the risk of falls. Ladders are not suitable for long duration or high force tasks. Administrative controls must be properly used, reviewed and maintained.

Safe work method statements

An SWMS must also be developed and followed if the fall height is more than two metres or the task is performed on a construction site and:

• there is movement of powered mobile plant;

• is on or adjacent to roadways or railways used by road or rail traffic;

• is over or adjacent to water or other liquids, if there is a risk of drowning.

Industry initiatives

A number of large civil construction projects and larger civil contractors have strict requirements for fall protection on earthmoving equipment. This includes ensuring:

• only plant with physical fall protection is permitted on-site or the operation of the plant is restricted (including prohibiting pre-start checks before sunrise)

• all trafficable surfaces on the plant are to have non-slip surfaces

• tracked vehicles are slewed to the correct orientation to enable safe access/egress to check and service points.

Purchasing earthmoving equipment

When purchasing or hiring earthmoving equipment, consider if workers will be protected from falls during refuelling, servicing, maintenance and repairs.

• are the pre-start check points accessible from ground level?

• are guardrails fitted to the areas where there is a fall risk?

• is there a protected means of access and egress to these areas?

Most manufacturers now produce earthmoving equipment with guardrail mounting points as standard and provide guardrails as an optional extra. There are also several manufacturers that produce after-market guardrails that can be fitted to existing plant.

OHS News