Author: Deborah Chick

Construction work can be hazardous, with SafeWork Australia data highlighting that 21 workers lost their lives because of a work-related incident in the construction industry in 2021.

The most common causes of worker fatalities were:

• Vehicle collisions (41%)
• Being hit by moving objects (13%)
• Falls from a height (11%)

In addition, there were over 15,500 serious workers’ compensation claims in 2019-20 relating to construction work. 

Employers have a duty to keep workers and their workplace safe. Learn more about duties under the model WHS laws for construction work.

You can also contact your WHS regulator for more information related to your state or territory.

 by Scott Barber, for Sourceable.

The following is guidance from the Working at Heights Association about being ready to rescue a worker who is injured when working at height.

#1 Update your Risk Assessment:

Always start with a thorough risk assessment early. If unsure, have it reviewed or approved by a rescue specialist. Remember, circumstances on site change regularly, be it weather or surrounding works, so make sure it is updated to reflect the actual job characteristics and don’t just use a general template.

Your working at height or confined space rescue plan is only as good as your risk assessment. So if your risk assessment isn’t in alignment with the risk profile, then you don’t really have an effective plan.

An incomplete risk assessment exposes any gaps in SWMS, and consequently, your rescue plan. Not accounting for site and job specific hazards . An out-of-date or inadequate risk assessment doesn’t cater for changes in the environment, and a last minute risk assessment may leave you scrambling for safety on-site.

#2 Specify Fit-for-Purpose Rescue Equipment

Highlight all potential rescue “hot-spots” on your site. Analyse each hot spot to understand your rescue equipment needs. Work with specialists to help identify the most practical and effective solution, taking into consideration the training and skills maintenance of the rescue team.

The wrong rescue equipment specification can lead to confusion, convoluted planning, and an ineffective response to an emergency. If the gear is not suitable for the rescue, you’ll be forced to improvise and compromise, and in a rescue situation, that significantly increases the risk to everyone.

#3 Scale-Up your Response Capability

Identify when, where and how often your team works at height. Use this frequency of work and the supporting risk profiles to inform your decisions around how much rescue cover you need. Ensure all required team members are trained accordingly in rescue techniques and procedures, or if high-risk, bring in a professional standby rescue team.

Not everyone requires rescue training but every site should have rescue-trained personnel. There should always be a rescue capability on-site, ready, with easily accessible equipment, and available to perform whenever and wherever there is work at height and/or the risk of a fall.

Maintaining a rescue capability can be challenging, particularly for smaller teams where everyone already has set roles or when rescue-trained personnel work across multiple sites.

There are alternatives to maintaining an in-house capability, but this requires utilising third-party stand-by rescue teams, which may be more viable for specialist works like shutdowns etc or when short of rescue cover.

#4 Practice, Practice, Practice

Set aside time to practice for a rescue. Ensure all equipment is on-site, inspected, accessible and ready for deployment. Have your practice supervised by a rescue-trained team member or qualified expert rescue trainer

Practice and skills maintenance is critical in assuring your team is ready to respond to an emergency incident. Assuming your team is prepared and comfortable to perform a rescue is dangerous, and places unnecessary risk

Practising your rescue plan is also a requirement under the Code of Practice, which requires evidence that your rescue plan is effective and can be implemented safely.

#5 Do a Daily “Rescue-Ready” Check

Have a pre-determined location for your rescue equipment. Inspect all items daily to confirm they’re safe and ready for use. Top-up your rescue gear as needed.

Every site has a daily pre-start procedure. Ensuring your rescue capability is intact should be a priority, alongside reviewing your risk assessments and SWMS. These go hand-in-hand, as any changes to the SWMS or risks on site may have a direct affect on the effectiveness of your rescue plan.

Is your rescue equipment secure, accessible and in the right location? Is it still intact? Is all the related PPE (harnesses, helmets, etc) complete? Is there anything about today (eg. weather, changes to the nature of work, team members away) that necessitates additional items or measures?

Remember, your rescue kit is only fast, easy and safe to use because it has everything you need and is ready to go. But, much like a first aid kit that’s been raided over time, an incomplete rescue kit could cost you dearly in an emergency.

Source: WorkSafe Victoria.

A residential building company and its director have been convicted and fined a total of $320,000 after a renderer was seriously injured when he fell 3.2 metres while working without fall protection.

Palladian Three Pty Ltd was sentenced in the Melbourne County Court today after earlier being found guilty of a single charge of failing to ensure, so far as was reasonably practicable, that the workplace was safe and without risks to health.

The company was convicted and fined $250,000.

Director Sach Sackl was also convicted and fined $70,000 after earlier being found guilty of a single charge of failing, as director, to ensure, so far as was reasonably practicable, that the workplace was safe and without risks to health.

The court heard the renderer fell while working from an unsecured plank on the exterior of the second floor of a unit under construction at Pascoe Vale in October 2016.

He was taken to hospital with serious injuries including a fractured skull and brain haemorrhage, broken ribs, a punctured lung, lacerated spleen, fractured arm and fractured ankle.

WorkSafe alleged that there was a risk of serious injury or death due to falling from the plank, which was 3.2 metres above ground and had no edge or fall protection.

The court found it was reasonably practicable for Palladian Three and Mr Sackl to ensure that passive fall prevention such as scaffolding was in place before the work began.

WorkSafe Executive Director of Health and Safety Narelle Beer said the serious risks associated with working at heights are well-known and there is no excuse for failing to provide safe workplaces.

“This was a blatant failure to protect workers, which sadly left one worker with significant injuries that could have easily been fatal,” Dr Beer said.

“Already this year there have been three deaths due to workplace falls,” she said.

“WorkSafe won’t hesitate to prosecute employers who fail in their duty of care to maintain a working environment that is safe and without risks to health.”

To prevent falls from height employers should first:

• Consider if they can eliminate the risk by doing all or some of the work on the ground or from a solid construction.

If that is not possible, they should use:

• A passive fall prevention device such as scaffolds, perimeter screens, guardrails, safety mesh or elevating work platforms.
• A positioning system, such as a travel-restraint system.
• A fall arrest system, such as a catch platform or safety nets.
• A fixed or portable ladder or implement administrative controls.

Article by Michael Biddle, for Sourceable.

Does my Height Safety Qualification Make Me a Safe Operator?

It’s not always an easy question to answer, as the reality is that there are many factors that determine a person’s competency.

There is a natural deferral point to this question – if the person holds a ‘Work Safety at Heights’ qualification with a Nationally recognised competency from a Registered Training Organisation (RTO), then surely this is the simple answer? In truth, it is only part of the answer to the question, and in many respects it might be that whilst people naturally defer to this answer, they may be ignoring the deeper risk in making decisions like this without considering all the key issues.

I have detailed below a summary of a number of key questions to consider when making a full assessment on whether to engage a contractor for working at height tasks or not and assess whether you’re placing yourself or your company at risk by using that person to perform tasks whilst working at height.

(1) Understand the tasks to be completed for the specific site / location – one of the first things to understand are the core tasks to actually be completed at height. Is there a possibility that these tasks can be done without having to work at height? Are there equipment or access methodologies to use that prevent the person from placing themselves at the risk of a fall in the first place? Ask your contractor to offer solutions or prescribe these methods before commencing work. That way you can assess if their proposed methods are valid / lowest risk.

(2) Are suitable documentation and procedures in existence to support the work to be carried out? – Can the contractor provide you with a suitable risk assessment of the individual site conditions that might be encountered during their work? What methods of access are they proposing and control measures will they implement to mitigate the risks? Typically the provision of well-documented Safe Work Method Statements (SWMS) incorporating methods of risk mitigation including rescue will be important to see. They should also detail the types of equipment to be used to perform the tasks and how and why these methods are used to mitigate the risks identified during the risk assessment process.

(3) Are they both theory and practicality qualified to perform the work at height? – A qualification is one thing, however with the current vocational training system in place, an RTO can deliver a ‘Safe Work at Heights’ qualification in alignment with the requirements of a Nationally recognised competency, however they do not need to prove their course is delivering safety of students.

The RTO system does provide adequate and relevant frameworks for the delivery of consistent training, however it does not participate in the quality control of the training itself. Once issued, a qualification does not expire. Technically therefore you could have successfully completed a course 10 years ago, however not be obliged to re-train or refresh your skills to gain a recertification of your qualifications.

Additionally, quality training providers will also be able to demonstrate that their students have undertaken a practical assessment of a person’s ability to use height safety equipment and work safely. The qualifications for competent operators will also likely reflect training in rescue techniques, the deployment of temporary access systems and using ladder climbing techniques such as using twin lanyards, rope adjustment and diversion anchors. Vendors issuing these qualifications that do not provide practical training are not fully executing on their duty of care to their students. If you can imagine a person undertaking an online course or half day course on working at heights might be issued the same qualification as someone with the same competency issued for a 1-2 day course. There is therefore going to be a major inconsistency between the standard of both courses.

One of the best examples to illustrate why this is important is someone achieving their drivers license. You are obliged to study content and then sit a theory exam before you can then undertake a practical test of your skills to follow the road rules and perform the safe operation of a vehicle.

These conditions are mandatory for all drivers, and yet are not mandatory for people working at height. So therefore the need to assess the merits of a qualification are the responsibility of the asset owner/their representative, in the absence of a formal / mandatory assessment process.

This issue is one of the greatest faults of height safety training in the VET system, as in my view as it gives both holders of the qualifications and the customers/companies they serve a false sense of security. To mitigate this risk, review the list of WAHA endorsed training providers and request other leading providers of training to provide evidence that they conduct/recommend refresher training at least every 2 years to overcome this area of concern.

(4) Does the person have previous experience in performing the specific work required to a high standard? – Experience is always a useful indicator of competency, but again, it’s only a part of the equation. Just because you have been doing a task for 5 years – perhaps you have been taking unnecessary risks in the way you’re performing those tasks and you’ve just been lucky that something serious hasn’t happened. Therefore do not rely solely on experience to make your decision.

(5) Does the company /operator promote the use of two-person teams when working remotely and at height or are they relying on someone using their mobile phone to call for help? – There are a significant number of companies that do not engage teams of two people to perform inspections at locations. Their belief and explanation is always – ‘if there is an incident, the operator can simply make a call for help from their mobile phone’.

What happens if the person has a heart attack and cannot move? What happens if the person falls over an edge and is injured in the process or drops their phone? How will a rescue be performed on that person if they are seriously injured and no-one knows of their injury for several hours? The use of single operators for inspection work may well be deemed appropriate if the inspection task can be done without other risks however you should be encouraged to contemplate this seriously in your decision making process before relying on a single-person operator or inspector to perform such tasks.

This list of areas for review is of course not exhaustive however it should provide adequate guidance for most decision making to assess a person / company’s ability to complete work at height. So I can only encourage you to look ‘beyond the ticket’ as a sign of capability to reduce your risk when choosing a company/person to perform work at height.

by Scott Barber for Sourceable.

Working at height is a high-risk activity and a leading cause of death and serious injury within the construction industry.

In fact, Safe Work Australia reports that between 1 January 2003 and 31 December 2015, 359 construction workers died as a result of falls from a height. This accounted for 37% of all fall related injuries and fatalities.

Dire consequences can result from an unsafe workplace, so height safety compliance is critically important.

As far as is practicable, the person responsible for any work being carried out needs to understand his or her obligations to managing the risk of someone falling from height. Precautions may include:

• That work is carried out either on the ground or from a solid construction.
• That there is a safe means of access and exit to a workplace.
• That the risk of falls is minimised by providing a fall prevention device, work positioning system or fall arrest system.

As the regulator, Safe Work Australia has provided information on its website that outlines the risks of working at height and how to manage these risks in line with the Australian Standards. For more information, see www.safeworkaustralia.com.au

Protecting workers from falls from height

Wherever practicable, protecting workers from the risk of a fall should be done by eliminating the need to work at height. If this is not possible, other preventative measures may include installation of fall prevention equipment.

This equipment is designed to prevent a fall and once installed, doesn’t require any further adjustment by workers using it. It may include:

• Guard rails or barriers.
• Fall Arrest harnesses, lanyards and safety lines.

Regardless, adequate fall protection to mitigate the risk of a fall is mandatory and systems should be designed to provide a safe system of work.

Fall prevention systems should be considered at the design and planning stage of any project and may include:

• Roof safety mesh
• Guard railings and barriers
• Scaffolding or elevated work platforms
• Fall prevention devices
• Work positioning systems

With any fall arrest system, work procedures should be developed on how to correctly install, use and maintain the system.

The importance of training and maintenance

Whilst fall protection equipment can assist in the management of risk, it will only provide the protection needed if workers are adequately trained in its use and the equipment is well maintained.

Maintaining PPE equipment helps to provide confidence and safety in the work arena, whereas quality training provides workers with knowledge on how to inspect their equipment before and after use, as well as how to clean and maintain it.

The Australian Standard AS/NZS1891.4 provides information on inspections and maintenance. It is referred to by the Regulators in their work practice documents, providing guidance for persons involved in working at height. Further information on the Standards can be found in the Working at Height Inspection Bulletins available from  www.waha.org.au

Web based products are required to be inspected six monthly by a Height Safety Equipment Inspector who is trained in the skills needed to detect faults in the equipment and to determine remedial action.

Why does equipment degrade?

There are a range of possible reasons why materials used in fall protection equipment degrade. This includes general wear and tear; abuse; edge/surface damage; ultraviolet light (certainly very prevalent in Australia); dirt; grit; chemicals; excessive loading; and if they have been used to protect a worker from a fall.

Textiles can deteriorate slowly with age regardless of use, however the most common cause of strength loss in textile equipment is through abrasion (either by grit working into the strands or by chafing against sharp or rough edges) or by other damage such as cuts. Any equipment that shows such signs of damage should be destroyed.

In addition, textile equipment which has suffered a high shock load (impact force), or that has had a load dropped onto it, should also be removed from use.

The Australian Standards AS/NZS1891.4 refers to AS/NZS1891.1, which specifies that harnesses or web-based height safety products should be removed from service and not used again after 10 years from date of manufacture.

Inspections:

It is essential that the person carrying out any inspection is competent to do so. In the case of pre-use checks, this is likely to be the user, however detailed and interim inspections should be carried out by a qualified Height Safety Equipment Inspector who should be sufficiently independent and impartial to allow them to make objective decisions, with appropriate and genuine authority to take the appropriate action.

This does not mean that inspector must necessarily be employed from an external company, although many companies and lone workers arrange do choose to outsource their inspections.

Employers should establish a regime for the inspection of equipment, drawn up by a competent person, which should include:

• A list of equipment to be inspected (including their unique identification);
• Frequency and type of inspection (pre-use checks, detailed inspection, interim inspection and servicing);
• Designated competent persons (Height Safety Equipment Inspector) to carry out the inspections (note that a competent person may need to be trained by a manufacturer or their authorised representative on specific PPE or other equipment and may need to have that training updated due to modification and upgrades);
• Action to be taken on finding defective products;
• Means of recording the inspections;
• Training of users;
• Means of monitoring the inspection regime to verify inspections are carried out accordingly.

Interim inspections may also be required in instances where the risk assessment has identified a risk that could result in significant deterioration of equipment, which may affect its integrity before the next detailed inspection is due.

This may be particularly necessary in arduous working environments that involve paints, chemicals, grit blasting operations and acidic or alkaline conditions. The results of interim inspections should be recorded and maintained.

Cleanliness and COVID-19:

Whereas there has always been the requirement for fall arrest equipment to be kept clean and dry, the arrival of COVID-19 virus has highlighted the need for increasing vigilance when it comes to cleaning and disinfecting equipment.

It is reasonable to assume that construction industry workers may come into contact with a person who unknowingly has the virus. Equipment used by this worker could become contaminated, with a risk of spreading the virus to other workers.

Cleanliness is king in this environment. Research suggests that the virus can survive on hard surfaces such as plastic and stainless steel for up to 72 hours (three days), particularly as many work surfaces and PPE have hard surfaces.

There appears to be little research on how long the virus lives on fabric. Although it may be less time than on hard surfaces, the best method of defence is to clean and disinfect your PPE regularly.

The Department of Health provides information on the need to clean and disinfect PPE. Information can be found at Department of Health’s Coronavirus (COVID-19) Environmental cleaning and disinfection principles for health and residential care facilities. www.health.gov.au

The Department of Health recommends disinfectants suitable for use on hard surfaces (ie. surfaces where any spilt liquid pools and does not soak in). This may include alcohol in a concentration of at least 70%; chlorine bleach in a concentration of 1000 parts per million; oxygen bleach; or wipes and sprays that contain quaternary ammonium compounds. These chemicals will be labelled as ‘disinfectant’ on the packaging and must be diluted or used following the instructions on the packaging.

Concentrated bleach can damage polyester fibres, whereas diluting the bleach may reduce this damaging effect. CHOICE Australia recommends that when cleaning woven materials such as webbings found in fall arrest equipment, that they be cleaned in a mild soapy warm solution, rinsed in clean water and then treated with a disinfectant. For more information, see www.choice.com.au

From all this, one thing is certain. Coronavirus has not only changed the way we work, but also added another layer to ensuring health and safety in the workplace as we adapt and refine our work methods moving forward.

A mutton abattoir has been convicted and fined $35,000 after an employee fell from a raised platform and hit his head in 2019.

Ararat Abattoirs Pty Ltd pleaded guilty in the Ararat Magistrates’ Court on Friday to one charge of failing to provide and maintain safe systems of work, so far as was reasonably practicable.

The company was also ordered to pay costs of $2,930.

The court heard that workers would stand on a 1.5-metre-high platform to load refrigerated shipping containers with boxes of mutton.

On 2 November 2019, a worker was performing this task when he fell from the platform, hitting his head on the ground. He was taken to hospital and discharged two days later.

A WorkSafe investigation revealed that employees were at risk because the task of loading the shipping container was being performed on a raised platform, in proximity to an unprotected edge, with no fall protection in place. 

WorkSafe Executive Director of Health and Safety Narelle Beer said all workplaces must ensure they are doing everything reasonably possible to prevent the risk of falls from heights.

“Already this year there has been one death due to workplace falls. That comes after eight deaths and 1,307 injury claims for falls from heights last year,” Dr Beer said.

“Thankfully, nobody was killed in this case, but it serves as a warning to all employers to ensure they take proper measures to reduce or eliminate such risks.”

Tips on controlling the risk of falls in the workplace:

• If possible, perform any work on the ground.
• Use a passive fall prevention device (e.g. scaffolding or guard railing).
• Use a work positioning system (e.g. industrial rope access system).
• Install a fall arrest system (e.g. a catch platform).

Source: WorkSafe Victoria

A heavy-duty trailer manufacturer has been convicted and ordered to pay more than $30,000 after a trailer fell while being lifted, narrowly missing three workers.

MaxiTRANS Australia Pty Ltd was sentenced in the Ballarat Magistrates’ Court on 18 January after pleading guilty to a charge under the Occupational Health and Safety Act for failing to maintain systems of work that are, as far as is reasonably practicable, safe and without risk to health.

The company was fined $25,000 and ordered to pay costs of $5,742.

The court heard that on 20 June 2018, three workers were using two cranes to lift a partially constructed trailer at its Wendouree premises. Workers usually did this by attaching chains to lifting lugs, which were fixed to the trailer using a magnetic drill.

However, on this date, the magnetic drills were being repaired. The court heard that workers instead looped a chain and hook around rails at the front and rear of the trailer, before lifting.

As a worker was placing a support stand beneath the raised trailer it fell – hitting the stand, rolling to the right and narrowly missing all three workers.

WorkSafe Executive Director of Health and Safety Narelle Beer said WorkSafe would not hesitate to prosecute employers who fail in their duty of care to maintain a working environment that is safe and without risks to health.

“This was a significant failure, which could easily have been catastrophic for the three workers involved,” Dr Beer said.

“The risks associated with working with cranes are well-known and there is no excuse for failing to ensure that safe systems are in place to protect workers.”

When using cranes, measures to manage the risks include:

• Selecting the proper crane and lifting equipment for the task, size and weight of the load.
• Ensuring cranes are maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications and requirements, and operated within their design parameters.
• Checking that crane operators and persons connecting loads have the skills, training and licences to operate safely.
• Creating and adhering to safe systems of work and ensuring all workers are properly trained and competent before commencing the task.
• Considering environmental factors such as weather, ground bearing capacity, overhead and underground services such as powerlines and pipes/drains, and ensuring non-essential persons are excluded from the area of operation.
• For construction work, ensuring a Safe Work Method Statement (SWMS) is created and adhered to.

Source: WorkSafe Victoria

Original Article Posted at Safety Solutions Magazine.

Western Australia has released exposure drafts of regulations for the Work Health and Safety Act 2020, ahead of the commencement of major work health and safety (WHS) reforms in March 2022. The Act brings together work health and safety for general industry, mines and petroleum operations, all under a single WHS Act. Releasing the exposure drafts of the supporting regulations will provide an opportunity for all participants in Western Australian workplaces to prepare themselves to meet the requirements of the new Act and to improve safety in their workplaces.

The regulations will come into effect in March 2022; Industrial Relations Minister Stephen Dawson has encouraged the community to begin familiarising themselves with the regulatory requirements of the Work Health and Safety regime that will come into force in 2022. Drafting the WHS regulations for all three sectors, which are needed to allow the WHS Act to be proclaimed, was a complex process. In recognition of the importance of this legislation, the state government has allocated significant resources to the drafting process and partnered with peak employee and employer bodies to ensure a wide distribution of information about the WHS laws. This approach will complement promotional activities being undertaken by the Department of Mines, Industry Regulation and Safety to other important stakeholders, as well as a government-funded education and awareness campaign.

“Every Western Australian has the right to expect a safe workplace where at the end of their day’s work they can return home to their loved ones uninjured and healthy. I encourage everyone to take the opportunity to access the exposure draft regulations and to take the time that is available to prepare themselves,” Dawson said.

The exposure drafts of WHS regulations can be accessed below:

• Work Health and Safety (General) Regulations 2022 (exposure draft)
• Work Health and Safety (Mines) Regulations 2022 (exposure draft)
• Work Health and Safety (Petroleum and Geothermal Energy Operations) Regulations 2022 (exposure draft)

Other applicable legislation:

• Petroleum (Submerged Lands) (Pipelines) Regulations 2022 (exposure draft)

The Department of Mines, Industry Regulation and Safety will be running WHS update sessions during January and February. The sessions will be held in Perth metro and regional areas, with live streaming where possible. Webinar recordings and videos on WHS implementation are also available.

Source: SafeWork Australia.

Have your workplace arrangements changed recently? It’s important to remember that COVID-19 risk management is an ongoing process, not a one-off. See our website for information on risk assessments, including how to review and monitor control measures and assess any new or changed risks.

Risk management is a proactive process that helps you respond to change and facilitate continuous improvement in your business. It should be planned, systematic and cover all reasonably foreseeable hazards and associated risks.  

A risk assessment involves considering what could happen if someone is exposed to a hazard (for example, COVID-19) and the likelihood of it happening. A risk assessment can help you to determine: 

• how severe a risk is 
• whether any existing control measures are effective 
• what action you should take to control the risk, and 
• how urgently the action needs to be taken. 

The exposure of your workers and/or customers/clients to COVID-19 is a foreseeable risk that must be assessed and managed in the context of your operating environment. 

A risk assessment will assist to: 

• identify which workers are at risk of exposure 
• determine what sources and processes are causing the risk 
• identify if and what kind of control measures should be implemented, and 
• check the effectiveness of existing control measures. 

A risk assessment can be undertaken with varying degrees of detail depending on the type of hazard and the information, data and resources that you have available. It can be as simple as a discussion with your workers or involve specific risk analysis tools and techniques developed for specific risks or recommended by safety professionals. For some complex situations, expert or specialist advice may be useful when conducting a risk assessment. 

When should I do a risk assessment?

Managing work health and safety risks is an ongoing process that needs attention over time, but particularly when any changes affect your work activities. 

All currently operating businesses must assess the risks associated with exposure to COVID-19 and implement control measures to manage those risks. They must also assess any other new or changed risks arising from COVID-19, for example, customer aggression, high work demand or working in isolation. 

You must also undertake a risk assessment with response to risks to any vulnerable workers working in your business. Risk needs to be assessed and mitigated with consideration of the characteristics of the worker, the workplace and the work. This includes ensuring vulnerable people are redeployed to roles that don’t involve physical contact with customers, where possible. Where risk cannot be appropriately mitigated, employers and workers should consider alternate arrangements to accommodate a workplace absence. For more, go the Vulnerable workers information. 

Other examples of when businesses must undertake a risk assessment with respect to COVID-19, include where a business: 

• changes work practices, procedures or the work environment 
• recommences operations following a shut down 
• increases operations following a period of reduced operations 
• introduces workers back into the workplace following the cessation of working from home or stand-down arrangements 
• is responding to workplace incidents (e.g. where a worker has tested positive to COVID-19) 
• is responding to concerns raised by workers, health and safety representatives, or others at the workplace 

Risk assessments should be reviewed periodically as the operating environment changes (for example, in response to changes in COVID-19 cases or changes to public health orders) or when new information on workplace risks becomes available. This should include the periodic review of control measures implemented to ensure their ongoing appropriateness and effectiveness based on the latest information.

How do I do a risk assessment?

The model Code of Practice: How to manage work health and safety risks provides practical guidance about how to manage WHS risks through a risk assessment process. See also our information on key considerations for businesses to take into account when assessing the risks associated with COVID-19, as well as an example risk register.

A safe and healthy workplace does not happen by chance or guesswork. You have to think about what could go wrong at your workplace and what the consequences could be. Then you must do whatever you can (in other words, whatever is ‘reasonably practicable’) to eliminate or minimise health and safety risks arising from your business or undertaking. 

This process is known as risk management and involves the four steps (see Figure 1 below): 

• Identify hazards—find out what could cause harm. 
• Assess risks, if necessary—understand the nature of the harm that could be caused by the hazard, how serious the harm could be and the likelihood of it happening. This step may not be necessary if you are dealing with a known risk with known controls. 
• Control risks – implement the most effective control measure that is reasonably practicable in the circumstances and ensure it remains effective over time. 
• Review hazards and control measures to ensure they are working as planned. 

This process will be implemented in different ways depending on the size and nature of your business. Larger businesses and those in sectors where workers are exposed to more or higher risks are likely to need more complex, sophisticated risk management processes. 

Consultation with workers and their health and safety representatives is required at each step of the risk management process. By drawing on the experience, knowledge and ideas of your workers, you are more likely to identify all hazards and choose effective control measures. 

Where do I go to find information about risks and control measures?

General risks – Safe Work Australia’s website has information on known risksfor some industries and activities. Your industry association, jurisdictional WHS regulator and health department are also good sources of information.  

Business specific risks – You and your workers know your business better than anyone. Working in consultation with your workers you can identify risks specific to your business and ways these can be addressed. If you need help with this you can call your WHS regulator for advice. For example, the Italian deli owner who knows they have a queue for their specialty bread every Saturday morning could allow customers to call ahead and have a loaf put aside for them to avoid the early morning queue. 

The unexpected – Some risks you might not be able to predict but you can pick them up by monitoring the work environment and checking in with your workers. For example, the local café offering home delivery during COVID-19 might suddenly find the demand is much higher than before but keeping up with this demand gives the chef a sore back. The café in consultation with their staff might put in anti-fatigue mats or re-task staff who used to wait tables to assist the chef.  

How do I know what is ‘reasonably practicable’?

Deciding what is reasonably practicable to protect workers or other persons from harm requires taking into account and weighing up all relevant matters, including (but not limited to): 

• Likelihood of the hazard or risk occurring – the greater the likelihood of a risk occurring, the greater the significance of this factor when weighing up all matters and determining what is reasonably practicable 
• Degree of harm that might result from the hazard or risk – the greater the degree of harm that might result from the hazard, the more significant this factor will be when weighing up all matters to determine what is reasonably practicable. Where the degree of harm that might result from the risk or hazard is high, a control measure may be reasonably practicable even if the likelihood of the hazard or risk occurring is low.  
• Knowledge about the hazard or risk, and ways of minimising or eliminating the risk – this must take into account what the duty holder actually knows and what a reasonable person in the duty holder’s position would reasonably be expected to know 
• Availability and suitability of ways to eliminate or minimise the risk – requires consideration of what is available and suitable for the elimination or minimisation of risk, and 
• Costs associated with the available ways of eliminating or minimising the risk – after assessing the extent of the risk and the available ways of eliminating or minimising the risk, consideration can be given to whether the cost of implementing a control measure is grossly disproportionate to the risk.  

The highest level of protection that is reasonably practicable in the circumstances should be provided to eliminate or minimise the hazard or risk. 

See also our Guide: How to determine what is reasonably practicable to meet a health and safety duty and the model Code of Practice: Work health and safety consultation, cooperation and coordination. 

What do the ‘costs’ associated with eliminating or minimising a risk include?

The costs of implementing a particular control measure may include (but are not limited to) matters such as:  

• costs of purchase, installation, maintenance and operation of the control measure  
• any impact on productivity as a result of the introduction of the control measure, such as reductions in output and or increases in work hours. 

When considering costs you should also take account of any savings that may result from reductions in incidents, injuries, illnesses and staff turnover, as well as improvements in staff productivity. 

How do I determine whether the costs of eliminating or minimising a particular risk are ‘reasonably practicable’?

To determine whether expenditure to eliminate or minimise a risk is ‘reasonably practicable’ in the circumstances, you must consider: 

• the likelihood and degree of harm of the hazard or risk,  
• the reduction in the likelihood and/or degree of harm that will result if the control measure is adopted, and 
• the available ways of eliminating or minimising the risk. 

The more likely the hazard or risk, or the greater the harm that may result from it, the less weight should be given to the costs of eliminating the hazard or risk. 

Where there are several options for eliminating or minimising a risk and they would achieve the same level or reduction in the likelihood or degree of harm, a duty holder may choose to apply one or more of the less costly options. However, choosing a low-cost option that provides less protection, simply because it is cheaper, is unlikely to be considered ‘reasonably practicable’. 

Importantly, the question of what is reasonably practicable in a particular circumstance is determined objectively, not by reference to your capacity to pay or other individual circumstances.  

If you cannot afford to implement a control measure that, based on the risk assessment and weighing up of the factors listed above, is necessary to eliminate or minimise the risk, you should not engage in the activity that gives rise to that risk. 

How do I know if the costs of eliminating or minimising a risk are ‘grossly disproportionate’?

To determine whether the costs of eliminating or minimising a risk are ‘grossly disproportionate’ you must balance the likelihood of the risk occurring and degree of harm that might result, with the cost of the control measure. 

It may not be necessary to implement costly control measures to eliminate or minimise a risk that has a low likelihood of occurring and would cause minor harm. However, it may be reasonable to apply less expensive controls to further lower the likelihood of the risk. 

What do I do if I find the costs associated with eliminating or minimising a risk are ‘grossly disproportionate’?

Where the cost of implementing control measures is grossly disproportionate to the risk, implementation may not be reasonably practicable and is therefore not required. The duty holder must then use a less expensive way to minimise the likelihood or degree of harm. 

Resources

• Checklist – Key considerations when undertaking a COVID-19 risk assessment
• Template and Example COVID-19 risk register 
• Workplace checklist – What can I do to keep my workers safe at the workplace and limit the spread of COVID-19?

Original Article Published with Safety Solutions Magazine.

Engineering company Andrew Buchanan Engineering Ltd has been fined $300,000, following an incident in which a worker was fatally crushed at a Leitchville factory in Victoria in 2017. The company was sentenced without conviction after pleading guilty to two charges of failing to ensure, so far as was reasonably practicable, that the workplace under its management and control was safe and without risks to health.

The company was engaged to oversee the dismantling and packing of equipment at a decommissioned cheese factory, for relocation to New Zealand, when the incident occurred. However, there was no representative from Andrew Buchanan Engineering on site when a condenser weighing 770 kg was moved into a closed-top shipping container with a crane in December 2017.

Two workers were inside the container, preparing to remove skates from underneath the condenser, when it fell off a jack and crushed them. A 59-year-old man died at the scene, while another man was seriously injured. An investigation by WorkSafe Victoria revealed that there were reasonably practicable measures available that could have reduced or eliminated the risks associated with the task, including using an open-top or flat rack shipping container. The company also failed to ensure that the workers packing the equipment were appropriately supervised.

WorkSafe Victoria Executive Director of Health and Safety Dr Narelle Beer said it is crucial for duty holders to ensure proper plans are in place before high-risk work commences. “Workers must be provided with clear instructions on how to perform tasks safely, especially when working with heavy machinery. WorkSafe will not hesitate to prosecute duty holders who fail to do all that is reasonably practicable to protect health and safety in workplaces under their management or control,” said Dr Beer.

A-1 Engineering Pty Ltd has also been charged and will appear in the Bendigo County Court for an application on 2 February 2022.

To manage risks, WorkSafe Victoria urges duty holders to ensure that work involving lifting or suspending loads is thoroughly planned, to identify designated lifting areas, landing areas and load travel corridors. Duty holders should also ensure that the appropriate shipping container configuration is chosen for the specific piece of equipment being loaded or unloaded, and that an appropriate mechanical aid is selected to lift or move heavy machinery in a controlled manner. Workers must also receive the necessary instruction, training and supervision to enable them to perform high-risk tasks safely.