Broadcast in 2015 en The agile leader – engaging with risk <div class="node node--type-media node--view-mode-rss layout layout--onecol"> <div class="layout__region layout__region--content"> <div class="field field--name-body field--type-text-with-summary field--label-above"> <div class="field__label">Body</div> <div class="field__item"><p style="line-height: 20.79px;">Work health and safety doesn’t exist in isolation – managing all the business risks together will support a business’s strategic direction and improve both productivity and workers’ health and safety. And it’s never finished – we need to remain alert for new risks.</p> <p style="line-height: 20.79px;">Safe Work Australia will continue to strive to make our country a world leader in health and safety. We will promote the value of health and safety to the community and its links with Australia's future prosperity.</p> <p style="line-height: 20.79px;">To achieve improvements in work health and safety there are challenges to meet, and we can help meet them by:</p> <ul style="line-height: 20.79px;"> <li>improving Australians' work health and safety knowledge and skills, and</li> <li>helping business leaders fully understanding the complexity of their operations including key health and safety risks, so they can ensure the work environment, processes and systems support health and safety.</li> </ul> <h2>Who is this presentation for?</h2> <p>Everyone from the corner office to the shop floor.</p> <h2>About the presenter</h2> <p>Michelle Baxter has been the CEO of Safe Work Australia since November 2014.<br /> Michelle has more than 20 years of public sector experience in employment and workplace relations and work health and safety policy, and is admitted to practise as a Barrister and Solicitor in the ACT.</p> <h2>Useful resources</h2> <ul style="line-height: 20.8px;"> <li>Australian Work Health and Safety Strategy Action Area <a href="/node/50"><em>Leadership and culture</em></a></li> <li><em><a href="/node/520">Workplace health and safety, business productivity and sustainability </a></em>– a report produced for Safe Work Australia by the Centre for Workplace Leadership at Melbourne University</li> <li>OHS Body of Knowledge – <em><a href="">Risk and decision-making chapter</a></em></li> </ul> </div> </div> <div class="field transcript-group"> <div class="field__label">Transcript</div> <div class="clearfix text-formatted field field--name-field-html-transcript field--type-text-long field--label-hidden field__item"><p><strong>The Agile Leader – engaging with risk</strong></p> <p><strong>Closing address by Michelle Baxter, Chief Executive Officer, Safe Work Australia</strong></p> <p>§ (Music Playing) §</p> <p><strong>Michelle Baxter: </strong></p> <p>We've come to the end of National Safe Work Month and of our 2015 Virtual Seminar Series. </p> <p>Hi. I'm Michelle Baxter the CEO of Safe Work Australia, the national policy body whose job is to improve work health and safety and workers' compensation arrangements across Australia.</p> <p>The theme for this year's safety month was "Be Safe, Be Healthy, Because…" I hope you used the month to focus on health and safety in your workplace and especially to reflect on your own reasons for being safe and healthy at work. </p> <p>A key activity for the month was our Virtual Seminar Series. This year was the second time we have used this format to promote workplace health and safety. Last year's seminar materials were viewed or downloaded nearly 70,000 times and we are expecting this year's will be just as popular.</p> <p>This October we focused on safety throughout supply chains, and good work design, and the industry spotlight fell on construction and manufacturing. Ann Sherry, the Chair of Safe Work Australia, spoke passionately about the value that good work health and safety brings to business productivity. She reminded us that good, safe work doesn't just help us avoid costs but that well designed work can be more productive and innovative and make your businesses more viable. </p> <p>Throughout the month a range of work health and safety experts shared their insights and experiences but beyond this year's seminars and behind the scenes our Safe Work Australia Members are also engaged in dynamic conversations about Australia's comparative work health and safety performance. While it depends on how and what is counted, if we look at workplace fatalities Australia is in about sixth position compared to other developed countries. Our Members have challenged all of us to do better: to ultimately see Australia ranked in the top three in the world for work health and safety.</p> <p>To achieve this we need to meet two very significant challenges. </p> <p>Firstly we need to shift negative community perceptions and behaviours about work health and safety and secondly, we need a workforce and business leaders who really understand work health and safety with the knowledge and the skills to effectively and efficiently manage risks. And we need the resources to support them.</p> <p>The first challenge is the need to shift the commonly held belief that worker carelessness is the main cause of injuries. This is really dangerous because it focuses on the individual and ignores why the worker behaves that way – perhaps as a result of unrealistic time pressures, fatigue, inadequate training or resources. How are we shifting this attitude? What do we know about what drives workplace decisions about risk and what influences people's behaviour when they are at work?</p> <p>We know that people don't always behave rationally and carefully. Our decisions are influenced by many factors and biases which we may not always recognise. We know some of our actions are quite consciously planned and deliberate while others are almost automatic or unconscious. Our deliberate actions reflect our values and conscious choices. Traditionally we have tended to assume that we need to change people's deliberative decision making by providing information and appealing to their values. While this is certainly important, recent research is questioning whether we are underestimating the contribution of the automatic or non-deliberative processes behind our decisions.</p> <p>So a challenge for those of us who care about workers' health and safety is how we influence both people's conscious and unconscious decisions and behaviours. Behavioural economists have been extremely successful in highlighting to policymakers the potential to change behaviour by going beyond mere information-based campaigns. Instead we need to design the work environment and the communication tools we use to favour the behaviours we want and discourage those we don't want.</p> <p>The former Chief of Army, Lieutenant-General David Morrison warned "The standard you walk past is the standard you accept", and this applies just as much to work health and safety as to any other area. Leaders' attitudes to how their businesses run and the behaviours they ignore will directly affect workplace health and safety. People will learn from what you say but they will learn a lot more if your actions are consistent with your words.</p> <p>So a better, holistic and more effective approach is to address the leadership and culture of the workplace and how risks are managed. Leaders need to ensure work processes and systems support safety before trying to influence people's behaviour at work. Unacceptable workplace risks have their roots in poor corporate decision making. When business leaders and managers understand how comprehensive risk management can actually support their strategic directions, both the business's productivity and workers' health and safety will improve.</p> <p>It's important to recognise that it's not always possible to totally eliminate all risk. </p> <p>The law demands that we manage risk "so far as is reasonably practicable". To completely eliminate all risk would stifle innovation and paralyse business activity, growth and creativity. In fact the enemy of good practical work health and safety is not risk itself but complacency. We need to constantly question "What are we missing?" This is what some leaders have called being in a state of chronic unease. </p> <p>If business leaders are to move their organisations beyond mere compliance and a box-ticking approach to work health and safety they need to fully understand the complexity of their operations including their key health and safety risks. Business leaders must welcome hearing the bad news as well as the good and they must use this knowledge to actively engage with and manage risk. If they do this well their organisations will be more flexible and more agile, able to then respond to shifting demands and seize the opportunities which will help make them profitable.</p> <p>To meet that second challenge that I mentioned earlier we need to improve all Australians' work health and safety knowledge and skills and give them the resources they need to implement good practice. This is one of the key outcomes of the Australian Work Health and Safety Strategy but there are some important questions to ponder. </p> <p>How do we get people's attention in a world where we are often overwhelmed with contradictory information? How do people best learn? Can our current education and training system deliver the skills needed? In an already overcrowded curriculum how do we make sure that health and safety isn't just an inconvenient add-on that receives only cursory attention, if that? How do we cut through the myriad issues that plague day to day business activity to help business leaders give strategic risk management the attention that it needs?</p> <p>Safe Work Australia is currently considering these important questions. Our Members have tasked us with improving the way work health and safety is covered across all education sectors and helping develop resources for better integrating it into the curriculum. We want to see risk management covered as an integral part of management training. As Professor Patrick Hudson noted in last year's Virtual Seminar Series, "Many organisations already have good attitudes. Their problem is a shortage of managerial skills to improve their actual performance."</p> <p>Major reforms are driving changes to both the vocational education and university sectors. Increasingly market-driven commercial approaches in education mean that to gain traction for work health and safety subjects we need to make a persuasive business case.</p> <p>Fortunately there is growing support for this because as we demonstrated in this year's seminars there is a direct link between good, safe and healthy work and business success.</p> <p>Safe Work Australia is using this evidence to engage with the education sector to support improved learning outcomes and supporting the development of some key curriculum material in areas like engineering, ergonomics, business management and agriculture. To support business leaders we have developed free, online resources on leadership. </p> <p>We recently published the <em>Principles for Designing Good Work</em>. These have been a key focus during this year's seminars and will form an enduring resource for everyone who has a role in designing or managing work. </p> <p>Between now and 2019 and beyond Safe Work Australia will continue to strive to make our country a world leader in health and safety. We will promote the value of health and safety to the community and its links with Australia's future prosperity. We will continue to be a key source of national research and data, building on the latest thinking on how to influence organisations and workers' behaviour and provide Australians with the tools to build safe, healthy and productive working lives.</p> <p>We hope you've enjoyed the Safe Work Australia Virtual Seminar Series. All our seminars will remain online so you can watch them and access the additional resources at any time. All the presentations have closed captioning and transcripts and many are available as podcasts. Please do share them with your friends and your colleagues. And we would like you to rate them and tell us what you'd like to see next year.</p> <p>For more information about work health and safety you can go to the Safe Work Australia website or Facebook page or follow us on Twitter.</p> <p>Thank you.</p> <p><strong>[End of Transcript]</strong></p> </div> <div class="field field--name-field-downloadable-transcripts field--type-entity-reference field--label-hidden field__items"> <div class="field__item"><article class="media media--type-file media--view-mode-default"> <div class="field field--name-field-media-file field--type-file field--label-hidden field__item"> <span class="file file--mime-application-vnd-openxmlformats-officedocument-wordprocessingml-document file--x-office-document"> <a href="" type="application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document">the-agile-leader-application.docx</a></span> </div> </article> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> Thu, 19 Mar 2020 11:13:53 +0000 Broadcast in 2015 Improving the risk management of musculoskeletal disorders <div class="node node--type-media node--view-mode-rss layout layout--onecol"> <div class="layout__region layout__region--content"> <div class="field field--name-body field--type-text-with-summary field--label-above"> <div class="field__label">Body</div> <div class="field__item"><p><span style="line-height: 20.79px;">The presentation shows how both physical and psychosocial hazards can contribute to musculoskeletal disorders. To effectively prevent musculoskeletal disorders in the workplace, we need to address both the physical and psychosocial hazards and risks.</span></p> <h2>Who is this presentation for?</h2> <p>This presentation is for leaders, managers, employers, workers and anyone with an interest in managing workplace hazards and risks associated with musculoskeletal disorders.</p> <h2>About the presenter</h2> <p>Dr Jodi Oakman is the coordinator of postgraduate programs in Ergonomics, Safety and Health at La Trobe University, focussing on the impact of the psychosocial and physical work environment on musculoskeletal disorders, and strategies to improve risk management in workplaces.</p> <p>Jodi has worked extensively in industry as a consultant ergonomist. She is a qualified physiotherapist and has a PhD in the area of the ageing workforce and the impact of organisations on their employees’ retirement intentions.</p> </div> </div> <div class="field transcript-group"> <div class="field__label">Transcript</div> <div class="clearfix text-formatted field field--name-field-html-transcript field--type-text-long field--label-hidden field__item"><p><strong>Improved risk management of musculoskeletal disorders:<br /> The need for a new approach</strong></p> <p><strong>Dr Jodi Oakman, Centre for Ergonomics &amp; Human Factors, La Trobe University</strong></p> <p><strong>Dr Jodie Oakman: </strong></p> <p>Hello and welcome. I'm Dr Jodie Oakman, I head the Centre for Ergonomics and Human Factors at La Trobe University. We are a WHO collaborating centre. Our research program in the Centre for Ergonomics and Human Factors has a large focus on the risk management of musculoskeletal disorders. Today, I'm going to talk to you about improved risk management of musculoskeletal disorders, the need for a new approach.</p> <p>I'm going to pose and then address three key questions today. What does the research evidence tell us about the causal factors of MSDs? Are there gaps in current strategies used to manage MSDs? And then, finally, what are we doing at La Trobe University to contribute to the knowledge of management of MSDs? Just some background, we are getting older, that's a fact. The population is aging and people will need to work until we are in our 60s and, it has been postulated, until we're 70. So this poses a couple of issues, the first being that we need to encourage people to want to work for longer and this requires quite a shift, but that's not the focus of my presentation today. The second thing is ensuring that people are able to work for longer and that ensures that they're not exposed to excessive physical or psycho-social hazards over their life course so that they can make choices about their employment up until the time for retirement.</p> <p>The way we work has undergone transformational change in the past 15 to 20 years. We're now on call, responding to things in our leisure time, sometimes because we have to, and sometimes because we've loosened the boundaries between home and work.</p> <p>The impacts of this on health outcomes hasn't been fully explored, but is part of the whole overall picture of management of occupational health issues such as MSDs.</p> <p>Now, what are MSDs? The issue of development of MSDs is a pivotal part of the discussion and in many ways we try and fit compensation schemes to an injury, rather than the other way around. Mostly, in musculoskeletal disorders, we're not talking about injuries at a particular point in time event, we're talking about development of a disorder due to exposure over a long period of time to occupational hazards. The issue, and complexity, is the number of hazards and how they interact and this makes MSD risk management particularly complex. There are a number of definitions of MSDs, but there is consensus on versions of the following: that work-related musculoskeletal disorders affect tendons, tendon sheaths, muscles, nerves, bursae, blood vessels in the body. So how do we know whether it's an injury or a disorder? In many cases the clinical diagnoses of MSDs is inaccurate, the reliability often poor and we know that in recent times there's been a bit of publicity around the relationship between MRI scans, X-rays and the symptoms that people demonstrate.</p> <p>One of the issues in occupational health is that we often spend a lot of time to the right of the arrow, rather than down the left, focusing on the onset of symptoms and trying to target our risk management strategies at that end of the arrow. I'd suggest that prevention activities need to really start well before we see people move into the compensation, or claim cycle, which we know some people have a lot of trouble getting out of.</p> <p>Perhaps our over-reliance on clinical diagnoses can cause us to consider events attributed to the injury in a way that may not be particularly helpful. And particularly when we use these diagnoses to develop our prevention or control activities, this may lead us down a garden path. Mostly, MSDs are accumulative in nature, that is they are the result of exposure to a range of hazards over time and it's very difficult to attribute one single event, and in fact evidence would suggest that this is in fact correct and that what we're seeing in the straw that breaks the camel's back.</p> <p>This model here, this 2001 model, developed by the National Research Council and The Institute of Medicine is quite a well-known and well-described model in the literature. It was developed after an extensive review by a panel of experts who reviewed epidemiological evidence around causal factors of musculoskeletal disorders. And we can see here in this model that the influence of both bio-mechanical hazards, of which we are mostly very familiar with and they're well accepted and well entrenched in our risk management plans for reduction of musculoskeletal disorders. Down the bottom, we can see organisational factors and social context which I've grouped there as psycho-social hazards which is the commonly used term here. These factors can either independently, or both, influence the person effects through bio-mechanical loading into loads and physiological responses. This in turn influences internal tolerances and how the body responds to these particular hazards, resulting in a range of outcomes, pain, discomfort, leading on to impairment and disability. And of course, on the right are the individual factors age, gender, different capacities, these are largely outside the sphere of influence of workplaces and so our prevention activities really need to focus on the workplace factors.</p> <p>This tells the same story as the last one, but highlights separate but interacting causal mechanisms. We can see here that the psycho-social hazards and the bio-mechanical hazards can both influence the cumulative tissue damage resulting in presentation of injury.</p> <p>This model in 2014 takes into account both of these models and we use this conceptual framework to underpin our research here at La Trobe, which is heavily focused on risk management of workplace MSDs. So we can see here that what we're seeing is this match between, or poor match, between individual factors, those work-related abilities and skills, personality, genetic vulnerabilities and the workplace factors so those psycho-social factors, organisational factors and physical loads. When these are not well-matched, so we have a demand capacity imbalance, we see that we get effects within the person so either biomechanical loads - we get a stress response, fatigue, reduced internal tolerance resulting in tissue damage and/or pain.</p> <p>Workplace hazard categories can be broadly grouped as manual handling hazards, which are focused on the task, or psycho-social hazards and there are two groups of these. One is the organisational factors which are around the organisation of work and job design. And then there's the social context - the support, the communications, the relationships with managers. There's some examples of organisational and social context hazards, organisational hazards can be around working hours, workloads, how jobs are designed, levels of control for individuals, pace of work, conflicting work demands. Social context is around communications with management, value of individuals, health and safety culture, relationships with colleagues and supervisors. Many organisational hazards are actually the responsibility of managers and supervisors, they arise from how work is organised and job designed. There is an overlap between these two groups.  Managers and supervisors play a key role in creating these hazards but also in developing effective controls.</p> <p>MSD risk is determined by many hazards, organisational and psycho-social and these interact or are additive, but we're still faced with a big question by many people, "Aren't manual handling hazards the main problem?" That is, "Isn't it the physical aspects of work that are primarily responsible for the development of musculoskeletal disorders?" In the literature, of which there is a large substantial body of evidence to support the role of both physical and psycho-social factors, this particular paper by Johnson et al was focused on retail material handlers, so very physically orientated job, large population -6,311, good study design and what they found was that what these odds ratio is predictors of new back pain. We can see there that job intensity had a predictive ratio of 1.8 compared to the lifting, the physical aspects of the work, 20 pounds at work. </p> <p>So, in summary, the psycho-social factors were at least, or even more so, influential on the development of new pack pain.</p> <p>In this review, a systematic review of a large number of papers, about 50, which undertook rigorous statistical analysis to examine the impact of psycho-social factors on MSD development. What they found was, again, looking at these odds ratios, or predictors of the likelihood of developing low back pain was that high job demands had a higher likelihood than low job satisfaction, or supervisor support, or low social support, although they are fairly close. But the key message here is that these factors were important in determining new cases of low back pain. I don't think it's helpful to focus particularly on the numbers, but just both factors are important, both psycho-social and physical factors are important.</p> <p>In Australia, more specifically at La Trobe University, we've had a long-standing research program on musculoskeletal disorders, beginning in2003 was the first piece of work, but here we can see in 2006 we started with a review, up until 2015 where we're currently working on a project looking at workplace barriers to reduce the incidents of musculoskeletal and mental health disorders. In addition to that, we're currently working on an intervention project in the aged care sector to look at new ways to reduce risks associated with MSDs.</p> <p>More locally in our work, we found that taking together a number of studies in healthcare, manufacturing, logistics, when we start looking at those odds ratios, or predictive contributions, is a good way to describe these, contributions to increasing MSD risk, we see that physical and psycho-social hazards contribute very similarly to increased MSD risk and low job satisfaction equally makes a contribution to the increased likelihood of developing a musculoskeletal disorder.</p> <p>So, in terms of MSD risk management it's clear assessment and management of psycho-social hazards is essential. It's not optional. There is sufficient evidence and sufficient good quality evidence to support the role of both physical and psycho-social factors. In addition, the severity of exposure to any single hazard isn't necessarily a good indicator of overall MSD risk and the output of tools for assessing adverse postures and bio-mechanical loads indicates severity or riskiness of the particular hazards. It doesn't necessarily indicate overall MSD risk, because they often take a very narrow focus rather than looking at the job as a whole.</p> <p>There are a number of barriers to improving current workplace practices for reducing MSD risk, or prevention of MSDs. We still have an ongoing widespread erroneous belief that MSD risk is largely due to physical hazard exposures. Many of the guidance materials that we use still focus on the physical aspects of work, including the sorts of tools that we use to identify and control hazards and risks associated with MSDs. The conventional OHS risk management paradigm that we use doesn't necessarily help us to develop and promote effective risk management for MSDs. It tends to be separate, operate quite separately to other business management strategies and procedures and it would be beneficial to see these better integrated.</p> <p>One of the issues is this focus on hazard by hazard, rather than looking more holistically at all the factors, so rather than taking into account the job as a whole, and you'll see there an example of perhaps a moderate force for pushing a trolley might be a problem if it's done a lot and there is a lot of time pressure associated with the job. But if it's done only occasionally and without time pressure it may not be a problem, so we need to be much better at looking at the contextual factors around particular tasks that individuals are undertaking.</p> <p>In addition, our conventional aim in terms of eliminating, or reducing hazards isn't always appropriate. Sometimes physical hazards shouldn't be always eliminated, workloads should not always be minimised. We know that people having interesting challenging work is actually good for them and that work without challenge is actually hazardous in itself.</p> <p>So we need expansion of our standard risk management paradigm and there's a parallel here with the approach needed to reduce the risk of major accidents. I take a quote here from James Reason who argued that "Errors are like mosquitoes, you can swat them one by one, but they still keep coming." This is analogous to MSD hazards and they are a bit like human error that you can swat them one by one, but it's not the most effective way to reduce risk. We need MSD risk management tools and associated guidance that covers both physical and psycho-social hazards and it encourages a high level of worker participation. We know and encourage worker consultation, but we need to encourage participation in terms of risk management for MSDs. It needs to include appropriate assessment methods and advice on how to develop appropriate controls for both physical and psycho-social hazards.</p> <p>At La Trobe University, we have been developing an MSD's risk management tool-kit over the past number of years. We are currently implementing this tool-kit in the aged care sector and testing various aspects of the implementation process.</p> <p>It very much the tool-kit follows a standard risk management process with some key differences to address these identified gaps in current practices. It's highly participative, involving the gathering of a risk management team and collation of available data on MSDs. It involves education of management and supervisors in what are all the relevant associated factors with increased MSD risk, physical and psycho-social. A key plank of this risk management tool-kit is the use of staff survey results which measure both hazards in the psycho-social work space and the physical work space. These are helped to develop a hazard and risk profile. These are then used to develop risk controls with the risk management team. Of course then there's an implementation phase and a review and evaluation phase consistent with a risk management cycle.</p> <p>The tool-kit has been developed under the guise of the WHO framework for all tool-kits which is based on the WHO Healthy Workplace model. The tool-kit is currently being tested in the aged care sector, as I said before, and we're working to customise the tool-kit to their existing OHS management systems. It will be interactive, allowing users to customise as they need and into their own workplace data. Future work from our end will involve implementation and evaluation and comparison of data across different sectors.</p> <p>So we come back to the three questions that I posed at the beginning of the presentation. What does the research evidence tell us about the causal factors today? I hope that from the presentation today you can see that there is very strong evidence to support the role of physical and psycho-social factors in the development of MSDs, that identification of both physical and psycho-social factors is not optional but mandatory if we are to effectively develop risk controls for MSDs. Are there gaps in current strategies used to manage MSDs? I hope, again, that you see from the presentation today that there are, that we currently still focus on the physical aspects of work predominantly in the management of MSDs and I would suggest that this is in part why we find it perhaps difficult at times to significantly reduce the large numbers of MSDs. Thirdly, what are we doing at La Trobe University to contribute to knowledge of management of MSDs? Well, we've been working over the last 10 to 15 years to help further that evidence base and then really working on translation, taking that research out into practice to develop more effective materials and supports to help organisations manage their MSDs more effectively.</p> <p>So, I thank you today for listening to this presentation and if you're interested in further discussion, there are my details. We will be seeking partners in the coming year to work further on implementing the tool-kit in a range of different organisations and we'd welcome discussions about potential partnerships. And, if you're interested in learning more, we have a short course coming up called Health and Design of Work and we also offer a graduate certificate of Masters, or Masters in Ergonomics, Safety and Health at La Trobe University. Thank you very much.</p> <p><strong>[End of Transcript]</strong></p> </div> <div class="field field--name-field-downloadable-transcripts field--type-entity-reference field--label-hidden field__items"> <div class="field__item"><article class="media media--type-file media--view-mode-default"> <div class="field field--name-field-media-file field--type-file field--label-hidden field__item"> <span class="file file--mime-application-vnd-openxmlformats-officedocument-wordprocessingml-document file--x-office-document"> <a href="" type="application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document">improved-risk-management-of-musculoskeletal-disorders-the-need-for-a-new-approach-application.docx</a></span> </div> </article> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> Thu, 19 Mar 2020 11:13:53 +0000 Broadcast in 2015 Effective load restraint <div class="node node--type-media node--view-mode-rss layout layout--onecol"> <div class="layout__region layout__region--content"> <div class="field field--name-body field--type-text-with-summary field--label-above"> <div class="field__label">Body</div> <div class="field__item"><p>Produced as part of the National Road Safety Partnership Program, this webinar discusses the fundamentals of load restraint and the importance of having an engineered load restraint system that includes testing, training, guidelines and audits.</p> <p>Please note that this item is pre-recorded, and the online assistance and questions facilities referred to in the audio are not available.</p> <h2>Who is this presentation for?</h2> <p>Suppliers and transport operators of any materials carried by road, heavy vehicle drivers and their managers.</p> <h2>About the presenter</h2> <p>Graeme Agnew, Logistics Engineer with BlueScope Steel, is a leading Australian expert in the field of load restraint and road safety. He is a mechanical engineer and has developed cost-effective and efficient transport safety solutions including the load restraint of a wide variety of loads, as well as coaching and mentoring drivers, loaders, supervisors and managers in their application.</p> <h2>Useful resources</h2> <ul> <li><a href="">National Road Safety Partnership Program</a></li> </ul> </div> </div> <div class="field transcript-group"> <div class="field__label">Transcript</div> <div class="clearfix text-formatted field field--name-field-html-transcript field--type-text-long field--label-hidden field__item"><p><strong>Effective Load Restraint</strong></p> <p><strong>Graeme Agnew - BlueScope Steel</strong></p> <p><strong>Slide 1</strong></p> <p><strong>Angela Juhasz: </strong></p> <p>Good morning or good afternoon depending on where you're joining us from today and a very warm welcome to everyone. Today we'll be covering Effective Load Restraint and we have a special guest presenter from BlueScope Steel. Now this particular webinar is part of the National Road Safety Partnership Program webinar series and a little bit of information on that for those of you unaware. </p> <p>The NRSPP has been established to provide a collaborative network for Australian businesses and organisations to help them create a positive road safety culture both internally and externally. It aims to help organisations of all sizes across all sectors to share and build road safety initiatives specific to their own workplace and beyond. It's delivered by ARRB and funded primarily by government coalition and AARB. For more information and more tools like this webinar please refer to the NRSPP website.</p> <p>Now as I said we've got a very special webinar presenter joining us today and I'll introduce him in one moment. </p> <p><strong>Slide 2</strong> </p> <p>My name is Angela Juhasz and I will be your friendly webinar moderator today. If you do experience any issues along the way or you have any questions please feel free to get in touch with me at any time. Now for today's session we've allowed approximately 60 minutes total. </p> <p><strong>Slide 3</strong></p> <p>About 40 minutes of that will be spent on the presentation and we'll be taking questions throughout. So please don't be shy. Get your questions through to us and we'll be happy to deal with those as we go.</p> <p>We are also recording today's session ladies and gentlemen and so there's no need to take notes. All of the presentation material as well as the recording will be sent to you once the webinar has concluded.</p> <p><strong>Slide 4</strong> </p> <p>Now as I mentioned before we welcome questions and discussion and if you would just look over to your control panel you'll notice a 'Questions' box. We ask that you type those in here and I'll make sure that Graeme gets them throughout the presentation and gets back to you on those. Now without any further ado I will introduce our man of the moment. So his name is Graeme Agnew. </p> <p><strong>Slide 5</strong> </p> <p>Now Graeme is a Logistics Engineer with BlueScope Steel and he's recognised as a leading expert in the field of load restraint and transport safety in the Australian steel industry having worked or consulted for various companies including BlueScope, Arrium and Stramat. With over 20 years operational and technical experience across manufacturing and transport functions Graeme has developed a practical, hands-on approach to load restraint. He is a Mechanical Engineer and also holds a Masters of Business and Technology through the University of New South Wales. His current role as Logistics Engineer with BlueScope he has been responsible for developing cost-effective and efficient transport safety solutions including the load restraint of a wide variety of loads as well as coaching and mentoring of drivers, loaders, supervisors and managers in their application.</p> <p>A very warm welcome to you Graeme on this rather cold winter's day here in Melbourne. How are you going today?</p> <p><strong>Graeme Agnew: </strong></p> <p>Good Angela. How are you?</p> <p><strong>Angela Juhasz: </strong></p> <p>I am very well thank you and thank you for your time in preparing today's presentation and delivering it for our audience. I'm sure we're all very keen to learn more about the good work of BlueScope Steel and this particular initiative. So I'll hand over to you.</p> <p><strong>Graeme Agnew: </strong></p> <p>Okay Angela. Absolute pleasure. All right.</p> <p><strong>Slide 6</strong></p> <p>So firstly I thought I'd just give you a bit of background into who BlueScope Steel are just so you can understand where we come from around this issue of load restraint.</p> <p><strong>Slide 7</strong> </p> <p>Basically we are a global manufacturer and supplier of steel products and solutions. Basically across the world we're in 17 countries employing over 17,000 people. We have more than 50 facilities across the Pacific region and nearly 100 distribution centres just here in Australia and with almost 8,000 people.</p> <p>As far as that we also operate the largest steelworks in Australia here at Port Kembla which is where I'm based and basically that has an annual production capacity of around about 2.6 million tonnes of crude steel.</p> <p>I'm sure many people have probably seen some of our brands in the past – things like Colorbond - you'll see those ads on television – and products like Zincalume, Lysaght and in the last 18 months or so we've supplied a couple of other well-known businesses in the Australian steel industry in Fielders and Orrcon Steel. The important part to understand about that is what BlueScope – BlueScope is actually not a transport operator. Basically less than 1% of our transport pass would actually be done on company owned vehicles. So primarily we are a loader, packer, consignor or receiver of goods.</p> <p><strong>Slide 8</strong></p> <p>One of the things though that has happened in that time is back in about the mid 1990s BlueScope - who was BHP Steel back in those days - realised that securing heavy steel products on trucks was a major risk to its employees, contractors and the community and basically started looking at ways to minimise that risk.</p> <p>Across the steel industry we have seen a number of serious incidents which have included fatalities and basically that has occurred to both drivers and also other road users as the result of having loads that were incorrectly restrained.</p> <p><strong>Slide 9</strong></p> <p>BlueScope itself – BlueScope is recognised as a leader in safety within the steel industry worldwide and basically one of the things we do is we manage our high risk activities or what we call 'codes of practice'. These are codes which sit across all our businesses and basically they set out the minimum standards for sites and also our service providers to adhere to. And those high risks include activities such as mobile equipment, overhead cranes, product storage and load restraint. All up there's about 12 of those codes of practice in our business and as we said load restraint is one of our major risks and has one of those codes of practice attached to it.</p> <p><strong>Slide 10</strong></p> <p>All right. So that's just a bit of a background as to – you know - where we come from and why we take this so seriously and that's probably where the real story begins is right now and here as to what is effective load restraint. And look I understand that the BlueScope approach to load restraint is probably not right for every organisation but if you adopt two of the key models that we're going to discuss it's possible to demonstrate compliance. And when I look at what that compliance looks like I regularly ring up people like the regulators to talk about chain of responsibility and they kind of talk about three things. They talk about Information and Instruction, Training and Auditing and I'll go into those in a bit of detail because it is a holistic system that you need in order to manage load restraint.</p> <p>So if I look firstly at Information and Instruction – you know - we need to make sure that our people - both our employees and contractors - know how the load is to fit on the vehicle, what vehicle and equipment is required to restrain the load and how that restraint equipment must be applied. Secondly we need to ensure that our personnel are trained and competent to complete the tasks that they need to do, and finally the second part is the Auditing section. So do work practices comply with instructions? Are personnel appropriately skilled and is the equipment being maintained? </p> <p>And generally speaking when I hear the regulators actually talk about compliance with COR requirements such as load restraint that third element, that Auditing phase, that supervision, making sure people are actually complying with those systems is generally the one they say is fairly poorly done. But look the focus of today's webinar is to show you how we manage load restraint using two different models basically and show how that we stop loads from coming off trucks and causing damage to both people and product.</p> <p><strong>Slide 11</strong></p> <p>So as I said the thing with BlueScope is that we are not a transport company primarily. We primarily are a consignor and really as far as consigning we have an effective system. Contract management is actually a vital element of that. Transport providers who work for BlueScope steel basically expect to sign up what we call the Australian Steel Industry Logistics Safety Code and that safety code was actually developed by BlueScope and OneSteel and it's actually aligned with the actual National Logistics Safety Code. Basically what that code requires is that contractors and sites that are working for us have evidence that they've met a number of key criteria. So they make sure that they've trained their people, that their load restraint equipment is up to standard, meets the relevant requirements and that they actually have guidelines around how those loads must be restrained on their vehicles.</p> <p>So what we're basically doing by going through that code and auditing our contractors against that is actually prequalifying those contractors before they actually even come onto site.</p> <p><strong>Slide 12</strong></p> <p>So when I talk about the two different models that we use and these are the two real models that you can have in your business. The first one is what I would call a contractor-based system and basically this is where you would go to the contractor and basically get them to develop an engineered load restraint system. So what we do is we say to the contractor "Look you've got some expertise in this. You come to us with a system that meets the legislative requirements for load restraint." We then would review that system and if it's acceptable we would approve it for them to use it. We then would monitor that system through our contracts management process and basically part of that would be our contractors showing us their compliance around quantity and also their compliance around if they've had an incident, how they actually have managed that and what corrective actions they've actually managed to prevent further breaches from occurring.</p> <p>From a consignor point of view it is the simplest solution because what we're doing is we're getting them to do the work in the background around developing the system and we are simply monitoring that. However in our experience most of our contractors don't have the engineering resources available to develop an engineered load restraint system. So what we've basically done is in most cases we've adopted what I call the consignor model where basically we have a team of specialised and experienced in-house engineers and basically what we do is we develop guidelines for them based on our knowledge of load restraint and also the different products and basically allow the contractors to adopt those. And as I said in the vast majority of cases that's what happens within our business.</p> <p><strong>Slide 13</strong></p> <p>Okay. So as far as information instruction, I'll talk a little bit about this now.</p> <p><strong>Slide 14</strong></p> <p>So why is it so important to have an engineered load restraint system? So I would compare this to driving down the highway and if I'm going to go over a bridge I want to make sure that when I go over that bridge that somebody has put some due diligence into that. Okay so they've made sure that when they're designing that bridge that they've taken account of the weight of the vehicles going over that bridge, that that bridge can take loading of the wind trying to push it sideways. You don't want to go over that bridge thinking "You know what? The labour on this job was the guy who selected the size and the strength of the metal girders that were going into it." When I drive next to a truck out on the road I want to know that somebody has also put that same bit of due diligence in. </p> <p>The reality of that though is in most cases the restraint of most loads out on our roads are left up to the driver. And the truth of that is that most drivers basically don't have any training around load restraint or have very limited training and most of them don't understand the principles of load restraint. I'll give you an example of that. A couple of years ago I was training a driver who was new to our business. He came up to me at the end of the session and he said ""I've been driving a truck for 20 years," and he goes "No one before today had actually told me what the legal requirements were for load restraint and so we used to put it up the top of this class." For me that was fairly scary to think that someone could do a job for 20 years and not understand, not know there was a legal requirement for the job they were actually doing.</p> <p><strong>Slide 15</strong></p> <p>All right. So what are the legal requirements? So for people who don't know the legislation around load restraint in Australia comes out of the little book that you see on the right hand side. It's called the National Transport Commission Load Restraint Guide. In that guide it sets out performance standards which the load must be restrained and those performance standards are shown there in that diagram. But to comply with the legislative requirements for road transport here in Australia basically you must restrain 80% of the load in the forwards direction. </p> <p>So if I had a 10 tonne load I'd have to have the equivalent of eight tonne of restraint. If the percent sideways and rearwards 10 tonne load I would need five tonne of it. Vertically 20%. So 10 tonne load I would need to have two tonne of restraint for… Now that's not as easy as it sounds and to make you understand that a little bit better another example I'll just put out. </p> <p>I looked at a load once a couple of years ago and I actually went up to the driver and I asked the driver how much restraint did he have on that load. And the driver basically said "It's simple." He said "Up to 10 tonne I need two chains." So I asked the driver how did he work that out and what he said to me was that basically he needed to restrain 80% of the weight forward. So that was eight tonne and basically then two four tonne chains used in eight tonne of restraint. Unfortunately it's not that simple as you'll see shortly and hence the reason why we need to have an engineered system.</p> <p>The other requirements that the law also requires as set out in those performance standards that the load should not come dislodged from the vehicle and the load cannot adversely affect the vehicle's stability or weight distribution when it sees one of those forces outlined in...</p> <p><strong>Slide 16</strong> </p> <p><strong>Graeme Agnew: </strong></p> <p>So as I said the reality is it's not that simple. The truth is that load restraint is actually a science. Generally speaking the load restraint relies on three mechanisms to prevent the load from moving – the frictional force created by the weight of the load itself, the frictional force created by the clamping force applied by the restraints and the strength of the equipment used to restrain the load either by blocking, containing or attaching it to the load.</p> <p><strong>Slide 17</strong> </p> <p>So if I was to look at an engineered load restraint system the way that we would do it and the way that it needs to be done regardless of whether or not you're working on the contractor based model or the consignor based model, you're starting with the NCC Load Restraint Performance Standards and you can see that there over on the left hand side. We then model that particular load and basically put into a model a whole heap of calculations that basically look at all the potential failure modes in that load – things like sliding, toppling and rotating. And then we take those equations and we put it into what we call the load restraint guideline for that product which is then the documentation the driver and the loaders receive.</p> <p><strong>Slide 18</strong></p> <p>What makes this these more complex is that many of the variables used in this calculation are not straightforward either. So its variance has shown us that in a lot of cases the actual load actually works and behaves a lot differently to what we would expect. So what we actually have to do is we actually go off and test those assumptions and to validate them. What we're trying to do here is create a real world situation so that we can verify those assumptions. So the things that we would look at would be the friction between surfaces, the impact of different load configurations, the behaviour of the restraints – stretch in your restraints, the different tensions will that restraint actually tension up and the other thing that we actually look at would be performance and packaging because the packaging as we'll discuss shortly plays a vital role in the actual load restraint.</p> <p><strong>Slide 19</strong></p> <p>Okay. So what we then do is we basically have a number of different types of testing that we do and I've got some photos there on the screen that you can see. I'll talk about these because these are some of the trials that we actually did last year on something that you see quite often out on the road with bulk bags. So you can actually see there where we've got some tilt testing. They're also sometimes referred to as static testing. So if you look at the NCC guideline what they will talk about in that guideline is that you can tilt the load up to a certain angle, you can stimulate a 0.8 or 80% forwards or the 50% sideways. So as I said some bulk bags. I'll show you a little video of some testing we did. </p> <p>(Mechanical noises from video being played on screen) </p> <p>So you can see there we did some testing and obviously that was a fail. One of the things that we started to do when we started testing these bulk bags was we found that the coefficient of friction with those bulk bags on the tip of pallets was actually much lower than what we actually assumed it would be from what we initially were looking at. </p> <p>So then we took those bags and we actually did what we call some drag test friction tests. You can see there the photo where we've actually put the bulk bag down on the ground. We've got a forklift, connected that up with a chain. So the forklift we had a load cell to then measure the peak force and then we could determine what the actual friction value is.</p> <p>After doing that we actually were able to get the required friction by actually placing some rubber on the deck and did some more tilt testing. And then we went to what we call dynamic testing. Now dynamic testing is very similar to the crash test dummy type test where we've actually put the load on a truck, run it down a vacant, isolated stretch of road on one of our sites and basically slammed on the brakes and actually measured the stress on the restraint. We have a decelero-meter that actually measures the actual deceleration of the actual load.</p> <p><strong>Narrator: </strong></p> <p>Forty kilometre per hour test.</p> <p>(Truck braking noise from video being played on screen) </p> <p>So yeah that's the type – in developing any new load restraint system that's the type of extent you need to go to. So as I said that due diligence type approach.</p> <p><strong>Slide 20</strong></p> <p>So look it has been fairly technical up to this point. The thing to understand though is when you're dealing with the actual audience that you're catering for so yep - we've done all the technical work. But now I need to do something that the loader and the driver - that they're going to understand. So I need to use the language that they understand and I want to try and cut down on the number of tech and also photos and actually use a diagram. So one of the things is drivers want to be able to look at their load and basically then look at a photo and need to go "Well my load needs to look like that." So if you look at those two photos you actually see that actually occurring.</p> <p><strong>Slide 21</strong></p> <p>The other thing that our guidelines certainly focus on is what we call Five Fundamentals of Load Restraint. So one of the things that we've actually done is we've done a lot of analysis over the years of our load restraint incidents and what we've found is that the majority of cases you can relate back to one of five fundamental principles - these being packaging, friction, dunnage, no gaps and also the number of restraints. So I'll talk a bit more about each of those.</p> <p><strong>Slide 22</strong></p> <p>So the first one is Packaging and one of the things that you kind of look at as you go through and actually look at those five fundamentals, actually how many of these actually are the responsibility of the consignor more so than what they are the actual loader. In a lot of cases probably the first four are and certainly packaging will always be the responsibility of the consignor. Okay. </p> <p>So the packaging – one of the things to understand about it is it must meet the performance standards. It must be able to withstand the 80% and the 20% because it needs to be able to hold that object together as one solid item on the vehicle. Now it's near impossible for a driver to directly restrain the load if the packaging is not right. So what we have in our business is the series of critical procedures for packaging and basically you can see there an example that comes out of our distribution business of small parts. And basically the operators are basically trained and audited against those procedures.</p> <p><strong>Slide 23</strong></p> <p>As far as fundamental two is friction and really this is the most important of those fundamentals. It is more important than the number of restraints. You want to make sure that if you've got low friction surfaces, things like steel on steel, plastic on plastic, plastic on steel, breaking those up with something like rubber or timber.</p> <p><strong>Slide 24</strong></p> <p>The third fundamental that we talk about is dunnage. So also the guidelines will spell out things like correct size and type of dunnage and how it must be orientated on the truck. So you can see there over in the cut-out the example of the good and the bad. Okay. We don't want things like rectangular dunnage on its thin edge because it's very easy for that to rock and that creates real problems because it allows the restraints to lift.</p> <p><strong>Slide 25</strong></p> <p>One of the other things we talk about is how to eliminate gaps. Okay. So you can see there an example. Again the cross for the bad, the tick for the good. If I've got gaps in loads that's going to allow my restraints to loosen and my restraints are ineffective.</p> <p><strong>Slide 26</strong></p> <p>So as I said a lot of those first four in a lot of cases do come down to the actual consignor, the people actually loading the load. Not always but in a lot of cases that is the case. The one that the drivers definitely have the actual responsibility for is actually making sure they have the number of restraints. So what we try to do here is take out all those complex calculations and do that up front for the driver. And then that driver can read the table for the number of restraints – to actually determine how many restraints he needs. So if you look at that table there it's fairly even. If I was to have 12 tonne of that product I would need to have three chains on that load.</p> <p><strong>Slide 27</strong></p> <p>So one of the other key things about these guidelines is basically their availability. Basically those guidelines are available to employees and contractors online through a couple of different systems. We also display those guidelines clearly at despatch points. So you can see there there's some photos there of one of our sites and you can actually see those guidelines clearly on display at the weighbridge area there on the slide. Drivers are also required to carry a copy of those guidelines that are relevant to their load within trucks and we actually audit that as part of our audit process.</p> <p><strong>Slide 28</strong></p> <p>In some cases though we will also take that engineered load restraint system one step further and actually also not only design the guideline or the technical procedure but we'll also have to design some type of equipment to go with it. So why do we do that? Well there's a couple of reasons. Sometimes the restraint can be complicated. So one of the things we try and do whenever we do these things we try and simplify the method of restraint, reduce the number of steps the driver and the loaders have to perform so we can reduce the potential for human error and also increase the efficiency.</p> <p>When you do that you want to think about things like using systems that block or contain the load because what that will allow you to do is actually reduce the number of restraints required. There's an example there where you can actually see where we've done that. We had an ongoing order for some coils down in Victoria last year and basically what we had to do was because these coils are so narrow and the potential for them to topple, you could see how we developed the technical document that actually supports this piece of equipment that we actually developed to allow that product to be moved safely.</p> <p><strong>Slide 29</strong></p> <p>Okay. So as I said earlier the guidelines, that information, that instruction part is just the first element. The second element that I want to just go through is our load restraint training. You know – basically regardless of whether or not you adopt either a consignor model or the contractor model we need to make sure that our loaders and our drivers are confident.</p> <p><strong>Slide 30</strong></p> <p>So contractually BlueScope requires that drivers be trained and competent. So all contract drivers are required to do that. We also train our employees as well and why do we do that? Because we want them to recognise high-risk situations and so they're empowered to basically prevent non-compliant loads from leaving site. Our training basically is available both online and face to face. A large focus of that training is actually those five fundamentals that we've spoken about. So you can see there a couple of slides there that actually show the type of things we do - fundamental two – load friction, fundamental three – the dangers of dunnage.</p> <p><strong>Slide 31</strong></p> <p>One of the things we also do with our training is we use a large library of incidents that we've collected over 20 odd years to provide impact and the reasons behind the requirements. So here we have a case here around one of those fundamentals and the role in dunnage, the rectangular dunnage on its thin edge. Basically a driver in this case had that rectangular dunnage on its thin edge. Basically that dunnage rolled when he applied the brakes at a rail crossing and basically it allowed the chains to come forward and basically the load slipped forward into the back of the cab and it crushed that driver. So you can see there that's the type of thing that would really impact.</p> <p>I recently was training some drivers who were going to start to carry that same product and when I was able to say to them "Look here's a fatality with exactly the same product you are carrying”. You can start to see the effect that would have on somebody who needs to get it right.</p> <p><strong>Slide 32</strong></p> <p>One of the other things that we are now doing is also starting to develop training videos to try and show people someone actually doing it. So I'm going to play one of those so you can actually see where we're headed with it.</p> <p>(Video playing) </p> <p><em>Place the rubber on top of the dunnage…</em></p> <p><em>(Forklift) </em></p> <p><em>Ensure the coil has not touched the trailer deck or the rack. Place the chains through. Place the polyurethane corners between the chains and the bore. Angled chains should be 800mm of the centre of the coil. Tighten the load binders. There are four different chain configurations based on the chain capacity, rack size and coil width and weight. Consult the load restraint guidelines for further details.</em></p> <p><strong>Graeme Agnew: </strong></p> <p>So that there is just an example. That's one of our shorter ones. There are two different versions of that. There's a long one which goes into a lot of the detail that the driver would have as part of his initial training and that version there is more just for a refresher.</p> <p><strong>Slide 33</strong></p> <p>So the different types of training we have both for awareness training and competency based training and that depends on the person's role. For example we've got a sales person in one of our small regional branches. We don't need them to have the same level of detail as the driver or the loader but we also want them to have some understanding of what those high risk situations are. So if they see something out on site they can actually stop that load from going out incorrectly restrained. They may also have a discussion with the customer who's going to pick it up around what the requirements are. So we want them to have some awareness of what the requirements are. But for people like drivers and loaders there are higher requirements which are the competency based requirements. </p> <p>Basically our drivers are required to complete theoretical tests and basically that is also around some of the stuff we've seen. And basically that then is also tested practically. They are audited by their Supervisor on their first load to actually confirm their practical competency. The record of that competency is then actually put into the driver's passport so that if anyone goes to audit that driver out on site it's very easy to verify whether or not that driver has the right training. That training is then refreshed every three years. So the driver is required to go through that process every three years or if there's a major revision to an actual guideline they also need t do it as well.</p> <p><strong>Slide 34</strong></p> <p>The third element of the Effective Load Restraint System is actually monitoring and supervising that system and we do that through our auditing process. As I said earlier this is the one that when I hear the regulators talk it's not very well done but I'll run you through exactly how we do it.</p> <p><strong>Slide 35</strong></p> <p>So our contract reviews whether or not it's a contractor based system or a consignment using the contractor consignor model. Basically our contract review process – we regularly meet with the contractors and one of the agenda items on that contract review is actually their load restraint performance. Contractors in that process are required to report on any load restraint failures they have what actions they're taking around those failures and also their audits. And we actually also have commercial penalties in our contracts with our suppliers for any special incidents.</p> <p><strong>Slide 36</strong></p> <p>We also monitor loads on an individual basis and we do that through our Load Restraint Audit Program. Basically annually we review our products to determine the risk types. So we put them into a matrix as you see down the bottom and basically we look at what the risk of that product is based on its incident history and also the number of audit failures. Then we rank them either high risk, medium risk or low risk and basically we audit high risk products every 5% of loads, medium risks 3.5% and low risk every 0.5%. And I'll talk a bit more about that in one of the next couple of slides how we also adjust that in one result.</p> <p>Basically then what we do is we get to site. Then basically depending upon the number of loads that they actually despatch and also what the product risk rating is they actually get an audit target for how many audits they need to complete every month.</p> <p><strong>Slide 37</strong></p> <p>Those load restraint audits come in a standard format. They can be accessed either by hard copy or electronically. So the technology is there these days to allow our people to actually complete those using a tablet technology such as an iPad straight directly into the Load Restraint Audit system. What those audits actually do is require checks of those essential requirements for making sure the actual person's been trained, there's no low friction surfaces, that they're following things like correct dunnage practices, the correct type, the number of restraints and that their equipment is in a good condition. </p> <p>One of the other parts of this as well is it’s not just about compliance - it certainly is - but it's also an opportunity to follow up on the driver's training. So often no one talks to the driver about load restraint after he's trained unless somebody does an audit. So it's a good follow up process for us around that and it's also an opportunity for drivers and loaders to get concerns resolved. So there's opportunity there on that form to write any comments the driver might have so that we then process that back through the system and we can then look at any changes that might be needed to the guideline.</p> <p><strong>Slide 38</strong></p> <p>Basically we have across Australia about 160 different despatch points and we would complete somewhere in the vicinity of 3,000 to 3,500 load restraint audits across those sites every month. All that information goes into the database and we actually use that database to identify any changes that may be required in the guideline or any training requirements. </p> <p>A couple of years ago we had an incident that some statistics in our distribution business that said some issues there basically we organised a major intervention with those sites right across the country and basically training up their people and that type of thing so that we could improve their performance. And we actually saw a marked improvement and have since with their performance around load restraint as a result of that and monitoring those strengths.  </p> <p>Across our business we actually target an audit compliance of 95% and if a site does not meet that audit compliance of 95% what we actually do over a three month period if they don't meet that is those actual targets, that 5% of high risk loads would actually get increased to 7.5%. Okay. They'd need to audit 7.5% of high risk loads for the next three months and then we would continue to monitor that and they wouldn’t drop back to 5.5% requirement – the normal requirement – until they've had three months consecutively above the 95% compliance.</p> <p><strong>Slide 39</strong></p> <p>All right. So the final little section of our presentation today is just about the future. I want to give you some ideas of the type of stuff we're starting to look at as far as load restraints are concerned.</p> <p><strong>Slide 40</strong></p> <p>Some of the things that we're starting to do is actually develop and use smart technology. So we're starting to do things like put GoPros on trailers to actually monitor the loads in transit. So give us some more guidance on how they actually behave and that type of thing. We're also using it as a bit of a training tool to allow us to show drivers and loaders different parts of the actual process. And we've also developed what we call a Smart Phone app which we're calling SteelDrive and I'll show you that in a little example over here.</p> <p><strong>Slide 41</strong> </p> <p>So this is still in development. The actual developers are telling us that it would be available towards the end of November, early December but this is where we're going with it. So this is an app that’s being developed for our drivers. So if we've come into a little screen like this as you can see here the name and password and then basically when he comes through he would then come into this section here. And basically he can then come into here with different locations and you can see here this is my little finger. Pretend that's my little finger on the screen there scrolling through and I click on – it's all touch screen and you can come down here and get to the details of the loading sites, details on the loading sites, that type of thing and also any – now you can click on here. </p> <p>So as I said some of the data in here is not here yet but you get the idea. The PPE requirements, things around exclusion zones, that type of thing, any requirements on the site, any facilities and also the closest weigh stations and rest stops and petrol stations. If that location was part of the driver's favourites, he also would receive notifications. So for example if that site – the forklift was broken down and we couldn't load for three hours, that's the type of information the driver would get notification of. So it gives us some idea of – it helps us also manage our fatigue management.</p> <p>The other information – look it's primarily being set up though around load restraint though and you can actually see that basically if I was to click on here the driver then gets his information on the different guidelines. As I click through depending on the product it would tell him how many restraints that he needed to apply.</p> <p>You can actually down here as well and if I was to click on this one you would get for that product the video similar to what I showed earlier. Alternatively you could come onto here and you would get a hard copy, the whole guideline. As I said the information's not there yet. That's the stuff the developers are doing.</p> <p>The other part of this as well basically is what we call load capture. So one of the things that we want to do is start to record data from the actual loads and basically two reasons for that – A) you're going to get the driver to actually take a photo of the actual restraint. The reason that we'd do that is so that it's another process. </p> <p>So it's another thing the driver actually has to look at. So he can't have a lapse in concentration and actually miss something in the process. And also it gives us some record of how the load was actually restrained if there's an issue. If I was to go through this I would pick the different product that I'm doing who I've carried for and then I can click on one of these, take a photo of the load and then there's a limit of eight photos you can actually take. It goes into this here database. The driver then would press 'submit', 'accept' and that then is uploaded to a system. And that stays on that system for a period of 30 days to allow us to review that.</p> <p>The driver can also see that on his smart phone and basically scroll through and get those details of that particular product.</p> <p><strong>Slide 42</strong></p> <p>Okay. So thank you very much guys for listening today. I hope you've got something out of it and I'll hand back over to Angela.</p> <p><strong>Angela Juhasz: </strong></p> <p>Thank you so much Graeme. That is a brilliant app concept. We have had a couple of questions and I think it was November-December you said that it was ready to be released. Is that right?</p> <p><strong>Graeme Agnew: </strong></p> <p>So the information that I had from the developers last week was that they were looking at late November early December for implementation as the first phase of that.</p> <p><strong>Angela Juhasz: </strong></p> <p>Brilliant. Well I look forward to seeing the final product. It sounds great and thank you so much for taking the time to deliver this session. I'm sure that our audience did get a lot out of it. Now we do have a few questions and unfortunately only 10 minutes remaining in the webinar. So I'll select a few to ask Graeme. So I do apologise if we don't have time to address your question today but Graeme's details as you can see are on there on your screen and we do welcome you to get in touch any time. If you'd like to discuss your queries further I'm sure Graeme will be more than happy to take your call or email.</p> <p><strong>Graeme Agnew: </strong></p> <p>Yes.</p> <p><strong>Angela Juhasz: </strong></p> <p>Okay. We've had a question here from Mark. Mark is asking "What are your thoughts on restraining loads using standard alloy gates and 2T web straps over the tops of the gates?"</p> <p><strong>Graeme Agnew: </strong></p> <p>It depends on the load. In a lot of cases I'd probably say it doesn't meet the requirements but I know of some cases where it can. Different loads are different. I would personally prefer to see those webbings over the actual load rather than go through the gate and actually locks clamping down the actual load rather than relying on those webbings holding the gates in place. It does work in some cases with smaller loads but I'd be certainly concerned about it trying to restrain something like a pallet on a trailer.</p> <p><strong>Angela Juhasz: </strong></p> <p>Great. Thank you for that question Mark. A question here from John and John's asking "Have you found statements in the Load Restraint Guide that are not in agreement with the BlueScope Load Restraint Guidelines? What approach do you take in dealing with such conflicts given the legal requirements?"</p> <p><strong>Graeme Agnew: </strong></p> <p>So for us as I said the thing that we do is we actually start with the actual legislation which is the Performance Standard. That's the only part of that actual guideline which is legislation. The rest of that book is just a novel. So all our loads actually comply with those performance standards. So that's our basis to work from and we work from those. The rest of book is just a novel.</p> <p><strong>Angela Juhasz: </strong></p> <p>All right. Another question here from Mark. "Can I ask why BlueScope has only released the documents as guidelines and have not had them certified to meet the performance standard?" Tricky one.</p> <p><strong>Graeme Agnew: </strong></p> <p>It is something that we have discussed over the years and it has certainly been – you know. There's been a lot of discussion over that and something that we are still looking at. It's not something that – there's been a decision in the past made that it was potentially we didn't see the real benefit in doing it but there's been – you know. Certainly it's an ongoing discussion. The process to actually certify those guidelines is one step that there's been some discussions in the past with the regulators about. So yeah. So it's still something we are certainly looking at.</p> <p><strong>Angela Juhasz: </strong></p> <p>Great. Okay. A couple of questions here from David. Now David's asking about getting access to the guidelines and using them in their own training material and he's referred to the videos that you showed during the presentation as well. So are they available for our audience to access, view and reuse in their own organisations? Or what would you suggest?</p> <p><strong>Graeme Agnew: </strong></p> <p>So look to start with any of that stuff that we've got is available to people who have agreements with us. So it’s not just BlueScope. It's people like OneSteel and Stramat. Those companies that we have agreements with certainly have access to those guidelines as well as any of our carriers that are actually transport providers – people like Toll, KNS who work very closely with us. They also have access to that. So we've developed that and said "We've got an agreement with you guys," or "You guys are working for us and we're going to give you that information." So that's where it is at the moment. </p> <p>Certainly there's some thoughts about also widening that to allow other people to access them but still there's discussions around that at this point in time. But if people were wanting more information that are outside of that group and they wanted to contact me to discuss that we can certainly have a look at those requests.</p> <p><strong>Angela Juhasz: </strong></p> <p>All right. No worries at all. Now we have had a couple of questions relating to today's presentation material and recording. So just to reiterate everyone that's participating here today will be sent a copy of the presentation material as well as the recording of today's session. So you'll be able to review that at your leisure, share those with colleagues perhaps. Yeah as I said at any time that's convenient you can have another look at that. So thank you to everyone who sent through questions relating to that.</p> <p>Look we do have a couple more questions so we might get time for one or two more. I've got a question here from Ian. Ian's asking "Are chains used for this presentation grade 8 and 8mm?"</p> <p><strong>Graeme Agnew: </strong></p> <p>So all our guidelines that we actually use are 8mm chains that meet the Australian Standard AS4344. All our guidelines are based on those. The only time that we've had to go to chains which are higher than that is when we had to do a guideline for OneSteel around excavators and because some of those were like 60 odd tonne basically we had to go to 10 and 13mm chains. But certainly any of our guidelines the minimum requirement is 8mm chains to AS4344.</p> <p><strong>Angela Juhasz: </strong></p> <p>Great. Well thank you for that question and I hope we've managed to clarify that for you. If not get in touch with us for a bit more discussion.</p> <p>All right one final question to finish up our webinar this afternoon or this morning depending on where you're joining us from. The question here from John is "Have you had on-road enforcement people question your guides and if so how would you have dealt with that?"</p> <p><strong>Graeme Agnew: </strong></p> <p>So in answer to that yes we have. We have and generally speaking there is a fairly good relationship between BlueScope and regulators and we have some of our senior managers are certainly part of the Logistics Safety Council and that type of thing. In fact one of our general managers actually leads up the Safety Committee for Australian Logistics Safety Council. So there's a fairly good working relationship there. </p> <p>There has been questions about it and there was a case recently but basically what's not – that was raised by an inspector. We challenged that together with others that were in that supply chain and basically that case was actually dropped before it went to court based on the fact that we had all the engineering to prove that the actual system was compliant.</p> <p>There is one other little bit to that as well. We are now actually basically adding some additional comments to our guidelines to basically say that they are designed to meet the Australian Load Restraint Performance Standards. That's an additional thing that we're now starting to add to our guidelines as a result of that case.</p> <p><strong>Angela Juhasz: </strong></p> <p>Great. All right. Well on that I will bid our audience farewell and take this opportunity to thank them once again for joining in today and we really hope that you gained something valuable from today's session. As I said if there's any part of today's session that you'd like to review you will be getting that presentation material shortly. So do keep an eye on your emails.</p> <p>Graeme a big thank you to you for putting together this presentation and sharing your story with us. It's certainly been insightful for me. So I look forward to that app becoming available as I'm sure many of our audience does also.</p> <p><strong>Graeme Agnew: </strong></p> <p>Yep. Not a problem. Pleasure.</p> <p><strong>Angela Juhasz: </strong></p> <p>Thank you once again and we hope you can join us for future webinars. </p> <p>There will be a short pop-up survey that will pop up on your screen ladies and gentlemen as I close down the webinar. It's just a few short questions and if you could kindly let us know how we went today I'd be very grateful. </p> <p>Thank you all and hope you can join us next time. </p> <p>Bye bye.</p> <p><strong>[End of Transcript]</strong></p> </div> <div class="field field--name-field-downloadable-transcripts field--type-entity-reference field--label-hidden field__items"> <div class="field__item"><article class="media media--type-file media--view-mode-default"> <div class="field field--name-field-media-file field--type-file field--label-hidden field__item"> <span class="file file--mime-application-vnd-openxmlformats-officedocument-wordprocessingml-document file--x-office-document"> <a href="" type="application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document">effective-load-restraint-application.docx</a></span> </div> </article> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> Thu, 19 Mar 2020 11:13:53 +0000 Broadcast in 2015 Good work through effective leadership <div class="node node--type-media node--view-mode-rss layout layout--onecol"> <div class="layout__region layout__region--content"> <div class="field field--name-body field--type-text-with-summary field--label-above"> <div class="field__label">Body</div> <div class="field__item"><p style="line-height: 20.79px;">For many workplace leaders, the safety vision they are still working towards is focussed on achieving an absence of injury. But there is so much more to be gained through creating a strong safety culture, including enhanced worker health and wellbeing and increased business success and productivity.</p> <p style="line-height: 20.79px;">This film features three different perspectives on how workplace leaders can design good work and influence their safety culture, not only in their own business, but across their supply chain and the broader community.</p> <h2>Who is this presentation for?</h2> <p>Regulators, industry representatives, worker representatives and leaders at all levels – from officers and CEOs to middle management and those with work health and safety or human resource functions.</p> <h2>About the presenter</h2> <p>Dr Simon Blackwood, Deputy Director General at the Department of Justice and Attorney General with the Queensland Government.<br /> Jennie Hunter, Manager of Leadership and Culture with Workplace Health and Safety Queensland.</p> <p>This seminar also features three business leaders from Australian Country Choice, Lend Lease and Toll NQX.</p> </div> </div> <div class="field transcript-group"> <div class="field__label">Transcript</div> <div class="clearfix text-formatted field field--name-field-html-transcript field--type-text-long field--label-hidden field__item"><p><strong>Safety Leadership at Work</strong></p> <p>Good work through effective leadership – the Safety Leadership at Work Program</p> <p>Queensland Government</p> <p>§ (Music Playing) §</p> <p><strong>Simon Blackwood</strong></p> <p>Workplace Health and Safety Queensland is pleased to be part of the second Safe Work Australia Virtual Seminar Series. Last year, we shared our focus of working directly with industry to progress the work health and safety agenda in Queensland.</p> <p>We introduced some of our industry safety leaders and shared their views on how important effective leadership is to deliver safe and productive business outcomes. But our safety leadership journey really began some years before that. In 2009 we introduced the Zero Harm at Work Leadership Program which focused on encouraging senior management to demonstrate their commitment to safety. More than 300 business leaders signed up to the program and signalled their support for creating safer and healthier workplaces.</p> <p>Six years on and following extensive consultation with industry, we've explored opportunities to build on the success of the program and further develop a strong safety culture in Queensland workplaces. We are going beyond our traditional networks and involving safety leaders from all levels of industry, not just senior management. We have changed the program name to reflect these changes and called it <em>the Safety Leadership at Work Program</em>. Our overarching goals for the program are to build safety leadership capacity, improve safety culture and as a result reduce injuries and fatalities in Queensland workplaces.</p> <p>Our expanded focus is not about developing safety leadership capacity but about sharing and promoting the latest research and industry practices about workplace systems, processes and activities to sustain effective safety leadership practices and improve safety culture.</p> <p>We've established an expert reference group to guide the direction of the program. Members have been drawn from academia, industry and employee stakeholder groups with each member bringing a unique contribution to the program.</p> <p>For many workplace leaders the safety vision they are still working towards is focused on achieving an absence of injury, but there is so much more to be gained through creating a strong safety culture including enhanced worker health and wellbeing and increased business success and productivity. To truly support a positive safety culture, leaders need to develop open communication, build trust and actively engage their workforce and supply chain partners.</p> <p>Workplace Health and Safety Queensland is actively involved in the response to the National Work Health and Safety Strategy through good work design, leadership and culture. Good work design is the elimination or minimisation of hazards and risks and optimisation of human performance, job satisfaction and productivity by considering all aspects of the work, the physical environment and people who do the work. Designing good work is closely linked with the actions required to demonstrate safety leadership - learning from experts, evidence and experience, actively involving those who do the work including supply chains and networks, engaging decision makers and leaders.</p> <p>§ (Music Playing) §</p> <p>The same principles and practices underpin our approach to the Safety Leadership at Work Program. The program activities directly promote learning from research and industry leaders, actively involving those who do the work and focuses on building the safety leadership capacity of decision makers and leaders. Join me now as we hear more about the approaches the program is taking to building safety leadership and culture practices, contributing to good work design outcomes and ultimately reducing injuries and fatalities in Queensland workplaces.</p> <p>§ (Music Playing) §</p> <p><strong>Jennie Hunter</strong></p> <p>I'm Jennie Hunter, Manager of the Leadership and Culture Strategy Unit at Workplace Health and Safety Queensland. </p> <p>Over 900 people from a range of industry sectors are members of our Safety Leadership at Work Program. I want to ask you to take a few moments to imagine the unique experiences of each and every one of those members. What sectors do they work in – construction, health care, transport or manufacturing? What is their role in the workplace – supervisor, general manager, small business owner or a certified professional? What safety experiences have they had in their current workplace or over the course of their career? What does safety leadership mean to them? What are the unique safety challenges they are dealing with? When you think about the range of possibilities presented you get a sense of the size of the safety challenges workplace leaders are dealing with.</p> <p>The Safety Leadership at Work Program aims to help members address their safety challenges through tools and resources, events and learning from other safety leaders. One of the priorities of the program is to find ways to bring about a shared understanding of what safety leadership really means and to provide an evidence-based approach to support the take-up of safety leadership and culture practices across industry.</p> <p>To meet these goals we have developed a Safety Leadership and Culture Model that introduces the key influences and practices of safety culture. The model has four components which contribute to an organisation's safety culture. One – demonstrating safety leadership from the top down, two – building a safety culture through six key engagement principles, three – the importance of safety leadership at all levels, and four – understanding the drivers of safety climate.</p> <p>Let's start with the importance of senior management valuing safety and setting a positive example. Through research and industry consultation we have found that there are a range of ways to demonstrate safety leadership including management commitment, having the right resources and capability to lead safety, valuing the input of workers and the importance of leadership style, matching the situation and intended outcomes.</p> <p>Depending on an organisation's safety culture maturity, leadership capability and safety challenges a number of different leadership practises may be affected. For example senior managers may be more actively engaged in setting the safety agenda, providing the resources required to address safety problems and communicating the priority of safety across the workforce and through the supply chain. Supervisors are more likely to be involved with day-to-day safety leadership through the provision of feedback to staff, problem solving and ensuring quality communication keeps workers informed of important safety matters.</p> <p>Although good safety leadership starts with senior management building a positive safety culture needs the involvement of workers, supervisors and supply chain partners. Workplace leaders need to recognise the factors influencing safety behaviour including values, beliefs and motivators. Good work design requires workers to be equipped with the safety knowledge the need to do their job. The levels of safety knowledge across the workforce will influence workers' abilities to comply with or participate in health and safety activities in the workplace. </p> <p>Safety leadership is important at every level of the business and across the supply chain if you want to create and sustain a positive safety culture. The Safety Leadership at Work Program promotes stories from a broad range of safety leaders across a range of industries. The films and case studies showcase different leadership practices and behaviours that are effective across a range of leadership roles from supervisors through to senior managers, CEOs and board members. The model recognises how the key drivers of safety climate can shape a safety culture over time. </p> <p>Safety climate is a measure of the perceptions and beliefs an individual has about the organisation's safety efforts. Key drivers of safety climate include the priority placed on safety within the overall business context, visibility of safety leadership, alignment of workplace practices to top management policy and a shared perception that safe work is valued by the business. The model is a key foundation of the Safety Leadership at Work Program and provides a roadmap for the development and delivery of program resources and activities, and it informs our approach to industry engagement.</p> <p>One of the first projects we have delivered to bring the model to life is a series of leadership films. The films feature senior business leaders speaking about their experience and insights of leading safety. I would like to share with you today three films and three different perspectives on how workplace leaders can design good work and influence their safety culture, not only in their own business but across their supply chain and the broader community.</p> <p>In the first film David Foote, CEO of Australian Country Choice talks about leading the journey towards the goal of best practice with an honest account of some of the setbacks and challenges he has faced along the way. David understands the value of effective consultation and communication with workers and taking them with you on the safety leadership journey.</p> <p>§ (Music Playing) §</p> <p><strong>David Foote</strong></p> <p>My name's David Foote. I'm the CEO of a family owned company Australian Country Choice based in Brisbane but operating across most of south western Queensland and here in Brisbane we have a meat processing facility that does primary processing, value adding, retail packing and we employ 1,220 Queenslanders.</p> <p>I came to this industry after a lifetime in agriculture being a farmer but having had a short break as an underground miner in the nickel operations of the deserts of Western Australia which was both life changing in both monetary rewards and life changing in my attitude toward two important parts of life now – safety and work practices.</p> <p>Whilst I only spent 11 and a half months as an underground miner I actually lost five co-workers. We were actually attending a funeral there for every two months and chipping in out of our weekly wage to widows who were probably my age as well – 23 or 24 and probably a kid in a pram or a kid on the way. So it's taken probably 30 years though for that to sink in and work out that it doesn't have to be the norm.</p> <p>§ (Music Playing) §</p> <p>ACC took over the Cannon Hill site back in 2000 and it would be fair to say that probably the safety culture in the site and the workforce at that time may have been at a near all-time low. We entered here what I think was one of the worst insurance premium rates for work cover and over the time we worked out that every impact we could have on reducing that actually was a financial benefit. So within three years of taking over the site we actually managed to reduce our initial premiums by 50%. That financial benefit not only gave us more productivity and less lost time, it also created some dollars to start to develop some safety processes and importantly install some safety equipment across the site and maybe bring the site up which has been here in existence for 90 years, to a more modern level of a workplace.</p> <p>§ (Music Playing) §</p> <p>Whilst ACC strives and we talk about best practice, we talk about leadership, we want to be at the front, we want to be a good role model, we're not perfect. We are not incident free. We've had two major incidents in the last 10 years that involved either a forklift incident here at the factory and a serious injury to a young lady and we've had a more recent amputation at one of our feed mill operations out in rural. The amputation incident out of the feedlot which is in quite a small workforce community where they all live together and work together was dramatic. The district was flooded. We actually couldn't get any ambulances in or out. We couldn't get traffic in or out. The only helicopter in the district was six hours away. So we actually had to provide medical assistance on site for a major amputation and the emotional impact that had on staff is still telling today. In fact, some of our staff have still been receiving counselling over that incident more than a year later.</p> <p>The incidents give you a constant reminder of are you doing everything that you can? Have you got every yellow line painted on the ground? Have you got every sign up that you can? Is your production management team really responding to your safety management team? Or are your safety people – are they just going around doing the tick and flick or actually being able to drive change, change cultures. But what you've got to do, you've actually got to give your safety team the confidence that they are of equal importance and standing in your work structure as the production people.</p> <p>§ (Music Playing) §</p> <p>Taking workers for the journey and making it – yeah – front of their mind is actually one of the greater challenges in business. We actually have a Stop for Safety Work Day now as part of our practice. So over the last five years we shut the factory down for two periods a day because we're on two shifts and we actually try instead of the boss ear-bashing them because that's what bosses do, we actually bring in outsiders to try and deliver a message and a different message each year. So we stop the factory, they get lunch. That's 500 people. That's not an easy process feeding 500 people and we bring on a speaker. We've had Mal Meninga when he was Safety Ambassador. We try to use people other than the boss banging the table to get the message across that we actually care about you and if we care about you maybe you'd like to care about you a little bit more as well.</p> <p>§ (Music Playing) §</p> <p>The CEO in any organisation has to lead the safety challenge in their business otherwise it's just lip service or people are doing what they feel they have to do. If it doesn't come from the top it'll take twice as long to get to the bottom. The first thing is don't give up. It's not easy. Don't do it because you have to. Do it because you want to. But you aren't on your own. There's a whole group of businesses out there that are prepared to help and pitch in so you're not on your own and it's worth doing.</p> <p><strong>Jennie Hunter</strong></p> <p>I'm pleased to introduce our next film featuring Mark Plummer, Senior Construction Manager for the Lend Lease Sunshine Coast Public University Hospital. Mark has a simple formula for leading safety – be clear about direction and expectations, use simple messages and value the input of your subcontractors. </p> <p>§ (Music Playing) §</p> <p><strong>Mark Plummer</strong></p> <p>I'm Mark Plummer. I'm the Senior Construction Manager on for Lend Lease on the Sunshine Coast Public University Hospital. This project is a $1.8 billion project for the Queensland Government. Sustaining the culture of safety on a project is very important and it's a challenge and so from our side of things the first thing we do is you must believe in what you're doing. You have to believe that what you're doing is the right thing.</p> <p>In achieving the first million hours without a lost time injury management's component is only one part in the whole process. Our part is very much about setting the direction and the expectations that the team have to achieve. It's about making sure the message is very concise and simple in its delivery so people understand and can follow that direction. </p> <p>Maintaining the energy in safety is always a challenge on a project. You need to be at all stages holding each other accountable. So at one stage when one person drops the ball there's another person in the background backing you up. We know where our expectations are and we know where our goals are so as a team we can keep that momentum going on safety.</p> <p>We have a very simple message about factory clean. We want it to look like a factory floor. So from the moment people walk on the project they see that the project is well set up and well laid out and we carry that expectation through to our subcontractors about that's how we want them to perform. So there's a fair bit of expectation management from the moment they walk on to the moment they start work on the project.</p> <p>Our final part of communicating with our subcontractors and keeping them engaged is making sure that we listen to what they're saying. They know their work very well, better than we do. So it's about listening to them and making sure their concerns and comments are incorporated and addressed. </p> <p>The challenge with safety is always to make sure that people feel comfortable of saying ‘Hey, I don't feel safe’ or ‘I see it as a concern’ and you need to encourage your workforce to be confident that they can stick their hand up and say ‘I see a risk’. You've got to treat every comment and every concern raised as valid and address it with the respect that it deserves. </p> <p>As you walk around the job you see the pride in some of the guys from what they're doing and that gives me a real buzz. I care about the guys on site. I really want to be able to go home each night and feel comfortable that we've done everything in our power to make sure that they have gone home safely.</p> <p><strong>Jennie Hunter</strong></p> <p>Our third film featuring Greg Smith, General Manager from Toll NQX introduces the idea that leading a safe business goes beyond the boundaries of the traditional operating environment. Greg shares insights into the work Toll has undertaken to improve road safety, not only for its own workforce but across the transport sector and for the broader community.</p> <p>§ (Music Playing) §</p> <p><strong>Greg Smith</strong></p> <p>My name is Greg Smith. I'm the General Manager for Toll NQX. I've been with the business about 16 years now and in my current role for about 13. I joined the industry over 30 years ago and I began as a truck driver. I've driven trucks, I've been on forklifts. So I've got a good understanding and a very, very healthy respect for the sorts of hazards that our employees face on a day-to-day basis.</p> <p>We are primarily a road transport company but we also have significant services and a coastal shipping service. Two of Toll NQX's core beliefs are firstly that everybody has the right to go home safely and secondly, that every incident is preventable. For us to live that belief it's not just about our own employees or the people that our employees engage with. The fact is that we go to all sorts of customer sites, all sorts of other transport companies. Our people are interacting with other people all the time – other businesses – and for us to enact our commitment that everyone has the right to go home safely, we have to try and make sure that everywhere that we go is at the highest possible standard from a safety perspective.</p> <p>Part of what drives my actions and my belief in the need for a safe working environment is that quite some years ago one of my workmates was killed in a workplace incident and I knew all of the people who were involved at the time. I saw the damage that was done to the customer's business and the people who were involved in there, the damage that was done to the business that I was working for where my friend was working. It had a huge impact on myself and my family. It's extreme but that very much drives my belief and my behaviour.</p> <p>§ (Music Playing) §</p> <p>We started the journey trying to develop processes and procedures and to get people to follow processes and procedures and we were successful to a point. But we didn't really get to where we believed we wanted to go. We weren't really impacting culture. What we learned is that we needed to change our approach and actually make it very, very personal. The biggest single change to our safety culture was when we made it personal and people started to understand that "If I take risks at work, I'm going to risk everything that's important to me."</p> <p>Our senior management team are heavily engaged in safety and one of the things that we've begun quite recently is that each senior manager has taken on board a couple of branches. We actually now have a weekly hook-up with that branch to review the incidents in the branch, understand what initiatives are in place and just offer them support in the safety journey. What we're trying to do there is we're trying to show leadership from that senior management team but also a level of interest and engagement that can keep the message fresh. Our senior management staff, in fact all of our management staff are empowered to intervene at any time when they see something that's unsafe or could develop into an unsafe position.</p> <p>§ (Music Playing) §</p> <p>At Toll we believe we have a leadership role in the transport industry and we take that very seriously. Recently we've had the safety showcase here at our Brisbane site. We were involved in the first one of those at Port of Brisbane and it was a really good event and what we saw, there was a lot of things that were coming from other businesses and we were able to contribute significantly as well. So the opportunity to have that here on our site and have a lot of our people interact with it was just one that we couldn't miss out on. So it was about a sharing of learned experiences and we thought that was very much of value. </p> <p>Another area where we believe we can take a leadership role is that we have spent some years in looking at camera technology to try and understand what's happening with our vehicles on the road. We've had a lot of our competitors come to us and actually ask us can you give us some information on the cameras, how they work, what your experiences are? We are happy to share that and have done on many occasions and it's not about proprietary information. It's actually much more about trying to make sure that the roads are safer for everybody.</p> <p>§ (Music Playing) § </p> <p>I'm particularly pleased with what we've achieved at Toll NQX. We have actually changed the culture. People are genuinely interested in coming to work and working safely for themselves, for their workmates, for their family. We have a more connected workforce, a more consistent workforce. Your people realise that you are genuinely interested in their wellbeing. So the commitment from the people has allowed us to continue to progress our safety culture which needs to continue to evolve. There is no end game. It must stay alive and it must continue to evolve.</p> <p>§ (Music Playing) §</p> <p><strong>Simon Blackwood</strong></p> <p>The reality is the size of the safety leadership challenge facing Australian workplaces requires more than a new leadership slogan, a speech or a film. If we are to achieve real change true cultural change will take more than the commitment of senior executives driving the safety culture of an organisation. </p> <p>To achieve lasting change, leaders at every level of industry from supervisors to managers must take an active role in creating good work for those they are responsible for and be capable and confident of their ability to lead safety and engage with their workforce and supply chain partners.</p> <p>§ (Music Playing) § </p> <p><strong>[End of Transcript]</strong></p> </div> <div class="field field--name-field-downloadable-transcripts field--type-entity-reference field--label-hidden field__items"> <div class="field__item"><article class="media media--type-file media--view-mode-default"> <div class="field field--name-field-media-file field--type-file field--label-hidden field__item"> <span class="file file--mime-application-vnd-openxmlformats-officedocument-wordprocessingml-document file--x-office-document"> <a href="" type="application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document">good-work-through-effective-leadership-application.docx</a></span> </div> </article> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> Thu, 19 Mar 2020 11:13:53 +0000 Broadcast in 2015 Good work design and applying it to psychosocial risks <div class="node node--type-media node--view-mode-rss layout layout--onecol"> <div class="layout__region layout__region--content"> <div class="field field--name-body field--type-text-with-summary field--label-above"> <div class="field__label">Body</div> <div class="field__item"><p style="line-height: 20.79px;">Professor Parker discusses the principles of good work design, why they are important, and how we can use them to make workplaces safer and improve workers’ wellbeing.</p> <p style="line-height: 20.79px;">She emphasises that good work design is not a one-size-fits-all strategy – it must addresses the physical, biomechanical, cognitive and psychosocial characteristics of work, together with the needs and the capabilities of the people involved.</p> <p style="line-height: 20.79px;">After the seminar, you can <a href="">ask Professor Parker questions and explore good work design concepts further on her LinkedIn page</a></p> <h2>Who is this presentation for?</h2> <p>Everyone who designs work, work systems and jobs: managers and HR specialists in small and large organisations, health and safety professionals and representatives.</p> <p>For educators and tertiary students with an interest in work design this session can be viewed with the supporting publication <a href="/node/1215"><em>Does the evidence and theory support the good work design principles? An Educational resource.</em></a></p> <h2>About the presenter</h2> <p>Professor Sharon Parker is Winthrop Professor at the Business School of the University of Western Australia. Her research focuses on job and work design and team work, organisational change and development, staff well-being and active mental health.</p> <p>She has published several books and chapters on job and work design, and numerous refereed journal articles, technical and practitioner publications. She has consulted in a wide range of public and private sector organisations.</p> <h2>Useful resources</h2> <ul style="line-height: 20.8px;"> <li><a href="/node/1215"><em>Does the evidence and theory support the good work design principles? An Educational resource</em></a></li> <li>Safe Work Australia <a href="/sites/swa/about/publications/pages/preventing-psychological-injury-fact-sheet">Preventing psychological injury fact sheet</a></li> <li>Safe Work Australia <a href="/node/305">Australian Strategy case study on reducing psychological injury at work</a></li> <li>Safe Work Australia <a href="/sites/swa/about/publications/pages/good-work-design"><em>Principles of Good Work Design</em></a> handbook</li> <li><a href=""><em>Principles and Evidence for Good Work Through Effective Design</em></a></li> <li><a href="">UK Health and Safety Executive guidance on reducing psychosocial risks</a></li> <li><a href="">UK Health and Safety Executive guidance on effective teamworking</a></li> <li>Safe Work Australia code of practice <a href="/sites/swa/about/publications/pages/manage-whs-risks-cop"><em>How to manage work health and safety risks</em></a></li> <li>Paper on the link between work design and the return on investment: <a href=""><em>How does human resource management influence organizational outcomes?</em></a> By Kaifeng Jiang, David P. Lepak, Jia Hu and Judith C. Bae</li> </ul> </div> </div> <div class="field transcript-group"> <div class="field__label">Transcript</div> <div class="clearfix text-formatted field field--name-field-html-transcript field--type-text-long field--label-hidden field__item"><p><strong>Good work design and applying it to psychosocial risks</strong></p> <p><strong>by Professor Sharon Parker, University of Western Australia's Business School</strong></p> <p>§ (Music Playing) §</p> <p><strong>Jennifer Taylor: </strong></p> <p>Good morning everybody. I'm Jennifer Taylor, the Chief Executive of Comcare. Thank you all for being here today for those that are with us in person and also for those that are joining us online. And I'd like to thank Michelle Baxter, the Chief Executive of Safe Work Australia for inviting me to launch this seminar. </p> <p>Firstly I'd like to acknowledge the traditional custodians of the land on which we meet today, the Ngunnawal people and pay my respects to elders past and present. I acknowledge and respect the continuing culture and the contribution that they make to life in this city and in this region.</p> <p>This presentation is part of a suite of virtual seminars being held throughout safety month to support the important goals of the Australian Work Health and Safety Strategy and congratulations to all at Safe Work Australia for putting on this seminar series. The last series has been extremely popular and they're an absolutely excellent opportunity for us to learn and share our experiences.</p> <p>It's also an opportunity to showcase the latest thinking, innovation, research, development and experiences in work health and safety. It's important to share ideas, experiences, skills and knowledge so that we can work together to achieve the Australian Strategy vision of healthy, safe and productive working lives.</p> <p>Before introducing our key speaker, Professor Sharon Parker, who's going to talk about good work design and applying it to psychosocial risks, I'd like to talk about the development of the Good Work Through Effective Design collaborative project that's been jointly led by WorkCover Queensland and Comcare. This initiative contributes to the Australian Strategy outcome of Healthy and Safe by Design because it aims to eliminate or minimise hazards through better work design. The <em>Principles and Evidence for Good Work Through Effective Design</em> report was commissioned by Comcare and written by our key speaker Professor Sharon Parker and Professor Mark Griffin of the University of Western Australia.</p> <p>It led to the development of ten guiding principles of good work design which aimed to encourage duty holders to move beyond compliance towards better practice. Broadly the principles are about identifying hazards and controlling risks, learning from experts, evidence and experience, engaging decision makers and leaders and actively involving people who do the work.</p> <p>The inclusion of "reasonably practicable" within the principles is emphasised as it recognises organisations will have varying capabilities and capacities. The principles also outline the importance of considering all hazards and risks together so that these risks collectively can be managed against what is practicable to protect employees from harm to their health, safety and welfare, improve employee health and wellbeing and improve business success through higher productivity.</p> <p>The Australian Strategy is underpinned by the principle that well designed healthy and safe workplaces give employees more productive lives. The Good Work Design Principles provide a practical framework to achieve that in the workplaces and more information is available on our website.</p> <p>Well I'd now like to introduce Professor Sharon Parker who is going to talk to us about good work design and how it can be applied to the very challenging area of psychosocial aspects of work. Across the Australian Public Service psychological injury represents 14% of all of our claims. But it represents 44% of all time lost and 42% of all cost. Good work design to minimise the risk to people in the workplace is absolutely essential and I know that I'm looking forward to hearing from Sharon. She'll take us through some of the contemporary aspects of good work design and its practical application.</p> <p>Professor Parker is the Winthrop Professor in Management and Organisation at the University of Western Australia's Business School. She is recognised as the world leader in the field of work design. She has more than 100 publications to her credit and her work has been cited over 6,000 times across the area of management, psychology, sociology and engineering. So will you please join me in welcoming Professor Sharon Parker.</p> <p>(Audience Applause)</p> <p><strong>Sharon Parker: </strong></p> <p>Thank you Jennifer. Good morning everybody. I'm very pleased to be here today. Thank you for coming along to the session.</p> <p>Okay. The average Australian adult spends about 90,000 hours in work and if you ran that back to back that would be about 11,000 days of work. So it's unsurprising that good work or bad work has a major impact on our lives and in aggregate across all of us a major impact on the economy and on civil society. So work really matters for people.</p> <p>This is the plan for this morning. First I will talk a little bit about what is work design. Second I will introduce you to the principles and describe a little bit about where they came from. Then I'm going to unpack the three sets of principles that we have - the ‘why’ principles, the ‘what’ principles and the ‘how’ principles – and finally I'll make some concluding comments.</p> <p>So let's begin with “What is work design?” Work design – this is my own definition – is about the content and organising of tasks, activities, relationships and responsibilities within a job or role or a set of jobs or roles. So if you consider for example the work design of a Police Officer job, the sorts of questions you might ask would be "Well which tasks should be in a particular job?", "What should be the variety of tasks?", "What should be the number of tasks?", "Which jobs should go to the Police Officer?", "Which should go to the civilian support staff?" and questions also about organising the work. So "Should those jobs be collectively organised as a team,or does it make sense for those to be more individual jobs?" Those are the sorts of questions that are at the heart of work design.</p> <p>When we talk about work design the language that we often use it to talk about particular job characteristics or work characteristics and the four focused on here I will develop a little further in the presentation. We can think about physical characteristics of work. We can think about biomechanical characteristics, cognitive characteristics and finally psychosocial characteristics. Let me unpack those a little further for you.</p> <p>So physical characteristics first of all focus on physical aspects of work like working at height or dealing with toxic chemicals or dealing with biological substances. So these are obviously fairly simple to understand. In 2011 there were about 120,000 serious workers' compensation claims and 75% of those pertained to injuries and accidents related to these physical aspects of work like slips or falls or body stresses. So these are very important and here's a simple example. Working with chemicals can expose you to potentially toxic chemicals.</p> <p>The second category is biomechanical characteristics of work. So here we're talking about those aspects of work that relate to your body and movement of the body. So aspects such as how much variety in posture do you have in your work for example? And obviously these biomechanical aspects of work can have major implications for musculoskeletal disorders and risk. And in fact Safe Work Australia in 2011 surveyed 4,500 workers and found that nearly all of those workers were exposed to some type of biomechanical risk. And the risk was particularly acute for some groups of workers such as young workers, male workers, workers at night. So biomechanical risks are really important and we need to give attention to how we think about body movement in the workplace.</p> <p>So here is another example. A construction worker for example might lift heavy loads repeatedly which can cause lower back strain.</p> <p>The third characteristic is cognitive characteristics. So these are harder to see because these are about the mental challenges or the cognitive demands of a job that arise from how complex or boring in fact the information is that needs to be processed. This is becoming a more important characteristic of work. So if you think about a lot of the physical tasks are now being absorbed by new technologies so we're actually seeing an overall shift in work towards more cognitive demands. That's a very important aspect to consider.</p> <p>So as an example of the sort of risk one might see I'm doing some research on cyber security agents. They spend a lot of time staring at a screen looking for cyber security risks. So that constant vigilance and focus actually can cause quite a lot of stress for them and of course can enhance their possibility of error. </p> <p>And the final set of characteristics are psychosocial work characteristics. So these are the more psychological aspects of work and we can typically think about them in terms of demands or psychological demands that are placed on people for example excess workload or conflicting expectations or unclear expectations, not really knowing what's required – these sorts of demands in the workplace. But also we can think of them in terms of resources or a lack of resources for doing the work and by resources we mean things like control. So having control over important decisions in your work turns out to be a really crucial feature from a psychosocial perspective.</p> <p>And another really crucial resource in work is having social support from people. Most people especially if you're having to deal with challenging demands need and benefit from having support in the workplace. So an example of this type of characteristic might be that you have a manager of a social worker who micro-manages everything that the social worker does which means that the social worker cannot give high quality care to their clients, which causes that person to experience strain and also probably is very demotivating.</p> <p>So that's what work design is all about – these four characteristics.</p> <p>What I'd like to do now is introduce some of the principles and how they came about.</p> <p> </p> <p>So these Work Design Principles sit within a bigger picture. So as Jennifer mentioned the bigger picture is the Australian Work Health and Safety Strategy and this strategy focuses on achieving healthy, safe and productive working lives through seven action areas and you can see those around the outside of this circle. One of those action areas is called 'Healthy and Safe by Design' and this is where work design sits. Healthy and Safe by Design focuses on two aspects. One is about the structure and the plant and the substances – so designing machinery for example to be safer – and the other is about the design of work processes and systems and that's really where the work design focus fits.</p> <p>So as part of this focus on Healthy and Safe by Design, Comcare, Workplace Health and Safety Queensland and Safe Work Australia have identified ten core principles for thinking about work design and this is the handbook that will be published very soon.</p> <p>The ten principles are all evidence based, hopefully easy to understand, they're all interconnected so they need to be thought of as a whole and also of course we've had to limit the number of those principles because otherwise it gets too unwieldy for being practical. And it's important to note that there's been a lot of consultation. Some of you I know were even involved in that consultation process to make sure that the principles sit comfortably with the many different stakeholders that are interested in or expert in work design.</p> <p>So there's three categories of principles. The first principles are what we're calling ‘Why Principles’ and these are really "Why would you even care about work design?", "Why does it matter?", "Why should an organisation or a business pay attention to this topic?" The second set of principles are ‘What Principles’. So if we care about work design and are persuaded on that, "What is good work design?" And the third set of principles of course then is "How do we go about getting good work design?" or "What are some of the process considerations?"</p> <p>So let's unpack first of all the ‘Why Principles’.</p> <p> </p> <p>The first principle is that good work design gives the highest level of protection so far as is reasonably practicable. Hopefully some of you recognise that principle as being derived from the Work Health and Safety Act. The bottom line is that there is a legal requirement for employers to care about people's work design. So workers and others should be given the highest practical level of protection against harm to their health, safety and welfare. So protection from hazards and risks that might arise from work. And one thing that's important and is going to become more important is recognising that when we talk about health this includes physical health but also mental health. And the way that the Work Health and Safety Act identifies how people can be protected from harm is through the elimination or minimisation of the risks that the work might give rise to. So persons conducting a business or undertaking have a duty of care to protect workers from risk so far as is reasonably practicable. So the first principle is basically we need to care about work design because there's a legal obligation to do so.</p> <p> </p> <p>Some of you will recognise this which is the Safe Work Australia's Code of Practice and this is about how do you achieve the best minimisation of risk and basically this is the hierarchy of controls. Ideally the level one, the preferred strategy is to eliminate the risk. If that's not possible then the next strategy is to substitute or isolate or reduce exposure to that risk. And then if that's not practicable then the final strategy is for there to be rules or procedures such as wearing equipment in the workplace. So let me just demonstrate that with some examples.</p> <p>Imagine that there's dangerous machinery in a workplace. The ideal, the level one strategy would be "Let's remove that machinery." Okay. That may not be possible. It may be absolutely essential to the work. So what might one do then? The next level might be to replace it with slightly safer machinery. There might be a better way of doing it or an equally good way of doing it that's safer. You might isolate the hazard. So you might lock the machine in a room and have workers remotely operate it. You might put some engineering controls in. So put some guards on the machine. So they would all be good strategies, perhaps not quite as good as getting rid of the dangerous machinery altogether. And then if none of those controls were feasible or practicable then you might consider training the workers to get them to operate the machine safely or you might focus on that they need to wear gloves and goggles and that would be more of a level three strategy – not the ideal because it relies on compliance from the workers. It only works if people follow the rules and wear the equipment, which increases the risk.</p> <p>Let's look at that in terms of long work hours, a more psychosocial work characteristic. So you could redesign the hours. So for example in the UK, trainee doctors were working extremely long hours causing all sorts of problems with burnout and patient error. So the UK government introduced a policy that trainee doctors should only work 48 hours a week. So that's an attempt to eliminate that hazard at the source. Actually there have been lots of complications and it hasn't really worked out that way but the intention was there. So it may not be possible for whatever reason to reduce the hours. So then what might you do?</p> <p>You might change the shift structure. So people might still work long hours but you might only allow them to do that for three days in a row and then give them a decent break in between. You might say "Well people are going to have to work long hours but let's look at the other demands that exist in the job and see if we can reduce some of those?" Or you might say "Okay people have to work long hours but let's at least give them some control over when they work those hours." So change another aspect of the work design to help manage the potential risk. And then of course there are level three strategies – most popular with organisations – and these would be things more around "Let's train people to deal with the long hours. So let's send them on resilience training” for example or "Let's give them all coaching in time management." They would be strategies that are aimed at trying to change the worker to better manage the risk. Or "Let's make sure we've got a good EAP system or support or counselling available so that if people are stressed as a result of the long working hours they can get some help."</p> <p>So I guess work design is all about trying to be at the level one and two end of this hierarchy of control by trying to change and modify the work to eliminate or reduce the hazards. Let’s go back – and there's a lot of evidence that this is more effective. So for example a review of 90 job stress interventions found that primary prevention (and by "primary prevention" they really mean level one strategy), level one and two strategies were the most effective in reducing work stress. Sometimes there was value in combining the level three strategies with the primary prevention. So for example redesign the work but also give the people some time management training. There's some evidence that that is good, but I guess this evidence suggests that just the level three or what is in the stress literature referred to as a "tertiary intervention", just those interventions are not as effective for dealing with work stress.</p> <p> </p> <p>So returning back to those examples that I have how might we redesign the work to reduce some of the risks? For example with the first one, working with chemicals, well we might just eliminate those chemicals or change the chemicals so they're not toxic, for example. With the repetitive lifting of heavy loads we might rotate the jobs. It might not be possible to get rid of that job but let's rotate it so that the person who's lifting the cartons off the truck all day gets a chance to go and do some other task that uses different muscles. The excessive vigilance such as a cyber security agent - maybe what we need to do there is build in decent breaks for that person. So a five minute break every 30 minutes or something like that. And finally with the example of the psychosocial work characteristic of not enough autonomy maybe we need to be training the supervisor to delegate more autonomy and give people more control over their work.</p> <p>So that's the first principle fundamentally about upholding the Work Health and Safety Act.</p> <p>The second why principle, "Why else would we care about work design and want to embark on it?" is that good work design enhances health and wellbeing. So the World Health Organisation defines health as "a complete state of physical, mental and social wellbeing and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity." So we're quite comfortable with this notion when it comes to physical health. Just because somebody is not sick does not make them healthy, okay? We would normally expect them to have a reasonable level of cardiovascular fitness. We'd expect them not to be drinking three bottles of wine a night or whatever, okay? They would have healthy behaviours and we're quite comfortable with that notion of physical health. But the same also applies to mental health. </p> <p>Good mental health isn't just the absence of burnout or the absence of anxiety and depression. Good mental health is also about people at work experiencing good wellbeing, having a sense of meaning, feeling confident, believing that they're learning and so on. Now there's a great deal of evidence. If we think of health then as having these elements of ill health but also these aspects of wellbeing or what I call active health there's a great deal of evidence as I've just discussed that good work design prevents or reduces ill health. But it also promotes or enhances this wellbeing and this active mental health.</p> <p>Some examples – enriched work design promotes self confidence which in turn enhances proactivity. So if you want a workforce where people are proactive and use their initiative and make things happen, good work design is a driver of that behaviour. Also evidence that good work design enhances creativity. So if innovation is important for your organisation, good work design can be a vehicle for achieving that. Work resources such as job control, support, information, directly influence teachers' levels of engagement. Job autonomy promotes commitment to the organisation which means employees are more likely to comply with safety procedures. And this is just the tip of the iceberg of a huge amount of evidence that shows that good work design isn't just about the prevention of harm but it's also about the promotion of this more active health and wellbeing.</p> <p> </p> <p>The third why and the final why principle is that good work design enhances business success and productivity. So three paths by which it does this and the first is that as we've just said good work design prevents ill health, stress and injury. In 2008 and '09 work related injury and illness were estimated to cost $60.6 billion to the Australian economy which is almost 5% of GDP which is a huge amount of money. And some of the costs that are tied up with illness and injury at work are things like compensation costs, the costs of replacing people including recruitment, advertising, the loss of knowledge when people leave, the costs of early retirement, the costs of EAP and health care and of course the cost of reputational damage. If there are fatalities for example in an organisation, that has a big consequence for the reputation of the organisation – as it indeed should. And so good work design affects business success partly because reduces these costs associated with illness and injury.</p> <p>The second pathway is as I've just said good work design promotes active health and wellbeing and there are a lot of performance benefits that derive from that. And I mentioned innovation, proactivity, creativity as some examples. So there's a lot of evidence that good work design enhances job performance and enables you to retain your most talented staff and that of course flows on to have effects for the business.</p> <p>And a final pathway I haven't talked about yet but is also relevant is that good work design is often just more efficient. It enables the better use of the skills that people have. It promotes learning and there's a lot of evidence about that and often it enables a faster response to a problem. The classic example if you're at the checkout queue there's a problem, you know, the person has to go and get their supervisor to unlock the key with a special code. You know, that’s a lack of control of the checkout operator that slows down service and is inefficient, and there are many, many examples that we could point to. So these are three of the pathways by which good work design enhances business productivity and this idea is recognised by others. The World Health Organization says "There is no trade-off between health and productivity. A virtuous circle can be established” and there's a lot of evidence. I won't go through it all. </p> <p>One – here's an example of some anecdotal evidence. Let's say you have a very dictatorial CEO and this is a real case from the Health and Productivity Report. So that causes a loss of morale. Okay. Twenty-eight percent of middle managers leave because they've got this over-controlling CEO. Of course they take with them all the corporate knowledge that they've got. Meantime all the staff are left there and they're uncertain and there's chaos and nobody knows who's managing them and that causes a loss of morale to them. That turns out to cost about $176,000 to replace those staff who've left and about $440,000 in reduced productivity assuming that there's about a 10% decline in productivity. So the total cost is around $616,000. Now that's just anecdotal but gives you an example of how one feature can flow – have a ripple effect in terms of cost.</p> <p>But there's also more systematic evidence, for example a meta analysis which is an analysis of lots of studies. So a meta analysis of 116 studies basically shows a link between work design and the return on investment and the return on assets in companies, and you can read that paper later.</p> <p>So to summarise why should we even care about work design? Well it matters from many perspectives. Certainly it matters from the point of view of legal compliance and the prevention of harm but it matters for many other potential outcomes that are important to organisations.</p> <p> </p> <p>So those are the ‘why’ principles, why we should care about work design. Now I want to move to the ‘what’ principles. So what is good work design?</p> <p> </p> <p>So the first principle in this category – principle four – good work design addresses the physical, biomechanical, cognitive and psychosocial characteristics that I've already discussed, together with the needs and the capabilities of the people involved. So one of the first points to make is that – and I guess I've given examples of how you can consider these work characteristics – but there is a tendency for people to just look at one set of the characteristics and that's partly because the interest and expertise in these different aspects have come from different disciplines.</p> <p>So the physical characteristics may come more from engineering for example. The biomechanical characteristics might be more the province of physiotherapists and ergonomists. The cognitive characteristics again the domain of ergonomists and then psychosocial tends to be more organisational or psychological disciplines involved. So the interest in these characteristics has come out of different disciplines which can mean that when experts get involved in designing work they may tend to focus just on one particular perspective. But it's important to consider them together because they can sometimes be in tension with each other. So for example many of your jobs I'm guessing and hoping would be good psychosocial jobs. So you would have some decent autonomy, some meaning, some challenge, some support. So from a psychosocial perspective really good, healthy jobs.</p> <p>But maybe there are some biomechanical risks associated with that. For example, maybe you sit at your desk for 10 hours a day absorbed in your interesting, challenging work. So on the one hand, a good work design from a psychosocial perspective. On the other hand presenting a risk from a biomechanical perspective. So we need to look at jobs fairly holistically. And when these tensions exist between these characteristics they need to be considered and they need to be managed. So let me give you another example.</p> <p>So I'm from Perth and in Perth we have in the past few years seen the growth of automated mining centres. So basically operators operate the mine from Perth in places just near the airport and the mines are thousands of kilometres away. So you can imagine that this is a positive change in terms of physical risks. They're not out there driving hundred-tonne trucks. So it reduces those risks but actually there's quite a lot of cognitive demand and vigilance required in these jobs which is really different for these people that actually came from a different background of work. So it can be quite cognitively demanding and stressful work for people and it changes the biomechanical risks. Whereas maybe the risks before were around lifting and moving big, heavy tyres and things, now the risks are sitting, sitting all day long. And a lot of evidence now that extended periods of sitting invoke considerable risks to people's long term health.</p> <p>The other component of that principle is to think about the aspects of work design together with the needs and capabilities of the people involved. So work design can't be a one-size-fits-all strategy. It needs to accommodate the needs of the people that are in the work. Just a very quick couple of examples. We know that people who do work that's very emotionally demanding – think about a nurse in the intensive care unit – very emotionally demanding work but we also know from research that people with lower self esteem tend to be more affected by emotional demands. So this might be something that we need to take into account when thinking about emotionally demanding work.</p> <p>Here's another example: from a biomechanical perspective we also know that mature or older workers are going to be more affected by heavy lifting. And an example of that: a German car manufacturing company that I am connected to, their average age now is approaching 50 of their production workers. So they are having to experiment with "Are there ways that we can make cars with these workers that are less physically demanding?" So they're having to accommodate the abilities of the workers in the design of their work, and good work design takes that into account.</p> <p>In the same way that good work design takes account of the person, good work design also takes account of the situation. So the context, the business needs and the broader work environment. So if you imagine a person there in the magnifying glass doing their work, you know, people have peers around them. Sometimes they have to work really closely with those peers. Sometimes they don't. They have a leader. Companies vary in terms of their management style. They use technology and the technology varies and changes. They have payment systems that can be different across different organisations, and of course different organisations have different strategies. So all of these things need to be thought about when configuring work design. </p> <p>If you're designing work in a company where innovation is crucial you might come to a different conclusion if you're designing work in a company where cost reduction is the primary strategy. So these factors need to be considered when designing work and in a sense this is Systems Theory if you're familiar with that. What it means again is that you need to design the work that's fit for the purpose, for the strategy, for the context, not just adopt an off-the-shelf solution or copy what someone else is doing. </p> <p>What it also means is when you're designing work you need to often take account of the broader factors. So many times organisations will embark on a work design; for example they might decide to introduce team work and then discover that everybody is paid an individual bonus according to their individual performance. So straight away there's an incompatibility there between the work design focused on team work and the payment structure focused on individual behaviour. So when configuring work one needs to look at those broader factors.</p> <p>So let me give that example of team working and it can be very tempting for organisations to say "Well they've got team working over there. We should have it too. So let's have team working." But team working only really makes sense if the tasks of the team members are interdependent. In other words if there's a reason for the team members to actually cooperate and work together to achieve a collective goal, if there's not then there's no need for team working. If you're going to have team working you're going to need to have team members who've got quite good interpersonal skills. So that needs to be considered and do the organisational systems reinforce team work? </p> <p>So I gave the example of pay but it might also extend to things like recruitment for example. Are we recruiting into our organisation people with a teamwork approach or not? So these are the sorts of factors that need to be considered and if you get it wrong it can have consequences. So my colleagues and I did a study many years ago in a wire manufacturing company and we found that where they tried to introduce team work in a situation where there wasn't very much interdependence between the task members. Basically these were wire makers that were drawing very long pieces of wire and it really didn't make sense. It really wasn't even possible for them to collaborate with other wire makers. That actually caused the employees to experience stress and dissatisfaction because they were expected to work like a team and yet it didn't make any sense and they couldn't do that. So this principle is about aligning the work design with the bigger picture of the organisation.</p> <p> </p> <p>The next ‘What’ principle is that good work design is applied along the supply chain and across the operational life cycle. So first of all recognising that businesses can shape the work design practices along the supply chain. And for example the National Heavy Vehicle laws have this idea of a chain of responsibility about the responsibility of people in the transport chain to care about the work design of all of the people in the supply chain. And another example some of you may have watched the <em>Four Corners</em> program on the ABC a couple of months ago looking at the suppliers of supermarkets and this is a quote from the program: "The slave-like conditions found on some of the farms supplying the supermarkets." So it's important not only to be thinking about the work design of your organisation but if you have control and influence also be thinking about the work design of the suppliers. </p> <p>And in a similar vein work design can be relevant across all stages of a product lifecycle, of a service lifecycle or of an organisational lifecycle. So here imagine an organisation starting up. Work design can apply in thinking about "Well how are we going to lay out the processes?", "What sort of machinery are we going to have?", "Who are we going to recruit to do this work because if we get a good fit of the people that do the work with their skills and abilities that's going to reduce risks and so on?" So it applies at the start-up end. Of course during the organisation's growth work design issues apply and we know that from your own personal experience. And even if an organisation downsizes or closes work design can be relevant. So let me give you a little, quick example of that. </p> <p>So I worked with a chemical processing company that downsized by 40% over three years. Now when an organisation downsizes by 40% you could imagine that the survivors – the people that are left in the workplace – are going to have higher demands, right, because the same amount of work still needs to be done but there are 40 fewer percent people to do it and that's exactly what happened in this organisation. The demands increased but at the same time that the organisation downsized they introduced a program, an empowerment program aimed at increasing the autonomy of the workforce and increasing the workforce's engagement in participative decision making. And so ultimately – and we tracked this through surveys – there was no net increase in stress for the survivors over the time and actually a decrease in stress for some. And for the company as a whole improved performance and also improved safety performance. So by paying attention to work design, by thinking about "Well how can we deal with the fact that people are going to have higher demands?" the organisation managed the downsizing process with fewer risks to the people that were left.</p> <p> </p> <p>In the last 10 minutes I'm just going to talk through very quickly the ‘how’ principles, the “how do you get this good work design?” and the first principle is probably fairly obvious and that's about engaging the decision makers and the leaders in this process. So at the end of the day work design or work redesign is going to be most effective when there is support and endorsement and this needs to be genuine, active, visible support. It's no good just having the sort of rhetoric without the reality and I'll give an example of that in a minute. And that's partly because even though work design might on the surface appear to be free because it's not – it’s not a whiz-bang new machine that cost $5 million, – it's changing the work. Actually to do it well there needs to be an investment of time and energy in the change process and potentially in training people and of course in changing these broader organisational systems. So it's not free. So you do need the commitment of leaders. </p> <p>Let me give you a very quick example of an organisation that we worked with introducing lean production. Again we tracked this change over time with surveys. First of all there was very little engagement of employees in the process and the surveys pre- and post- for a particular group that we focused on, a pilot group, showed that compared to comparison groups they had lower job control where they introduced this particular moving assembly line, they had less variety, they had increased depression, reduced commitment and I could go on. Bottom line: bad work design.</p> <p>We gave the feedback of course and then the company decided to introduce this particular initiative across the whole organisation. So this is a case where the leaders were not genuinely committed to work design. Actually their company mission statement says "We are dedicated to exceeding customer expectations… in an environment of employee involvement and commitment” and some of their values on their website talk about the importance of workers, and yet you see this big gap between their espoused values and their enacted values. So it's the genuine commitment of leaders and decision makers that is important.</p> <p>The next principle is yes, you need to engage the leaders and the decision makers but you absolutely must actively involve the people who actually do the work as well, including those in the supply chain and the networks if necessary. At the very least you need to consult, ask people "What do you think of what we're doing?" at the very least. But ideally you should really go beyond consulting to actually involve people in the design of work. Involvement and by that I mean if you're redesigning people's work they can help. They can get involved and help come up with options. They can get involved in the evaluation and so forth and that's going to give them ownership and engagement. So it's actually going to mean you get better decisions because who knows the work better than the people that do it themselves? And of course involvement is a protective factor in and of itself. When people are engaged in making decisions, that enhances their wellbeing.</p> <p> </p> <p>And if you're going to ask people to be involved in the work design of course you then need to share information with them so that they can make good and sensible decisions. So hand-in-hand with involving people is ensuring people have the information to make those good decisions. And this is in fact highlighted in the Work Health and Safety Act. So this is part of the responsibility and part of the duty of care of an employer.</p> <p> </p> <p>There's a lot of evidence that this matters. So for example a review of 26 studies of interventions to reduce manual handling problems, the evidence shows that direct involvement of workers is a critical success factor. Those interventions that work tend to involve the workers and the same in the stress field. Those interventions that work tend to involve people and facilitate that participation.</p> <p> </p> <p>The ninth principle is about identifying hazards, assessing and controlling risks and seeking continuous improvement. And this really again comes out of the Code of Practice from Safe Work Australia and ties closely to the Work Health and Safety Act. This actually recommends a particular process and I'm just going to describe it from the point of view of some physical characteristics and also from the point of view of psychosocial characteristics. So the first step is identify the hazards. What might be the hazards in the workplace? Now with physical characteristics it might be as simple as looking around – okay – observation because you can usually see those things. </p> <p>But with psychosocial hazards you can't necessarily see them. So you might need to do something more like surveys or analyse exit interviews or look at attendance records and see if they've changed. But you probably need to do a bit more detective work in a sense, because they are not necessarily as visible as the physical hazards. And then after that of course having identified "Okay there might be a potential hazard here” "There might be” for example, "a possibility of bullying and harassment indicated in exit interviews." The next question is "Well what risk does that impose to people?", "Maybe the bully has left and it’s not a risk anymore but let's assess the risk” and that's the second step. And then the third step of course is then to put in place some processes to control that risk and those are the things that we've talked about – the level one, two and three strategies. </p> <p>But what's important is that there's a good diagnosis phase, so not leaping straight into the solution but a good checking out of what is the situation. And the final step for some reason is not showing up there, is to evaluate what has actually happened. So you've put in place these controls, you've put in place a bullying program, you've got rid of the bully or you've removed the machinery, whatever, what's the effect of that? and it's really important to do that evaluation. </p> <p> </p> <p>And the final principle is the importance of trying to learn from experts, evidence and experience.</p> <p>If needed, there are many experts in work design who can be sought and what ideally is people need to work together – different experts need to work together and learn from each other. So this is a quote from Chris Clegg: "Most design processes are dominated by people with partial forms of expertise such as the design of technology being dominated by engineers and other technical experts. Consideration of people, human and organisational issues is neglected which means that the full range of organisation and job design choices that may be possible are typically under-represented." So in another words ideally more than one stakeholder, more than one expert should be involved in shaping the work design so that we don't get this under-representation of the options. There is often more choice for work design than people recognise.</p> <p>I won't go into the detail but we've been doing some research looking at how do people design jobs, what we call "naive job designers" which is basically just managers and everyday people. How do they design jobs if given a chance? and our research basically shows that people design very bad jobs. People slip into designing Taylorist sort of jobs with very little variety, very little autonomy. So if you just leave it to people to intuitively design work it's not necessarily going to deal with some of the hazards that might occur.</p> <p>The second aspect to this principle is there's also a lot of evidence. I've just reviewed the literature on work design. There's more than 17,000 articles on work design in the published journals and 4,500 in psychology and management alone. Nobody expects organisations to read all that. So there's two things that can help. Experts can help translate this evidence, but also there are a lot of reviews and syntheses and Safe Work Australia and Comcare and also other similar bodies in the UK like Health and Safety Executive, they've got beautiful synopses of this material. So there's a lot of guidance available to help.</p> <p> </p> <p>And finally it's important to learn from experience. So experts and evidence are helpful and useful and we would totally recommend them but also as I said work design needs to be tailored to fit the situation and to fit the people. So it's really important to try things out and see how they work for that organisation and gather the data and do the evaluation and see if the experience is suggesting that they are helping to manage the risks. So this is the importance I guess of good monitoring and good evaluation of the changes that you might make.</p> <p> </p> <p>To summarise we've talked about the importance of why you might design work differently and yes, it's about legal compliance and that's absolutely critical. But it's also about creating work environments where people have good wellbeing, where they're learning and thriving. And it's also about creating efficient organisations where people are maximally productive and innovative and creative. And work design is a vehicle for all of those agendas. What is good work design? Think probably the most important message to come away with is that it's that holistic approach of looking not just at the physical aspects or not just at the psychosocial aspects but looking at all of those aspects in relation to the person and the needs of the person but also in relation to the business and the needs of the business.</p> <p>Work design can sometimes be pretty straightforward. It might be as simple as an injured worker is coming back to work and the doctor and the worker negotiate with the boss to make some changes. It might be as simple as that but many times it's more complicated than that because work is part of that bigger system of an organisation and as I said it's intimately related to other systems like payment and selection and so on. And because of that it's really important to sort of think about the change processes. And so the ‘how’ principles are all about how do you get that sort of larger scale work design actually embedded and working effectively in an organisation? No matter how small or how big the work design it's fundamentally important to involve the workers in the process.</p> <p> </p> <p>So I want to conclude. As I just mentioned I've just done a review of work design research in the past 100 years and in doing that I found an article written in the <em>Journal of Applied Psychology</em> which is one of the most important journals in my field that was actually written almost 100 years ago about the importance of job design. So I just want to share with you a quote from that paper. "Every man should be more of a man for having worked." Sorry, "Every man should be more of a man, a better man for having worked a day. The humdrum shop operated by humdrum workmen managed by humdrum superintendents, dominated by humdrum ideals should be banished to Humdrum Land if for no other reason than to save the men." </p> <p>I suggest we still have a fair number of humdrum jobs in our workplaces not just affecting men but also affecting women. So hopefully by taking on board some of these principles we can indeed banish those jobs to Humdrum Land and those 11,000 days that most of us spend in work hopefully all of those days can be safe and productive and make us better people.</p> <p>So thank you very much.</p> <p>(Audience Applause) </p> <p>And questions, comments? </p> <p> </p> <p>Yes?</p> <p><strong>Audience Member: </strong></p> <p>Thanks Sharon for that interesting presentation. I'm Amanda Day from the CSIRO. My question is I'm looking for what would be your advice to people looking to apply and implement these principles for the first time?</p> <p><strong>Sharon Parker: </strong></p> <p>For the first time? I guess the first piece of advice would be to read the handbook which – we've had to sort of rush through the principles a little bit today but the handbook involves lots of examples of different applications in different sorts of industries and the handbook also signals to other sources that people go to. So I guess I'd start there with first of all there's a nice summary in there. Start with that and then that will refer to many other sources that can help. So, you know, learning from other organisations that have gone down this path or experts that can help and so on. So I guess I'd say to an organisation thinking about this for the first time use the resources that are there and that have been developed. Thank you for the question.</p> <p>Any more questions? Yes? It's – Howard – here we go.</p> <p><strong>Audience Member: </strong></p> <p>Thank you. Fantastic Sharon. Thanks so much for that. Just really interesting to see that involving sort of picture.</p> <p><strong>Sharon Parker: </strong></p> <p>Great.</p> <p><strong>Audience Member: </strong></p> <p>And having been in work health and safety since the ‘80s which is quite a long time I feel that whole thing of we're standing on the shoulders of giants and I'm quite interested because I sort of cut my teeth in safety management systems, you know, management commitment, hierarchy of control, supervision, consultation and I see so much of it. But I'd just be interested in your concept of how it links in with this.</p> <p><strong>Sharon Parker: </strong></p> <p>Yeah. Great question.</p> <p><strong>Audience Member: </strong></p> <p>Thanks.</p> <p><strong>Sharon Parker: </strong></p> <p>And I mean – I guess the principles have been deliberately designed to be underpinned by the same core messages that many health and safety systems already have. And as I alluded to – and a couple of the principles focus explicitly on things that are in the Work Health and Safety Act such as the hierarchy of control. And most people in this area are familiar with that and they understand how that works. And I guess what these principles are trying to do is say most people are familiar and understand how they work in relation to the more physical aspects but they can also work in relation to the psychosocial aspects. So let's also think about those and have that more holistic perspective. So hopefully the principles are very tightly tied to what organisations are already thinking about who are focusing on the health and safety aspects. </p> <p>Thank you.</p> <p><strong>Audience Member: </strong></p> <p>Great.</p> <p><strong>Audience Member: </strong></p> <p>Aileen Conroy from Human Factors and Ergonomics Society of Australia. Thank you Sharon. My interest is particularly when it comes down to the new job that's just about to be created. I work in a hospital and it's a very complex system and what I see is that say the government says "We need this statistic to be gathered in this hospital” somebody just says "Okay how are we going to do that?" and they create a job. They don't actually think about any of this. Is that what you mean by "Taylorist"?</p> <p><strong>Sharon Parker: </strong></p> <p>Yes.</p> <p><strong>Audience Member: </strong></p> <p>Yeah.</p> <p><strong>Sharon Parker: </strong></p> <p>I think what happens is people tend to design jobs that sort of fit with their assumptions about what work should be and even though we're probably not conscious of it, people sort of intuitively hold this idea that, you know, simple – jobs that have all the same tasks for example put into one are going to be more efficient because they're more specialised. And that's a fairly pervasive idea that's sort of in people's heads that's very Tayloristic and that might be the best way of doing it. I don't know. But the important point is to open up the options and say "Okay that's one way of doing it but maybe a person searching for statistics all day long or whatever is going to have some risks of boredom or whatever. Would it make more sense actually if they also were liaising with the customer or they were also, I don't know, gathering some primary data or whatever?” But ask the question at least.</p> <p>A lot of the time the jobs that we have are just taken for granted and we don't even see that they could be configured another way and when there's a new job it just slots into the existing without saying "Is there a different way or a better way we could do this?" So I guess part of the agenda here is hopefully just for people to ask that question. "Is there a better way we could configure these jobs or what we're calling a job? Should we have a think about which tasks really should be in there to make it more meaningful and fewer psychosocial risks?" So it's asking the question. Thank you.</p> <p><strong>Audience Member: </strong></p> <p>May I drill down just a little bit further?</p> <p><strong>Sharon Parker: </strong></p> <p>Sure.</p> <p><strong>Audience Member: </strong></p> <p>So if I go in to do the work station assessment and I think "Okay this person's reporting symptoms but I don't think it's actually to do with the way their work station's set up. I think it's to do with the psychosocial aspects of their job” and this has actually happened to me as you can kind of see. And I put in their report this section and then their supervisor takes umbrage about the fact that I am actually suggesting that the job design was a problem and this person shouldn't have three different supervisors who don't work together and things like that. For those who work actually on the ground have you got a suggestion for something we could point the supervisor towards? Would you say the handbook would be the way to go?</p> <p><strong>Sharon Parker: </strong></p> <p>Yes. So what you're describing actually is a classic role conflict and in fact the evidence suggests that role conflict is one of the most stressful psychosocial work aspects. If you've got three different people telling you to do three different things and there's no schema for prioritising it's a classic cause of stress. </p> <p>So hopefully you would be able to go to the handbook and say "Role conflict appears to be a challenge for this job and here's some tips on how to address it." And then if perhaps you were presenting the supervisor first of all with a language for talking about it because sometimes that's half the challenge and second of all with some ideas about how to address it, perhaps then it's not quite so threatening because there's that – and it's also recognising that this is something that many people face. It's not the supervisor's fault necessarily. You know, they just probably inherited the management of this job but it gives you a language and a way of talking about it hopefully.</p> <p><strong>Audience Member: </strong></p> <p>Thank you.</p> <p><strong>Sharon Parker: </strong></p> <p>Great question. Thank you.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Audience Member: </strong></p> <p>Wendy Elford from Now to Next. My question is when we do the job design quite often it's done in a pilot in a small team. When the job is rolled out it's exposed to everything that changes in that job over a long time and quite often the pilot is done with a small team that can see the results quite easily. Once it's out in the wild all the results are particularly hidden particularly if you take in some of the issues to do with the built environment which are controlled by people who are often not HR people and not connected with the job designers. So how do you keep it together and keep it real over the long term?</p> <p><strong>Sharon Parker: </strong></p> <p>Yeah. Great question and I mean what you're describing is a classic problem with the change strategy of pilots and then rollout, because what happens with a pilot is everyone's invested usually in making it work. So there's a lot of attention, there's a lot of resources and sure enough it works, right, because it's had all that attention and resource and fine-tuning and tailoring to that particular pilot. And then when it's cascaded out there's not enough resources for the same level of attention and then issues emerge. </p> <p>So I guess it's – I guess it comes back to what I said earlier that changing work is not necessarily free. It requires resources. So I guess in that case it might be important to set up some people whose responsibility it is to manage the process of the rollout knowing in advance that there are going to be some challenges and some issues. Just because it's all worked in the pilot it's not going to necessarily work for everyone else. So I think as long as people are entering into it knowing that and there have been perhaps some roles to set up to support that rollout then you could be managing some of the risks associated with that. So put in place some controls I guess in a pre-emptive type of way.</p> <p>It's a very good problem and very classic. You try something over here in this hospital and it works and then it's – and partly it's the way it is cascaded out too, because often people try to then take what was learnt in that particular setting and codify it and make it standard for everybody else, when part of what happened in that particular pilot was that people adapted it to work for themselves. So I think the participation principle would also be really important there as well, that even if it's cascaded out and you're trying to do something that's applicable to all there'll still need to be some tailorisation that comes out of full participation. So great. Thank you.</p> <p>Yes?</p> <p><strong>Audience Member: </strong></p> <p>Thank you very much Professor Parker. It's been a real eye opener and fascinating. Helen Righton from Safe Work Australia. You've talked a little bit about a couple of the challenges historically in applying these principles.</p> <p><strong>Sharon Parker: </strong></p> <p>Yes.</p> <p><strong>Audience Member: </strong></p> <p>Maybe you could just talk a little bit more about some other challenges that you see in applying those principles please?</p> <p><strong>Sharon Parker: </strong></p> <p>Great question. Thank you. I think one of the major challenges that we face particularly in the area of work stress is the temptation of organisations to focus just at level three. So there's a lot of organisations that have invested in providing EAP services. There's a lot of excitement and interest around training workers to be more optimistic and resilient. And those things are important but they frequently do not deal with the root cause of the stress. And that's a harder message for organisations to swallow. In some senses it's easier for organisations to send everybody off on training than it is to change their shift structures or to, you know, look at the micromanaging behaviour of their leaders. So I think one of the challenges is getting organisations to go further up the hierarchy when it comes to psychosocial risks. I think they get it with the physical risk because it's sort of almost intuitive. If there's a dangerous machine try to replace it. It's harder to grasp that concept I think with psychosocial risks. </p> <p>So that's probably one of the challenges and the other challenge I think is getting organisations to believe that psychosocial risks matter. Again with a physical risk, a toxic chemical, no one's going to argue that that's bad for people. Okay. But things like role conflict as we just discussed or long work hours, you know, there will be some organisations that say "Well that's not our problem. That's just the worker is not up to the job” or, you know, that "they just need to be tougher." And so getting them to actually – getting organisations to say "No look, if people here are routinely working 12 hours a day that is something we should pay attention to and thinking about the expectations we're placing on people." That can be challenging. </p> <p>So I think getting people to recognise that psychosocial risks are just as problematic as the physical risks is a challenge. But one that hopefully organisations are going to be listening to more because of the rising incidence of work stress and the problems of mental health. It's becoming more and more spoken about and evidenced. So hopefully that will change.</p> <p><strong>Audience Member: </strong></p> <p>Thank you.</p> <p><strong>Sharon Parker: </strong></p> <p>Yes?</p> <p><strong>Audience Member: </strong></p> <p>Thank you. Professor Parker my name is Alex Allars and I'm also from CSIRO. I'm interested in the notion of what an individual employee can do in this space. A lot of the job design that's been discussed is about an organisation doing something to employees. It has to be fit for purpose and it has to involve them. But what role can they realistically play?</p> <p><strong>Sharon Parker: </strong></p> <p>That's a great question and actually in the work design literature, there's been a lot of interest in this concept called "crafting" or "job crafting" and the basic idea being that most people, given a little bit of latitude, craft the job, especially professional jobs. You know, you craft the job around your expertise and your interests. So personally as an academic I have three responsibilities in my job – research, teaching and leadership. You know, I craft those responsibilities to best fit my preferences and my expertise. So in many jobs there's some scope to do that.</p> <p>You probably need some autonomy to do that too. So some jobs that are very lacking in control there's no scope to do that whatsoever. So employees can shape their own jobs and they can do it in many different ways. They can do it just through a sort of natural evolution of what they focus on. They can do it by going to their boss and saying, you know, "I would like more decision making responsibility in this area” or "I feel I'm experiencing conflicting expectations. When I experience this please tell me what I should do. Which should I give more priority to?" So people can absolutely take responsibility and try to make their job a better job and people do.</p> <p>I guess what I would also say is that that's important and we should encourage that but it does not dissolve responsibility for the organisation to create jobs in which people can do that. So in the crafting literature there's a bit of a temptation to focus on crafting as a solution to everything. I mean I happen to think if you work in say a call centre where every single word you speak is crafted by someone else and you cannot deviate from the script, I happen to think that crafting is not going to help you much. Okay. Maybe the job needs to be changed too. So both things should ideally go in parallel but great question. Thank you.</p> <p> </p> <p>Okay. It looks like that's all the questions. </p> <p>So thank you very much guys for your very thoughtful questions and participation in the workshop. </p> <p>Thank you.</p> <p>(Audience Applause) </p> <p>§ (Music Playing) §</p> <p><strong>[End of Transcript]</strong></p> </div> <div class="field field--name-field-downloadable-transcripts field--type-entity-reference field--label-hidden field__items"> <div class="field__item"><article class="media media--type-file media--view-mode-default"> <div class="field field--name-field-media-file field--type-file field--label-hidden field__item"> <span class="file file--mime-application-pdf file--application-pdf"> <a href="" type="application/pdf">good-work-design-and-psychosocial-risks-application.pdf</a></span> </div> </article> </div> <div class="field__item"><article class="media media--type-file media--view-mode-default"> <div class="field field--name-field-media-file field--type-file field--label-hidden field__item"> <span class="file file--mime-application-vnd-openxmlformats-officedocument-wordprocessingml-document file--x-office-document"> <a href="" type="application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document">good-work-design-and-psychosocial-risks-application.docx</a></span> </div> </article> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> Thu, 19 Mar 2020 11:13:53 +0000 Broadcast in 2015 Case study: Good work through effective design <div class="node node--type-media node--view-mode-rss layout layout--onecol"> <div class="layout__region layout__region--content"> <div class="field field--name-body field--type-text-with-summary field--label-above"> <div class="field__label">Body</div> <div class="field__item"><h2>Who is this presentation for?</h2> <p>This video is for workers, managers, health and safety representatives and professional advisers. It will also be useful when combined with other resources from the Virtual Seminar Series for those developing curriculum packages on work design.</p> <h2>About the presenter</h2> <p style="line-height: 20.8px;">Rachel Hawkins, Director, Engagement and Insurer Services, Office of Industrial Relations, Queensland, introduces this video and explains the Good Work Design Principles.</p> <p style="line-height: 20.8px;">Managers and workers from Holy Cross Laundry and Burstows Funeral Home, and Workplace Health and Safety Queensland representatives, describe how those two businesses applied the Principles during major changes to their operations.</p> <h2>Useful resources</h2> <ul> <li>Safe Work Australia <a href="/sites/swa/about/publications/pages/good-work-design"> <em>Principles of Good Work Design</em> </a></li> <li>Safe Work Australia <a href="/sites/swa/australian-strategy/case-studies/pages/case-studies">Australian Work Health and Safety Strategy case studies</a></li> <li><a href="">Workplace Health and Safety Queensland</a></li> <li>Workplace Health and Safety Queensland <a href="">Good work design for young workers</a></li> </ul> </div> </div> <div class="field transcript-group"> <div class="field__label">Transcript</div> <div class="clearfix text-formatted field field--name-field-html-transcript field--type-text-long field--label-hidden field__item"><p><strong>Good work design</strong></p> <p><strong>Workplace Health and Safety Queensland</strong></p> <p><strong>Screen text: </strong>Good work design – Workplace Health and Safety Queensland </p> <p><strong>Rachel Hawkins (Director, Engagement and Insurer Services, Office of Industrial Relations): </strong>Ensuring health and safety by good work design is essential to maintaining your business’s productivity and success, its safety record, and to engage and motivate your workers through positive interaction.</p> <p>Good work is healthy and safe work where the hazards and risks are eliminated or minimised in order to prevent injury. Good work is also where the work design optimises human performance, job satisfaction and business success.</p> <p>A ‘Work designer’ is anyone who makes decisions about the design or redesign of work. They not only include experts such as engineers, architects, ergonomists or psychologists but also every-day decision makers in the workplace such as those responsible for staffing rosters, IT systems and the way work is done. </p> <p>Those with a primary duty of care and those with specific design duties relating to the design of machinery, substances and structures under Work Health and Safety laws also have a role.</p> <p>To assist with planning and implementing good work design, work health and safety regulators, unions and employer groups nationally have agreed on ten good work design principles.</p> <p>Let’s look at the ten principles and how they have been applied at two workplaces, Holy Cross Laundry and Burstows funeral home.</p> <p><strong>On screen text: Holy Cross Laundry</strong></p> <p><strong>Bob:</strong> We specialise in providing healthcare linen to the major private hospitals in the Brisbane area.</p> <p>We employ about 150 people. Of those, 40 people have an intellectual disability.</p> <p><strong>Mandy:</strong> Our WorkCover history was pretty dismal, to be quite honest. The culture wasn't the best it could be.</p> <p><strong>Bob:</strong> We were moving to a situation where our WorkCover claims were more than our annual surplus.</p> <p>And we've been able to turn that all around.</p> <p>As a result of the strategies that we implemented, we reduced our claims by 85 per cent over a two-year period. </p> <p><strong>On screen text: Burstows Funeral Home</strong></p> <p><strong>Ian: </strong>Burstows are a fourth generation funeral home, since 1900. There’s about 40 staff in total.</p> <p><strong>Patricia: </strong>The funeral industry is actually quite a high pressure industry to work in.</p> <p><strong>Ian: </strong>You’re dealing with families in their most vulnerable times. </p> <p><strong>Patricia</strong>: Those psychosocial risks, no matter how small an issue that it might be, within an organisation, for that individual, it can lead to depression and anxiety, and, a lot of stress for them.</p> <p><strong>Christopher</strong>: The thing that probably stresses me the most about the industry, is um you want to help everyone; and just feeling helpless to go that step further.</p> <p><strong>Christopher</strong>: Grief takes many forms.</p> <p><strong>Robyn:</strong> there are pressures on us for time.</p> <p><strong>Robyn</strong>: If you imagine that I am a wedding planner, that's exactly what I do, except I only have three days to complete the task. </p> <p><strong>Ian:</strong> If we have a funeral at 3 o'clock on such a day, that's exactly what has to happen.</p> <p><strong>Christopher</strong>: Say in a half hour period, we could have six families call up, and they all want us at the same time, to go and meet with them, to bring their loved ones into our care.</p> <p><strong>Rachel: </strong>The ten principles of good work design fit into three sections:</p> <ol> <li>Why good work design is important.</li> <li>What should be considered in good work design</li> <li>How good work is designed.</li> </ol> <p>Let’s have a look at the first set of principles starting from the outside of the model and moving in.</p> <p>How is good work designed?</p> <p> </p> <p>Principle 7. Engage decision makers and leaders</p> <p>Principle 8. Actively involve the people who do the work, including those in the supply chain and networks</p> <p>Principle 9. Identify hazards, assess and control risks, and seek continuous improvement</p> <p>Principle 10. Learn from the experts, evidence and experience</p> <p>These four ‘how’ principles are the actions or steps that should be used to achieve good work design.</p> <p>Screen text: Engage decision makers and leaders</p> <p><strong>Rachel:</strong> Work design or redesign is most effective when there is a high level of visible commitment, practical support, and engagement by decision makers. Steps should be taken to engage them in the good work design process.</p> <p>Leaders can support good work design by ensuring the principles are appropriately included for example in:</p> <ul> <li>key organisational policies and procedures</li> <li>proposals and contracts for workplace change</li> <li>managers’ responsibilities and key performance indicators, and</li> <li>business management systems and audit reports.</li> </ul> <p> </p> <p><strong>Screen text:</strong> Actively involve the people who do the work, including those in the supply chain and networks</p> <p> </p> <p>Work health and safety laws require employers to consult with their workers and other stakeholders, such as supply chain partners. This step in the good work design process is an effective strategy to give workers a sense of ownership of the change and to use their knowledge and experience to provide solutions for work design problems.  </p> <p><strong>Screen text:</strong> Identify hazards, assess and control risks, and seek continuous improvement </p> <p> </p> <p>Good work design should systematically apply a risk management approach to the key workplace hazards and risks. For the long term sustainability of safe and healthy work, designs or redesigns should be continually monitored and adjusted to adapt to workplace changes. This includes obtaining feedback and new information to continually improve design. </p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Screen text</strong>: <strong>Learn from experts, evidence and experience</strong></p> <p> </p> <p>Continuous improvement in work design also requires ongoing collaboration between the various experts involved in the work design process.</p> <p> </p> <p>Holy Cross Laundry employed these principles when designing a new laundry facility at Banyo. This was a unique opportunity for them to comprehensively review the work environment and how work is done.  </p> <p>Holy Cross Laundry and Burstows provide an insight into how they managed this redesign process…</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Screen text: Holy Cross Laundry</strong></p> <p><strong>Mandy: </strong>We were very serious about it. It wasn’t just about ticking a box for us. It was, we, we wanted to make these improvements.</p> <p><strong>Bob: </strong>We were also able to look at how we benchmarked ourselves against other industries.</p> <p><strong>Steve: </strong>I think they’ve also put a, a big focus on consulting with their staff.</p> <p><strong>Bob: </strong>One of the first things that was undertaken, was a survey of staff on workplace health and safety issues.</p> <p><strong>Mandy: </strong>We did total risk assessments on every single piece of equipment um that was in the laundry.</p> <p>We’ve done that through partnerships; with different people; with our external consultants; with Workplace Health and Safety Queensland, with our team members, taking feedback on board. We’ve done all that to, to make those changes, be they big or small; be it the purchase of a piece of equipment, or be it some additional training.</p> <p>The management team here have been very hands-on in the design of that building, and the workflow of the building.</p> <p>Every consideration that we can possibly think of, every scenario that we can think of, has been built in to that laundry, to make it as safe as it can, as efficient as it can be.</p> <p><strong>Steve: </strong>Employers are always introducing new processes in their existing workplaces; introducing new plant and equipment into their workplaces.</p> <p>All of those types of changes are an opportunity to design out hazards that exist in your workplace.</p> <p><strong>Mandy: </strong>We do everything that we can to make it more comfortable, when we go to the new place the environment will be much more amenable.</p> <p><strong>Rachel: </strong>Burstows funerals also looked at work redesign to better manage work-related stress. </p> <p><strong>Screen text: Burstows Funeral Home</strong></p> <p><strong>Patricia: </strong>Ian felt that there was some psychosocial risks within the organisation but couldn’t really pinpoint any one particular thing.</p> <p>The survey tool was provided to Burstows, and then they went about surveying their own organisation.</p> <p><strong>Ian: </strong>It highlighted three areas for potential improvement.</p> <p><strong>Patricia: </strong>And they related to time pressures, the emotional demands of the job, and also team conflict within the organisation.</p> <p><strong>Christopher: </strong>So after the survey, we had quite a few changes.</p> <p><strong>Patricia: </strong>They’re consulting more with their staff.</p> <p><strong>Ian: </strong>We created a branch and department managers meeting.</p> <p><strong>Christopher: </strong>Anything that is a potential issue we sort of get on to it before it happens.</p> <p><strong>Maryanne: </strong>People know who they need to go to, to have something changed, improved, updated.</p> <p><strong>Ian: </strong>It had to be upper management, middle management, staff, all working as a team, to create an environment that is a happier, a better, closer team.</p> <p><strong>Patricia</strong>: 12 months later, Burstows underwent, and completed the same survey, those key factors that were identified in the first survey around time pressures, emotional stress, and conflict, were virtually non-existent.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Ian:</strong> Management should be really getting to know their staff, and getting to identify what makes them tick, and what's important to them, and so that they can get the best out of the staff. Let's make them happy. Let's help them enjoy their work environment.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Rachel: </strong>What should be considered in good design of work?</p> <p>Principle 4. Good work design addresses physical, biomechanical, cognitive and psychosocial characteristics of work, together with the needs and capabilities of the people involved</p> <p>Principle 5. Good work design considers the business needs, context and work the environment</p> <p>Principle 6. Good work design is applied along the supply chain and across the operational lifecycle</p> <p>The ‘what’ principles should be considered by those people in the organisation that have design responsibilities. </p> <p>These three principles are a good way to consider all aspects of the work that should be included in the design or re-design. To identify potential risks and hazards you need to look at the key characteristics of the work as shown in this diagram.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Screen text:</strong> Good work design addresses physical, biomechanical, cognitive and psychosocial characteristics of work, together with the needs and capabilities of the people involved</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Rachel:</strong> It is important to look at these in combination. For example, introducing a new computer-based monitoring system may change:</p> <ul> <li>the force, movement and posture required and the vibration associated with tasks</li> <li>physical, chemical or biological hazards </li> <li>the intensity, complexity and duration of tasks</li> <li>job control, supervision or peer support required.</li> </ul> <p> </p> <p><strong>Screen text: </strong>Good work design considers the business needs, context and work environment</p> <p><strong>Rachel: </strong>The business needs, context and work environment can be important factors in work design, for example the organizational structure and culture.</p> <p><strong>Screen text:</strong> Good work design should be applied along the supply chain and across the operational lifecycle</p> <p><strong>Rachel: </strong>Good work design should be applied along the supply chain and at all stages of the operational life cycle, from start-up, routine operations, maintenance, downsizing and cessation of business operations. </p> <p>At Holy Cross, workers and managers identified what needed to be considered in the design of their new facility by looking in a holistic way at issues across the workplace:</p> <p><strong>Screen text:</strong> Holy Cross Laundry</p> <p><strong>Mandy: </strong>We’re, we’re pulling and tugging at linen. We’re separating linen.</p> <p><strong>Bob:</strong> Trolley movement is a big issue in terms of if a lot  of trolleys need to get pushed around the plant.</p> <p><strong>Mandy:</strong> The maneuvering of the trolleys, because that’s a, a danger itself, where the trolleys can be heavy.</p> <p><strong>Steve: </strong>The trolleys were being pushed around in, in tight, confined areas, which was leading to a lot of crush injuries, people getting fingers jammed between the trolley, and , and fixed structures, and people being struck by trolleys as well.</p> <p><strong>Bob: </strong>One of the other major things that we needed to do, was to change the culture in the organisation.</p> <p><strong>Bob: </strong>We’ve looked at how the bags are handled, so that we can, as far as possible, reduce the weight of the bags on the individual.</p> <p><strong>Mandy:</strong> We extended the conveyor belt at the foot of the, the sorting area.</p> <p><strong>Bob: </strong>To enable bags to be dropped on to the conveyor, so people don’t have to take the weight.</p> <p><strong>Mandy:</strong> It was right there. It was slightly raised. So we minimized the bending, the, the lifting, the, the pulling, the tugging, and all of that, that we needed to happen. So, we sort of redesigned that area.</p> <p><strong>Steve:</strong> They also had some issues with their loading docks, and, and people potentially falling off those loading docks.</p> <p><strong>Mandy: </strong>So when we came to purchase new trucks, we sort of said, ‘Well what can we do here, in the design of the truck, to improve that?’</p> <p><strong>Bob:</strong> We implemented a system whereby we had spring up rails on the side of the tailgate.</p> <p>So when the tailgate was lowered, the side rails would, would come up.</p> <p><strong>Steve:</strong> Holy Cross Laundry had some significant challenges, primarily due to the age of the workplace that they were working in.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Murray:</strong> It’s a fairly hot, sweaty environment here and I don’t, it doesn’t take me much to sweat at all. I just have to think about work and I start sweating.</p> <p><strong>Mandy:  </strong>The airflow isn’t the best. Yes, we’ve got industrial fans. Yes, we’ve got everything that we can put in place, to make it as comfortable as possible. You know, during the very hot times, we take more breaks. The team members have ice pops.</p> <p><strong>Murray:</strong> Which we all appreciate, I’m sure! And you grab one, and then hide it behind your back, and say, ‘Can I have another one? I haven’t got one yet.’</p> <p><strong>Mandy</strong>: It’s about health and wellbeing of our team. It’s nice when you come to work that you can actually enjoy being at work.</p> <p><strong>Rachel: </strong>At Burstows.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Screen text: </strong>Burstows Funeral Home</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Ian: </strong>The other thing that came out of it was an evaluation of my leadership style [laughs]… the famous 360.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Patricia: </strong>Where the worker gave ‘him’ feedback on his performance.</p> <p> </p> <p>So one of the key things that came out of that 360 feedback, was to um restructure the organisation, and in such a way that Ian didn’t have so many people reporting to him.</p> <p> </p> <p>In the organisational structure, there was Ian, and then there was all the workers underneath him. So he didn’t have any supervisors, or team leaders, or other managers that worked for him.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Robyn: </strong>But then, we branched out with having each little location having their own manager.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Marianne: </strong>That in itself, created more of team work, um a cohesiveness that everyone was part of the overall team.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Christopher: </strong>They made some great efforts to integrate our teams.</p> <p> </p> <p>Burstows integrated a um counselling service for its staff and our families.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Marianne: </strong>Whether or not it’s um something to do within work, or if it’s something in our private life that is actually causing us stress.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Patricia</strong>: If people in specific areas needed certain tools or um certain um processes to be implemented, to be able to do their job better, and in a less stressful way, Burstows went about um setting up processes and systems to provide that to their staff.</p> <p><strong>Ian</strong>: One of the key things, I think, that came out of it too, was ... we'd talked about emotional stress, and part of that happens with, in funeral services, in relation to people transferring people from hospitals and homes to our funeral home. </p> <p>And one of the things that they were, they showed concern about, was bariatric patients, which are overly obese. </p> <p>We created a special-s unit for our transfer vehicles, that can enable us to carry people of any weight, you know; 300, 400, 500 kilos, if necessary, um with no ergonomics issues at all, because the, the unit does the, the whole lot of it.</p> <p><strong>Rachel: </strong>Why is good work design important?</p> <p>Principle 1. Good work design gives the highest level of protection so far as reasonably practicable</p> <p>Principle 2. Good work design enhances health and wellbeing</p> <p>Principle 3. Good work design enhances business success and productivity</p> <p>The last three principles, the ‘why’ principles outline the benefits of good work design.</p> <p>Good work design will assist you to comply with work health and safety laws. Good work design prevents harm but can also enhance the health and wellbeing of workers because satisfying work and positive social interactions are good for people’s physical and mental health. Good work design can lead to direct cost savings particularly when problems are addressed before they arise.</p> <p><strong>Screen text:</strong> Burstows funeral home</p> <p><strong>Bob: </strong>Yes, what we’ve done here is, we’ve tried to remove as much manual handling as we can.</p> <p><strong>Ellie: </strong>My favourite thing in the new laundry, is the trolley tipper, and, the bag hooker. </p> <p><strong>Racquel: </strong>My favourite things are the bag tracks and the new conveyor belts. Because it helps us not to lift those bags anymore.</p> <p><strong>Mandy: </strong>The trolley tipper now empties the bags on to the conveyor belt. The conveyor belt takes it on a journey to the bag rail system that takes it on a journey and it comes up here on this platform to the, to the sorting deck.</p> <p>When it’s on the sorting deck just behind me, the team members just needs to loosen the cord.</p> <p>So we’ve removed all those manual handling concerns that we had.</p> <p><strong>Murray: </strong>We don’t have to necessarily push and pull the big trolleys around the place.</p> <p><strong>Mandy: </strong>We now have conveyor belts that do that, not only in the main sort area, but in the, in the clean sort area as well. So we’ve reduced the amount of trolley traffic that is there.</p> <p><strong>Racquel: </strong>I think it’s less chance of accidents, because we get more, a wider space to go through.</p> <p><strong>Bob: </strong>So we’re trying to improve the working conditions.</p> <p>One of the things that we’ve done, which hasn’t been done before, is to isolate the driers from the rest of the plant, because they generate the most heat, lint and noise.</p> <p><strong>Mandy:</strong> We’ve got very high ceilings so we’ve got a lot more natural light coming in.</p> <p><strong>Bob: </strong>The roof’s been designed so that we get a cross-flow of ventilation.</p> <p><strong>Mandy: </strong>We’ve got cooling systems near the, the sorting deck so it’s a more pleasant environment for them to work in.</p> <p><strong>Bob: </strong>I believe that the new laundry will set a benchmark for how workplace health and safety practices can be adopted in a broad range of industries.</p> <p><strong>Screen text: </strong>Burstows funeral home</p> <p><strong>Ian:</strong> We ended up with longer term staff. There was less turnover. A happier, better, closer team.</p> <p><strong>Marianne:</strong> The changes have been observable, you can see it in people’s performance, you can see it in people’s camaraderie, marked respect for each other.</p> <p><strong>Rachel:</strong> The ten principles of good work design can be applied to help support better work health and safety outcomes and business productivity. They are deliberately high level and should be broadly applicable across the range of Australian businesses and workplaces. Just as every workplace is unique, so is the way each principle can be applied in practice.</p> <p>To explore how good work design can be useful for your workplace, visit <a href=""></a>.</p> <p>Work safe. Home safe.</p> <p></p> </div> <div class="field field--name-field-downloadable-transcripts field--type-entity-reference field--label-hidden field__items"> <div class="field__item"><article class="media media--type-file media--view-mode-default"> <div class="field field--name-field-media-file field--type-file field--label-hidden field__item"> <span class="file file--mime-application-pdf file--application-pdf"> <a href="" type="application/pdf">good-work-design-application.pdf</a></span> </div> </article> </div> <div class="field__item"><article class="media media--type-file media--view-mode-default"> <div class="field field--name-field-media-file field--type-file field--label-hidden field__item"> <span class="file file--mime-application-vnd-openxmlformats-officedocument-wordprocessingml-document file--x-office-document"> <a href="" type="application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document">good-work-design-application.docx</a></span> </div> </article> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> Thu, 19 Mar 2020 11:13:53 +0000 Broadcast in 2015 Designing safe machinery <div class="node node--type-media node--view-mode-rss layout layout--onecol"> <div class="layout__region layout__region--content"> <div class="field field--name-body field--type-text-with-summary field--label-above"> <div class="field__label">Body</div> <div class="field__item"><p style="line-height: 20.79px;">Peter, Liz and Wes will provide practical strategies to designing out hazards and explore work health and safety and productivity improvements that result from good design of machinery.</p> <p style="line-height: 20.79px;">Panellists will field questions from in-studio and online audiences. Contribute to the conversation by:</p> <ul style="line-height: 20.79px;"> <li>using the hashtag #virtualWHS on social media, or</li> <li>submitting questions and comments using the text entry field, which will become available on bottom right-hand side of your screen when this session begins broadcasting.</li> </ul> <h2>Who is this presentation for?</h2> <p>Designers and manufacturers of machinery and organisations that use machinery.</p> <h2>About the presenter</h2> <p style="line-height: 20.8px;"><strong>Peter Dunphy</strong> is Executive Director of the Work Health and Safety Division with SafeWork NSW. Peter has over 20 years’ experience in the control of work health and safety hazards.</p> <p style="line-height: 20.8px;"><strong>Dr Liz Bluff </strong>is a Research Fellow at the National Research Centre for OHS Regulation in the Regulatory Institutions Network at the Australian National University. Liz is the author of <em>Safe Design and Construction of Machinery: Regulation, Practice and Performance.</em></p> <p style="line-height: 20.8px;"><strong>Wes Wilkinson</strong> is Principal of Work Systems Technology. Wes is a qualified mechanical engineer, risk manager an human factors (ergonomics) specialist and has extensive experience in working on design solutions.</p> <h2>Useful resources</h2> <ul> <li>Safe Work Australia <a href="/sites/swa/about/publications/pages/good-work-design"><em>Principles of Good Work Design</em> handbook</a></li> <li>Safe Work Australia Model Code of Practice <a href="/sites/swa/about/publications/pages/managing-the-risks-of-plant-in-the-workplace"><em>Managing the risks of plant in the workplace</em></a></li> <li>Safe Work Australia – <a href="/sites/swa/about/publications/documents/154/guidanceontheprinciplesofsafedesign_2006_pdf.pdf"><em>Guidance on the Principles of Safe Design for Work</em></a></li> <li>UK Health and Safety Executive guide to <a href=""><em>Using work equipment safely</em></a></li> <li>Australian Standard AS/NZS 4024.1201:2014: Safety of machinery – General principles for design - Risk assessment and risk reduction</li> <li>Elizabeth Bluff Safe Design and Construction of Machinery: Regulation, Practice and Performance. Ashgate (2015)</li> </ul> </div> </div> <div class="field transcript-group"> <div class="field__label">Transcript</div> <div class="clearfix text-formatted field field--name-field-html-transcript field--type-text-long field--label-hidden field__item"><p><strong>Designing Safe Machinery</strong></p> <p>Live Panel Discussion</p> <p>Peter Dunphy, SafeWork NSW<br /> Dr Liz Bluff, Australian National University<br /> Wes Wilkinson, Work Systems Technology</p> <p><strong>Andrew Dettmer: </strong></p> <p>Thank you all for joining us today, both our in-theatre audience and those joining us online. My name's Andrew Dettmer. I'm the National President of the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union and a Safe Work Australia Member. </p> <p>Firstly, I would like to acknowledge the traditional custodians of the land on which we meet, the Ngunnawal People. I acknowledge and respect their continuing culture and the contribution they make to the life of this city and to this region and I pay my respects to their elders, both past and present.</p> <p>Today's discussion explores the crucial action area from the Australian Strategy – Healthy and Safe By Design and how it applies to the safe design of machinery. Healthy and Safe By Design means that hazards and risks are eliminated or minimised at the design phase, that is before they enter the workplace. </p> <p>Before I introduce today's speakers, I want to share with you a real story. </p> <p>A casual Factory Hand was helping out at a plant that makes cardboard boxes. On this particular day he had moved into a tight space between a printer, the slotter and stacker machine and the out-take conveyor. It is understood that he was trying to remove some jammed cardboard pieces. His clothing became caught on a roller spinning at over 60 revolutions per minute and he was dragged over the top. Another worker heard him scream, located and pushed the emergency stop button and ran to help him. He remained trapped in the machine for over 45 minutes. Ambulance officers tried to keep him alive while the fire brigade worked to free him. He was eventually freed and rushed to hospital but he died the following day. His death was completely preventable.</p> <p>The subsequent WorkSafe and Coroner's report found no hazard identification had been undertaken before the plant was commissioned, the emergency stops were not properly labelled, the company had not provided adequate information nor training regarding the machine's safe use and the level of its supervision was inadequate. Across Australia all works health and safety laws require designers and manufacturers to ensure so far as is reasonably practicable that machinery is designed and manufactured to be without risks to health and safety and to provide adequate and up to date information about the machinery. Yet the story I've just told you and data from Safe Work Australia tells us that the poor designed machinery continues to kill and injure workers.</p> <p>A recent Safe Work Australia report reveals 188 work-related deaths were possibly caused by the unsafe design of machinery between 2006 and 2011. Our research also tells us that involving experienced workers in the design and testing process before machinery enters the workplace results in better work health and safety outcomes for workers. We should and we must do better.</p> <p>So I am delighted that today our speakers will discuss this important topic. Our first panel member is the Executive Director of the Work Health and Safety Division with SafeWork New South Wales. Peter Dunphy has over 25 years' experience in public health and work health and safety and is currently completing a doctorate of Public Health with the University of New South Wales. Welcome Peter.</p> <p>Our second panel member, Wes Wilkinson is the Principal of Work Systems Technology. He is a qualified Mechanical Engineer, Risk Manager and Human Factors Specialist. He is a certified practising professional and has 30 years' experience in industries such as agriculture, manufacturing and the legal and commerce sectors. Wes provides specialist consultancy services for the design and manufacture of machinery and is regularly called as an expert witness in major work health and safety prosecutions. Welcome Wes.</p> <p>Our third panel member, Dr Liz Bluff is a Research Fellow with the National Research Centre for Occupational Health and Safety Regulation with the Australian National University. Liz has over 30 years' experience in research, policy, legislation and management of work health and safety. She authored <em>Safe Design and Construction of Machinery in Regulation, Practice and Performance</em> and co-authored <em>Work Health and Safety Law and Policy</em>. Welcome Liz.</p> <p>Last but not least, let me introduce my old friend, today's Facilitator Bryan Russell. He's the former Executive Director of SafeWork South Australia and of course a Member of Safe Work Australia and played a key role in the introduction of national work health and safety legislation and national uniform mine safety laws and explosives legislation. </p> <p>Welcome Bryan and please join me in welcoming our speakers.</p> <p>(Audience Applause) </p> <p>Thank you and I'll now hand over to Bryan to start today's discussion.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Thank you Andrew and thank you everyone for joining us in the audience today and for those joining online. For those who are joining online I invite you to tweet any comments or questions that you may have in the course of discussion. You can do that through our live chat facility or through the #virtualWHS. Just on that I'll add that at the end of today's broadcast we will be providing an additional period of time where the speakers stay behind to answer any additional questions online that we didn't resolve through the course of discussion today.</p> <p>I would like to take just a moment to reflect on some of the introductory comments that Andrew made and regrettably the tragic story that Andrew told us about today is all too common. The fact that we have almost 200 deaths over a five year period related to unsafe machinery and poorly designed machinery is alarming. For that reason the elimination and minimisation of hazards at the design stage is a priority in the Australian Work Health and Safety Strategy. In that sense Safe Work Australia Members are united in their efforts to elevate safety in design as a national action area and that underscores the discussion that we're having here today. People often bandy about expressions about safe design and safe machinery but they're not really sure at times what that means. What I would like to do today is to explore that a little bit further and I'll start off with you Peter as a regulator. What's your understanding of safe design and safe machinery?</p> <p><strong>Peter Dunphy: </strong></p> <p>Well Bryan, I think as regulators we can often have lofty ideals but I think it can be explained really quite simply that for us really safe design is about thinking ahead. It's really about thinking through the whole lifecycle of the plant that you're dealing with, thinking about the sorts of things that can injure you along the way of use of that plant and really then going through a harm prevention process of really ensuring that you identify what the hazards are that arise out of the lifecycle of the plant and then ensuring that you either eliminate those or control those and that you also ensure that you risk communicate, so that you provide appropriate information around the actual item of plant, whether that be safe operating procedures or whether that can be in terms of training. I guess from a regulatory perspective that's how we see it. I don't know Liz from an academic perspective whether the literature characterises it any differently to that but certainly that's how we certainly see it. Yes.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Liz do you?</p> <p><strong>Liz Bluff: </strong></p> <p>Certainly. Yes I think that Peter's highlighted some important principles with that and I think one of the main things that works well in terms of improving safety at the design stage is for those who are involved in designing and manufacturing to be very conscious of the different ways in which machinery can be hazardous. That might seem like a fairly obvious point but for a lot of people safety of machinery starts and finishes with mechanical hazards and the issue of guarding but there are a lot of other ways in which machinery can be hazardous. So it can be hazardous in terms of different aspects of the structure or the power sources that are used that raise safety issues. There may be ergonomic issues related to the working positions and postures of people or perhaps the design of controls which might be poor so that they're hard to interpret. There can be problems of noise, vibration, substances that are used in or produced by machinery and there can also be issues related to access. It's something that's really quite commonly overlooked is whether people can get easy access without slip, trip, fall problems onto or into where they have to be working with machinery.</p> <p>So I guess the pitfall there is when people have a bit of a narrow focus on certain types of issues and don't properly recognise the range of problems that there can be with machinery.</p> <p><strong>Peter Dunphy: </strong></p> <p>And I think commissioning and decommissioning plants is a really important aspect too which often gets overlooked in terms of that, in terms of safe design.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Thanks Peter and thanks Liz for that as well. Peter in terms of the laws how is safe design covered in the work health and safety laws and what are the legal duties that apply to people who are responsible?</p> <p><strong>Peter Dunphy: </strong></p> <p>Yeah. Well safe design is rarely picked up. It is really a cornerstone of our work health and safety legislation. So in terms of the primary duty holders of the person conducting the business or undertaking it is a critical component of their ensuring work health and safety and ensuring the safety of the workers. So the maintenance and ongoing provision of safe plant at the workplace is a really important aspect. It also follows on to the further duties which are in the work health and safety legislation and that sort of tracks through the lifecycle of whether it's the designer who has duties, whether it's the manufacturer, the importer, the supplier, someone who's in control of plant or whoever's installing or decommissioning the plant. So it's a really broad range of duties that are covered across there and it's a very comprehensive duty and a very important feature of our other than safety legislation.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>So the laws cover all aspects with respect to safety in design from the actual design process through to commissioning and the operation of the equipment itself?</p> <p><strong>Peter Dunphy: </strong></p> <p>Yeah. So it really is about trying to make sure that we do have consideration to safety in all aspects of the lifecycle of the item of plants, and it really is about ensuring that those are considered very much at the design phase but also during the life of the plant in terms of that and ensuring that all duty holders and I shouldn't forget other duty holders such as directors and workers and others also have duties under the legislation to ensure that they follow instructions, that there's due diligence in terms of directors, in terms of the plant at a workplace. So it's a very broad range in duties and again I guess the other point is that those duties are often shared too amongst different people whether it's the PCBU, the supplier, the manufacturer and the designer. So often they can be overlapped in terms of those duties. So it is really important in terms of the legislative framework that there is good coordination and cooperation amongst duty holders.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Okay. Liz I might just come back to you in terms of what works well for designers and manufacturers in this space and you mentioned the range of issues that they need to consider. Would you like to expand on that a little?</p> <p><strong>Liz Bluff: </strong></p> <p>Well I guess the next step in that is recognising that there is that sort of range of different ways in which machinery can be hazardous is for those who are designing and manufacturing machinery to also be well informed about the different options that are available in terms of the control or risk control in order to address those different types of hazards. So I guess what we're trying to do is encourage people to actually eliminate hazards and/or integrate state of the art risk control measures. So really being familiar with what the different options might be is important to underpin that aspect of designing things to be safer in the first instance.</p> <p>So I suppose another important point to sort of underline in all of this is that what we're trying to encourage is making machinery inherently safer and so that can be a bit of a pitfall if people tend to see machinery safety as being about providing warning signs or devices, whether it's flashing lights on machinery or beeps or something like that. That can be an important part as supplementary measures if you like for risk control to help further minimise risks but if you look at that they're not fundamentally dealing with the actual hazards of the machinery. They're still about trying to get people to work safely around the machinery while not actually controlling the fundamental hazards and so that point about making it inherently safer I think is a really fundamental one.</p> <p><strong>Peter Dunphy: </strong></p> <p>It's a really difficult thing to do though I think in old plant. One of the things regulators and I'm sure Wes you experience this too is that in terms of older plant there's always that issue about retrofitting and how do you make old plant inherently safe and whether retrofitting can actually do that. But yes.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Actually we might come to you Wes on that point now and as a consultant designer for manufacturers can you tell us please a little about what you do in practice and why safety and design of machinery is really so important in workplaces?</p> <p><strong>Wes Wilkinson: </strong></p> <p>Yes. I think Peter hit the nail on the head that it's basically from start to finish or cradle to grave. So I assist industry with safe design of machinery from inception to disposal effectively. Ensuring regulatory compliance is one of the most critical steps but it's understanding that relationship and what is regulatory compliance from a manufacturer or employer's point of view. The interpretation of that differs from each business to the next one because the legislation really gears your control and your safe design of machinery to your process and the way that you're using it, your machinery, the way that you're applying it, installing it, operating it and so on. So I assist with the risk assessment process and that's something that we've had a lot of I suppose trouble with in the industry. </p> <p>Simplistic risk assessment is commonly done on not complex plant but basic plant. But the more complex the machinery, the more complex the process, the more complex the risk assessment has to be because you have to capture all of these aspects of designing, operating, maintaining, cleaning, disposing, decommissioning and so on. If you don't get those captured in the risk assessment process you can't possibly move on to what is the most critical step which is your risk control design. I spend so much time in the risk control design area because that's where we get the paybacks. </p> <p>If we can put in – and one of the things that people do in industry is they do the process of risk assessment very badly because they don't have the skill sets within their reference groups when they're trying to find that information on the process out, from task and so on and disposal, maintenance and so on. So they don't have the skill sets in there. People don't have that knowledge to know where to go with the process. So they see it as I think Liz mentioned before, a simplistic mechanical hazard and will deal with that as a mechanical hazard. But what should the risk control for that be? So they don't have the depth of knowledge to understand and explore the risk assessment process. </p> <p>So in summary on more complex processes we don't do that risk assessment process particularly well. So that's where I usually get involved and start getting people thinking about "How do we go about this process to get something meaningful out of it?" and also you've got to think from the regulatory point of view "Can that document stand up in court?", "Have we done it thoroughly?" as I think the first example, the case of the fatality pulled out. Had that document been done? Well if it had been done was it done properly? Did it explore all the hazards and risks and task-related issues? I'd answer that no at this point because we need to probably inject a little bit of skill there. But then we look at risk control development and risk control development is where I get my job satisfaction because we're talking about trying to change a culture in industry from a lowest cost solution. A simplistic answer to trying to get people to almost – we're trying to change their culture, we're trying to twist their minds but we're trying to aim also for senior executive so that we can make that critical link between good design, better design of and safe design of machinery and the bottom line of the business. If we can get that relationship right and get those people – appeal to the entrepreneurs in the group, twist the minds of the CFOs from a dollar driven process to a return on investment and demonstrate that, then I think that’s where we win but that’s the areas or they're the areas that I work in and certainly the most rewarding is the risk control design area.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Okay. Now Wes you mentioned some of the challenges faced by manufacturers and designers in this space and you've had a lot of experience in this. What are some of the unexpected benefits that you've derived from working directly with these people?</p> <p><strong>Wes Wilkinson: </strong></p> <p>The unexpected benefits – I mean I'll give a case study. I've worked in the timber industry quite a lot and it's a very difficult industry and it has the highest industry levy rates. It has woeful statistics, horrific injuries and it's pretty much on par with the meat industry as well. Now those two industries have done a lot of work in recent times to try and lift their game and I've worked with a hardwood timber mill and they took a different approach. The owner of that business was an entrepreneur or is an entrepreneur and he decided he was going to bring in some C&amp;C controlled equipment from Europe. The trouble is it landed on the deck here and the risk controls weren’t with it and what was there wasn't compliant with the Australian Standard. So before that process could be put in place and become operational the systems had to be developed.</p> <p>The good side of that is that the solutions that were developed became state of the art. That supplier adopted the risk controls, a zoning model, a specific risk control to very difficult problems of things like tracking the saws once you've installed the massive band saws to break the logs down. That process itself and I'll put you in the picture of that, if you're the supervisor you were expected to basically adjust this thing manually looking at it and if it went wrong you wore this massive band saw if it came off the guide wheels. So that was a risk that was totally unacceptable. </p> <p>The solutions to that process of the zoning model which meant that no worker was in the same place and time – classic risk management theory – with the hazards so that you've separated your workers and your hazards, you've controlled it all remotely, no worker handles any part of the timber until such time as the process is at zero state whether control or power and then the operation of those controls was done from the control room. So the unexpected benefits in that was also the manufacturer adopting those as worldwide standards, OE standards for their equipment, solving the problem of their band saw tracking meaning that it was done from the control room after you'd installed the bands, not from within the process while it's running. The cost on return on investment which really appealed to the owner of the business was the fact that it cost between $15,000 and $20,000 roughly to put in the risk controls to track those saws and do it safely.</p> <p>The payback on that when you're considering a timber mill of this kind costs in excess of probably $5,000 or $6,000 an hour to run which was a fairly typical figure. You look at that. We do a change every shift at least once. So saving 15 minutes and do some simple maths, depending on what shift structure they were running payback was between four and eight days to put in a process that then became state of the art world wide. If you think about that, that is a huge improvement and to see the rewards from that but other unexpected benefits of this employer running with this in an entrepreneurial way and basically honing in on that relationship because they could see that it was great for the bottom line of the business, they had significant discounts in their workers' comp insurance. Considering that they were at the worst industry rate, the industry was performing very badly their performance became so much better than industry that their reductions in premiums were in the millions. So they're the unexpected benefits and very rewarding unexpected benefits.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Wes you touched on this in terms of talking about the bottom line.</p> <p><strong>Wes Wilkinson: </strong></p> <p>Yes.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>And obviously in terms of incorporating those safety features it did represent an up-front cost.</p> <p><strong>Wes Wilkinson: </strong></p> <p>It did.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell:</strong></p> <p>To what extent is cost consideration an issue for manufacturers and designers in implementing those safety principles into their equipment?</p> <p><strong>Wes Wilkinson: </strong></p> <p>Cost is probably the major issue. It's probably my number one enemy in the sort of work I do because everything you do is going to cost money. You're dealing with CFOs and CEOs that don't want to spend money. We're trying to create a link between better, safer design machinery, better performance in OHS and the bottom line. Concreting that link in and getting acceptance of it and getting these guys to free wheel is where we need to be because that's the biggest challenge. The finance always gets in the way because we can save money there but they don't look at the holistic picture. They look simply at investment, bottom line, cost but they don't look at return on investment. So it's our challenge as professionals to be able to demonstrate that return on investment and do it in pretty much a – I mean I cut my teeth in the automotive industry when we had continuous improvement gurus like Deming and in manufacturing it's lovely because you've got all these process measurables you can draw on. Intelligent use of those measurables you can demonstrate that what we're doing improves the bottom line. You win the CEOs and the CFOs over. You've got the game there but that's the biggest challenge of all is the financial and getting that culture in place.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Okay. I might come to you in a moment Liz about cost issue as well but as an extension of that Wes, can you tell me how does a manufacturer or designer market their product when as a consequence of the extra cost it's going to be at a higher cost than its competitor?</p> <p><strong>Wes Wilkinson:</strong></p> <p>Look I think we'd be crazy. In Australia's climate at the moment, our industrial climate, we need to market the abilities we have and our technology skills are superior and we need to market that. So if we've got manufacturers here designing equipment that is state of the art in terms of risk control that's giving us a positive benefit to the bottom line, we need to market that. We need to market it on regulatory compliance because if we're not doing that, I mean I'm trying to in my client base – regulatory compliance is mandatory. We've got to accept that. We must do it but I don't want to see very basic compliance. I want to see us going to a level where we select compliance at a point where it is a positive for the business, not just a have to do, minimal compliance because the minimal compliance will turn around and ambush you.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Yep.</p> <p><strong>Wes Wilkinson: </strong></p> <p>So that's probably the key message.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>So it's also return on investment as well.</p> <p><strong>Wes Wilkinson: </strong></p> <p>Return on investment.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Yeah.</p> <p><strong>Wes Wilkinson: </strong></p> <p>And demonstrating that. You can't just say "It's nice to have", because you won't get any response from the CFO on that.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>No.</p> <p><strong>Wes Wilkinson: </strong></p> <p>You've got to have a demonstrated result. You've got to be able to show them the tools that you're using to be able to demonstrate. We need to play on their turf in other words. We need to play in their language with dollars, numbers and all of that and demonstrate to them that what we're doing can actually demonstrate a result and that is probably the biggest challenge in doing the sort of work I do.</p> <p><strong>Peter Dunphy: </strong></p> <p>And I think getting it right up front does actually save money in the long term because the costs of recalls and retrofitting is very expensive. So to actually design something well and elegantly at the beginning of the process actually is a win-win situation for everybody.</p> <p><strong>Wes Wilkinson: </strong></p> <p>It certainly is and you don't want to be playing catch-ups and particularly if you've been found not compliant with the legislation and you're getting any further action as a result of that, whether it's simply notices of improvement or whatever, or prohibition, but any subsequent legal action out of that is very costly to a business and a fatality is a major cost to a business that can sometimes be terminal and we never want to go there. We don't want to injure people. We don't want to kill them at work. We want to design processes that are user friendly and actually work and are productive.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell:</strong></p> <p>Okay. Liz I might just come to you in terms of cost.</p> <p><strong>Liz Bluff: </strong></p> <p>Yes.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Has your research found that cost considerations are an issue?</p> <p><strong>Liz Bluff: </strong></p> <p>Absolutely cost is an issue and actually I'm going to just deflect this a bit and pose a challenge for Peter…</p> <p>(Laughter)</p> <p>…because what the research actually suggests is that one of the biggest issue is companies like those that Wes deals with feeling "Okay. We're dealing with safety but that company over there that's doing the same sort of stuff, they're not dealing with safety. The regulator doesn't seem to be inspecting and enforcing with them." So we've got this unlevel playing field and actually there's some really rather sad examples of companies that had put themselves out to do safe design, had come up with some great safe design solutions and then found that they couldn't compete with other companies that were still producing the same type of machinery but without the safety features that were effectively adding to the cost of it. So all of this for me raises the issue of how do we get a more consistent and I think networked approach to inspection and enforcement which would mean that as a regulator you're doing it strategically through supply chains and markets. So you're not just focusing on particular companies one at a time. Maybe when something terrible goes wrong because there's a fatality at the sort of company that Wes is dealing with, but let's take another example – food processing machinery, let's say.</p> <p>If we could have strategies which are dealing with those that design, manufacture, supply, import, key customers as the end users of the system who are all being interacted with, as part of regulatory strategies then you get that impetus through supply chains and markets to help reinforce the importance of safe design, perhaps reinforce key messages about what the design solutions are that you're looking for and at the end of the day you've got a level playing field where people don't feel that they're going to be missing out because they are trying to deal with safety.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Excellent. I think that that has obviously provided some fertile information for people who might have questions. So I might at this point in time see if there are any online questions that we have and also invite members of the audience to think about questions as well.</p> <p>We do have a question from Cathy online and the question is "There is some discussion about the need for designers to take a holistic approach when designing machinery. What does this mean and how can designers do this?" Wes I think this is one for you in terms of your experience working directly with manufacturers and designers. How do they take a holistic approach?</p> <p><strong>Wes Wilkinson: </strong></p> <p>Well the holistic approach is that you're not just looking at operating the plant because most people think that "Okay. It's while we're normally running the process," or the machinery or whatever it is that there's a problem and they look at that isolated area in their risk assessments. They don't look at maintaining. They don't look at cleaning. They don't look at decommissioning or commissioning. They don't look at installation. So holistically we mean we need to look at the whole picture of owning and operating that piece of machinery or process or whatever it is. I think that's basically what it's about. So it's broadening your vision, taking the tunnel vision off and looking at your risk assessment processes and being far more thorough and laterally thinking a little bit along the lines of that.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Thank you. Peter I might just come to you on that and you touched on it earlier. Does the law establish a framework for a holistic approach?</p> <p><strong>Peter Dunphy: </strong></p> <p>Well it does. It certainly covers all of those things that Wes was talking about and it really does ensure that people need to – the designers do need to factor in every aspect of the life cycle of the item of plant and that's quite critical in terms of how they do that. So no it is. It's a really important element of design safety and ensuring that we actually do that.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Liz from your research are we achieving that yet, that holistic approach?</p> <p><strong>Liz Bluff: </strong></p> <p>I would say not. I think actually to the extent that designers and manufacturers are addressing issues for those who install, maintain, clean, repair and so on, it tends to be a bit incidental to what they're doing for the sort of everyday operation. So if you've got good measures for the operation user of the machinery maybe they're going to flow on to other people as well but maybe not because you've got different things going on when you're maintaining and so on. </p> <p>I think one of the big issues really is for designers and manufacturers to in a sense get their hands dirty in terms of really understanding or understanding the real nature of work and certainly that involves consultation with workers but it's even a step more than that because it can be quite hard to get people to actually have input as workers into discussions about safety especially at the design stage which raises I guess the issue of "Well how do you do that effectively?" Certainly those who do get to a better understanding I guess of what really goes on in work are those that trial with prototypes or models if it's not the sort of machinery that you can actually have the whole thing there for people to trial, people using models, simulations and all sorts of things to try and get workers with that sort of experience to tap into their experience and raise the genuine safety issues that need to be addressed.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Thank you.</p> <p><strong>Peter Dunphy: </strong></p> <p>I think there's also a role there with regulators in bringing the parties together. I think where we've had our best successes has been where we've been able to get the designers, the manufacturers and the end users, whichever part of the lifecycle together to really understand what are the issues and what needs to be addressed. I think there is an important role for regulators to help build those networks and build those conversations because often where we see the problems it's where there isn't necessarily the needs of the end user as being really addressed in the design process.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Okay. Thank you and thank you Cathy for that question. We have another online question. So we'll go to that now and this is from Terry. Terry asks "How do you address the competing objectives of aesthetics, practicability, cost and functionality during the manufacturing stage?" So in other words we've got these competing issues – making the machine look good, the aesthetics of the machine, the practicability, cost and functionality and balancing all of those up. In certain instances it may be that the manufacturer decides that functionality overrides some of the others. Wes, you have any experience with that, any views about that?</p> <p><strong>Wes Wilkinson: </strong></p> <p>It's a pet topic of mine.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Excellent.</p> <p>(Laughter) </p> <p><strong>Wes Wilkinson: </strong></p> <p>The problem we have is that – if we can put the question up again just so I can get the whole context of it? But we need to look at all of those aspects and I've basically got a copyrighted expression that when we're looking for risk control for processes and that we're looking not just for an answer that excels in one area. We want to keep the finance people happy and they want to see the process as productive. Well that's great but at what cost? Because they're not looking at the real cost. They may be looking at just getting parts or getting things out of the end of the process. We've got to look at all aspects of that process and get a best possible compromise risk control solution for that item of machinery and by 'compromise' I mean our risk assessment is going to throw up all the different variables that make that process tick. We don't want to excel in some and fall down miserably in the plant safety or the risk control area. So we need to get that right. We need to get the user friendly part right, the ergonomics, the human factors side of it, the psychology of the relationship with the process – all of that right and we want to get that answer that's going to work. So I think that's the key to it is the best possible compromise risk control.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Excellent. Thanks. Thanks very much Wes and thanks Terry for that question. It covers all aspects of safety in design. We have another question online and this question is from Kenneth and the question is "Can the panellists talk about some real life examples of great machinery design?" and "What does well designed machinery look like?" Liz I might just come to you on that? </p> <p><strong>Liz Bluff: </strong></p> <p>Okay.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>You've done a fair bit of research here and in terms of from your research have you seen some great machinery designs?</p> <p><strong>Liz Bluff: </strong></p> <p>For me the best examples are those ones that come out of an understanding of what the real nature of work is like. One that comes to mind is an example of – it's actually – well a hand-operated but reasonably large device that's used for finishing surfaces and the people who developed that actually came out of an industry where they used that kind of machinery. It's interesting I think how often those sorts of solutions actually come out of people with that real firsthand experience and the reason that it was good was that they understood exactly what it was like to be dealing with dusts which might be coming from all sorts of synthetic as well as timber materials. They knew what it was like to be straining with an item of machinery in terms of the physical strain and the potential for overuse and so basically came up with a design which was a device that was easy to manoeuvre and really effectively controlled the dust issues in terms of dust extraction, so – and there were some other things. But I guess the point there is really when you understand the real issues for people using it, it means so much more when you're coming up with the solutions.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Okay and Wes you mentioned the timber industry?</p> <p><strong>Wes Wilkinson: </strong></p> <p>Yes. The example I was giving earlier is an example of intelligent design, very good design in the sense that okay, if anyone's ever been into a timber mill or traditional mill, you're hand feeding timber into machines and it's – things can go horribly wrong and people end up being severely injured as a result. This process by separating the hazards from the workers creates an environment that is very difficult to get injured if the hazards are in there and you're out here and if you want to go in there then the hazards are no longer there because you've placed that zone in a controlled state or a whole power state if you're doing major maintenance work. </p> <p>So that sort of design is very good but not only that, your interfaces with the process and the user-friendliness of those because if you've done your homework with your risk assessment with your user groups and you've got that interaction and got the dynamics going in that group you've developed an interface that's very friendly to them and performs well. It doesn't frustrate them. It doesn't drive them nuts because it breaks down every five minutes and you've got to fix it. They're the sorts of issues that you need to hone in on. </p> <p>So a good design process will tick all the boxes as best as possible across the line and that's what great design is about, is getting something that works in all of those areas that your people can take ownership because they've had the involvement in the development of the process. It's quite amazing how that relationship snowballs. Once you've got those people accepting that they were part of the design of the process that actually works whereas it hasn't before, the sort of dynamics of that, getting that moving and getting that ownership is just the power that's in that relationship is amazing.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Thank you Wes, ta. Peter I was just about to ask the regulator. Any views there about real life machines that work?</p> <p><strong>Peter Dunphy: </strong></p> <p>Yeah. Just picking up on Liz's point. I really like the idea of design thinking and I mean architects do it all the time. They prototype, they design, they do drawings for their clients and work through and eventually prototype into something that works. Our best example of something where we have worked with industry and worked with users and there are a good couple of examples in our Safe Design Program, whether it's been grain augers or bench place drivers or wood chippers where we've sat down with the industry and tried to work through what wasn't working and what needed to be working. That was an iterative process of working out some different trial and error about what would work better and more effectively in terms of that. So I think we can learn a lot from the architecture profession in terms of how they use that process of prototyping and continuous learning and working with clients to actually understand their needs and what you want to get out of the process.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Okay. A theme of engagement on reading from this process as well which is important. I might now just ask our audience here if there are any questions you have of panel members? Yes?</p> <p><strong>Audience Member: </strong></p> <p>Yes. My question is does anyone have any comments on approaches for working through situations where there's really conflicting views about what constitutes safety and design because I'm thinking of an example for example in quad bikes it's been quite an issue of what is safe design of quad bikes?</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Okay. I might actually invite Peter respond to this and perhaps Liz from you as well from your experience. So Peter and the example of quad bikes has been mentioned and views about what actually constitutes safety and design?</p> <p><strong>Peter Dunphy: </strong></p> <p>Yeah. I think that's a great question because it's a really live issue in terms of quad bikes and for us I guess it is about getting down to again getting all of the parties together to try and work out a solution on what the issues are. So for quad bikes certainly part of the approach we've taken is to commission research. So really have an evidence based approach to try and really resolve some of the design issues and some of the concerns that we know users have in terms of quad bikes and then working with the industry to try and change perceptions and understanding I guess of what those issues are. </p> <p>So for us it's been again a bit of an iterative process of working through, focusing on things going through from PPE right through to actually better stability of the quad bikes, better design and really pushing, trying to push the suppliers basically up the hierarchy of hazard controls to try and get them to think about "Well, it's not just about training and it's not just about helmets. It's not about how people use the equipment." You really need to design in elements that are going to make the equipment more stable and more safe to use. So we've certainly been using that as an approach and I think there's some really good learnings from that. </p> <p>One of the things we've been pushing for I guess is the idea of having some better consumer safety information about the stability of different types of quad bikes so people have more choice about the safer options in terms of those or actually using other side-by-side equipment so what else is safer to use in terms of those. So there's a whole range of things that we're doing at the moment to look at that but it is a really good question because quad bikes is a really complex issue because it's not just a workplace issue. It's also a recreational issue. It's used in lots of other aspects. So it shows the complexity I think in plant and plant often covers not just workplaces. It covers across many other boundaries. So as a regulator it's a very complex space to navigate sometimes.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Liz does that resonate with you in terms of your research?</p> <p><strong>Liz Bluff: </strong></p> <p>Yes it does and actually I was going to just say that I think you could sort of answer this question in two contexts in a way. One's this sort of wider regulatory context where it's been really important with the particular example that you've raised of the quad bikes for that to be underpinned by some really sound research as to what the technical issues are in terms of stability and all of those sorts of factors which then I think puts the regulator and others in a better position to actually advocate for what is safer design and there are some other good examples of that being done by regulators in the past. </p> <p>In Victoria there was some really good research that was done around forklifts because everybody presumed as with quad bikes that the issues were all about the operators hooning around and not operating these things safely and it actually turned out that there were real serious issues that related to forklifts not actually having the braking capacity for the usual speeds that they were driven at, all sorts of issues around stability and tendency to tip over and things like that. So in that case there was a role there with the regulator being able to define some designed solutions and advocate for those solutions to be put in place.</p> <p>But the other context I wanted to just raise because I guess these differences of opinion about what's safe, they come about for individual companies as well in the context of one-off particular designs and the research that I've done certainly suggests that those issues are better resolved when you involve teams of people basically in that process of recognising hazards and deciding what you're going to do about them. So bringing people from different perspectives again but in the workplace context similar to what you're trying to do I guess in a regulatory context as well.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Yes. Thanks Liz. Any further questions from the audience? There's a question here?</p> <p><strong>Audience Member: </strong></p> <p>Thanks. Thanks. You've talked about this a bit already but with cost. But does regulation tend to drive safe work design or is safe work design a commercial imperative particularly for the designer's reputation?</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Thank you for that question. I think that any of the panel members could probably have a view on this. So does regulation drive safe design or is safe design a commercial issue? Peter?</p> <p><strong>Peter Dunphy: </strong></p> <p>I think just relying on legislation isn't enough. I think what designers need to do is really be focusing on harm prevention because we know you can comply with standards but still have unsafe safety issues in terms of the plant that you're producing. So for us it's – and certainly I know as regulators we can check that people are complying with the standards but often there are other issues that need to be addressed in terms of ensuring harm prevention. So I would always be advocating for duty holders to be looking at the harm prevention, "What's going to cause harm?", "What am I doing about that?" and "How am I controlling that?" and not thinking so much about "Have I ticked all the boxes in terms of the statutory obligations?" because that doesn't necessarily lead to safe design ultimately. So for me it's really about an emphasis on the harm prevention.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Okay. Wes, your experience?</p> <p><strong>Wes Wilkinson: </strong></p> <p>The regulatory framework sets basically the standard or the basic minimum compliance level but it's up to the person who is the duty holder to actually explore that and work out where their solution to the problem sits. That's probably the bit we don't do well as I touched on before. But it certainly is a commercial imperative because if we're going to do it properly we've got to sell the benefits of doing it properly back again. As far as I'm concerned it is absolutely critical that we get that relationship in there because we're going to get it right if we can prove that it works.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Okay. Liz does your research show that the regulatory requirements prevail or do commercial instincts drive the manufacturer?</p> <p><strong>Liz Bluff: </strong></p> <p>I think the research suggests that the commercial instincts are drivers but regulation and I use that in the sense of both the law and the inspection and enforcement is part of the mix in terms of factors that motivate organisations to address health and safety issues. I'm inclined to say that regulation in that sense is – yes it's a driver but it doesn't – it doesn't give people all that they're looking for in terms of capacity, so understanding what it is that they actually need to do. That's where other aspects of the wider regulatory influences come into play and in particular things like the technical standards for the safety of machinery which are not formally legal standards. They're certainly referenced in codes of practice but they have a momentum in a way that for example Health and Safety Act, regulations type of thing don't. So the technical standards are an important part of that momentum for driving health and safety improvements.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Thank you.</p> <p><strong>Peter Dunphy: </strong></p> <p>One of the things I liked about your research Liz was that idea that community of practice is almost as important as the regulation and if you can connect people then they learn from each other and that's really I think an important role for us all to be facilitating that and ensuring that happens.</p> <p><strong>Wes Wilkinson: </strong></p> <p>The networking side of that as well.</p> <p><strong>Peter Dunphy: </strong></p> <p>Is really critical, yes.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>So the communication is becoming a powerful instrument in this space.</p> <p><strong>Liz Bluff: </strong></p> <p>Yes.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Now I have one more question online and I'd like to take that question now. This is from Leo. Leo runs a small business. How can he get help to ensure that the machinery he puts into the workplace is safe? Now this is a most relevant question because we've been talking about the information and communication process. Here we have a small business person. He wants to make sure that what he puts into the workplace is safe. How does he go about making sure that that's the case? Wes?</p> <p><strong>Wes Wilkinson: </strong></p> <p>If I can address that, look I mean it's the duty on any small business operator or any employer that they need to get appropriate expertise to assist them with what they're doing. This is not a commercial plug but certainly they need to seek technical advice to be able to assist them to make sure that they've got the machinery in their workplace safe and that's where the duty is. So it's really their responsibility to engage someone or talk to the regulator who can quite often provide advice and assistance or guidance in those directions, certainly bring them up to speed with what their responsibilities are and that's sort of a great starting point for them probably. But bringing in that resource is probably the most important thing to that business.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>So Peter contacting the regulator will assist in providing information about what the legal requirements are?</p> <p><strong>Peter Dunphy: </strong></p> <p>That's absolutely right and we have great sympathy for small business operators and how they access that information. We actually operate in a global economy and people are often buying things from overseas, buying them from trade shows and all sorts of things internationally and often standards which are told to be – are said to be equivalent are not always equivalent. So that certainly is worth checking if people are buying major purchases certainly checking it out with the regulator and we're certainly willing to help. We do see people get into trouble where they think they've done the right thing and bought something but it may not be compliant with Australian standards or Australian requirements.</p> <p>So it's really important I think to do the homework, yes.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Thank you. Just on that point I'd like to ask is the legal framework adequate for dealing with safe design of machinery?</p> <p><strong>Peter Dunphy: </strong></p> <p>Look I think the legislative framework we've got is the best you can have in terms of addressing it. We've got very much a prevention approach to our legislation. It really is performance based. It's really designed about trying to get the right outcomes. So you can't be too prescriptive because we know that internationally social environments change and technology is changing. You can't anticipate every change in terms of plant. So the framework we've got is good. I think it is effective in terms of having the right controls but it's more about – really about making sure people are aware of those controls. I think as Liz was talking before people don't necessarily always refer to the legislation. So it's raising awareness not so much about the legislation but about what's important in terms of what people need to do to design safely.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Okay, yep. Liz in the context of what Peter's just told us about the legislation and the legal framework what do you think needs to be done now to improve the outcomes in safe design of machinery?</p> <p><strong>Liz Bluff: </strong></p> <p>Look from the research that I have done people who design and manufacture machinery have a strong preference for I guess what I'd call hands-on learning in the sense of getting practical opportunities to actually find out how to actually do safety in a sense. So you can provide information in a written form about safety but actually what people are looking for is how do you do it in practise? That leads me to think that there would be great value in I think regulators banding together with education providers, professional industry associations and looking at providing programs which are structured around those practical opportunities. So what does it actually mean in practice to be recognising hazards? How do you go about doing that? What are the practical ways for actually making sound decisions about how you control risks? How do you do your testing and examination of machinery that you're expected to do? How do you effectively involve workers?</p> <p>So these are all very practical, hands-on type things and I think there'd be great value in looking at how we can provide programs that help build capacity and build those sorts of knowledge and skills.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Okay. Thank you Liz. I'd like to now again ask our audience here if there are any further questions that you might have? No? Yes, one question here.</p> <p><strong>Audience Member: </strong></p> <p>How important is it to know who you're designing for, know their shape, their size, given a lot of machinery is about people having to control difficult and complex environments? How do we know that we're designing for Australians?</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Okay. Wes I might refer this one to you and this is a question about how do you cater for all of those hazards and that includes the hazards of catering for differences in individuals?</p> <p><strong>Wes Wilkinson: </strong></p> <p>I'll put my ergonomist's hat on for that one. We need to when we're designing interfaces for people, we need to design those interfaces for the people which means we need to take into consideration the variation in stature, physical size etc. in our workforce. Unfortunately in Australia our databases are not where they probably should be but there's a major project within the human factors society to work on getting us a database of the Australian population. But an ergonomist knows how to interpret the databases that are available and there's various software packages that are available that assist you in designing for people but it is critical that we design interfaces for the range of user groups and I'll give you an example from a shift manufacturing organisation. </p> <p>They were operating assembly machines and on the day shift the guy that operated it was about six foot four and on the night shift the lady that operated it was about four foot two and she's basically working up here and he's working down there. So there was a total mismatch in the design of those workstations.</p> <p>So if you appreciate that both of them were within perhaps 95% of our expected user population, if we know those limits, we know where the boundaries are, we can design to cater for that and we can put in appropriate risk controls like adjustable floors, adjustable processes to be able to get those interfaces to the correct height and get those working relationships because it's a three-dimensional model. It may not be just height. It may be reach. It can be any way that we relate with people. Vision - if we're talking control room environments and that sort of stuff you've got to design for focal lengths and for information and interpretation of that information. So a professional ergonomist is someone that can assist you in that area in terms of getting that information and making that relationship work for you.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Thank you. Ta. Any further questions? No. No further questions. We start to come to the conclusion of the discussion and for that I'd actually like to refer to the panellists about a particular take-away message. So in other words we're dealing with a very key issue with respect to safety and design and design of machinery and I'd like to ask each of the panel members what their take-away message is for you. When you go away from here and think about safety and design what is it you should be thinking about? So Peter from a regulator's perspective what's a key take-away message with respect to safety and design?</p> <p><strong>Peter Dunphy: </strong></p> <p>Yeah. Well for me it is about that thinking early and really trying to anticipate all of the types of hazards that will arise throughout the lifecycle of the product. So really making sure at the front end that we get that right so people and users at the back end are not being injured in the process.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Okay and Liz?</p> <p><strong>Liz Bluff: </strong></p> <p>I think for me it is that fundamental message about we're trying to make machinery inherently safer and at the end of the day we'll only achieve that when we do recognise the full range of ways in which the machinery could be hazardous and take steps to address that range of hazards.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>And Wes?</p> <p><strong>Wes Wilkinson: </strong></p> <p>Look my take-away message would be that injury and illness from work is unacceptable and we need to target the decision makers. We need to convert their thinking and we need to achieve a culture of not having to do it but a culture of wanting to do it right and that's I think the fundamental message I'd like to put through.</p> <p><strong>Bryan Russell: </strong></p> <p>Cheers. Thank you and clearly safety and design is a fundamental issue. It is embedded within the Australian Work Health and Safety Strategy. It's an identified action area and what I would like to think is that today we've had a vital discussion on some of the issues of concern with regards to safety and design but more importantly on how we achieve positive outcomes that are going to drive safety for people operating machinery and equipment. We've got key messages here and I think if I could sum it up in terms of saying that some of those key messages relate to communication, information and engagement, what we need to do is to work actively with one another as regulators, as researchers and as practitioners within this space to ensure that we look at the front end process to ensure that the hazards are eliminated or minimised at the design stage. That’s what this is all about. That's what this discussion has been about.</p> <p>I would like you to put your hands together and thank our panel members – Peter, Liz, Wes.</p> <p>(Audience Applause) </p> <p><strong>[End of Transcript]</strong></p> </div> <div class="field field--name-field-downloadable-transcripts field--type-entity-reference field--label-hidden field__items"> <div class="field__item"><article class="media media--type-file media--view-mode-default"> <div class="field field--name-field-media-file field--type-file field--label-hidden field__item"> <span class="file file--mime-application-pdf file--application-pdf"> <a href="" type="application/pdf">live-panel-designing-safe-machinery-application.pdf</a></span> </div> </article> </div> <div class="field__item"><article class="media media--type-file media--view-mode-default"> <div class="field field--name-field-media-file field--type-file field--label-hidden field__item"> <span class="file file--mime-application-vnd-openxmlformats-officedocument-wordprocessingml-document file--x-office-document"> <a href="" type="application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document">live-panel-designing-safe-machinery-application.docx</a></span> </div> </article> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> Thu, 19 Mar 2020 11:13:53 +0000 Broadcast in 2015 The power of cooperation – supply chains and workers’ health and safety <div class="node node--type-media node--view-mode-rss layout layout--onecol"> <div class="layout__region layout__region--content"> <div class="field field--name-body field--type-text-with-summary field--label-above"> <div class="field__label">Body</div> <div class="field__item"><p><span style="line-height: 20.8px;">Our panellists suggest practical ways to use supply chains to protect the health and safety of workers, emphasising the importance of consultation and cooperation.</span></p> <h2>Who is this presentation for?</h2> <p>Business leaders in large and small enterprises, workers, union leaders, and suppliers and their clients in supply chains.</p> <h2>About the presenter</h2> <p>Michael Borowick, Assistant Secretary of the Australian Council of Trade Unions, introduces the video.</p> <p>Panellists are Ged Kearney, the President of the Australian Council of Trade Unions, Professor Michael Quinlan, the Director of the Industrial Relations Research Centre at the University of New South Wales and Christian Frost, the Head of Workplace Health and Safety at News Corp Australia.</p> <h2>Useful resources</h2> <ul style="line-height: 20.8px;"> <li><a href="/sites/swa/about/publications/pages/supply-chains-and-networks-australian-strategy-paper"><i>Supply Chains and Networks – Australian Strategy Paper</i></a></li> <li><a href="/node/2261">2014 VSS seminar on supply chains</a></li> <li><a href="/sites/swa/about/publications/pages/labourhirefactsheet">Labour hire employers’ duties</a></li> <li><a href="">National Heavy Vehicle Chain of Responsibility</a></li> <li>European Agency for Safety and Health at Work – <i><a href="">Promoting occupational safety and health through the supply chain</a></i></li> </ul> </div> </div> <div class="field transcript-group"> <div class="field__label">Transcript</div> <div class="clearfix text-formatted field field--name-field-html-transcript field--type-text-long field--label-hidden field__item"><p><strong>Supply chains and workers' health and safety</strong></p> <p><strong>Professor Michael Quinlan, Christian Frost and Ged Kearney</strong></p> <p>§ (Music Playing) §</p> <p><strong>Michael Borowick: </strong></p> <p>Welcome everybody. I am Michael Borowick, a Safe Work Australia member and an Assistant Secretary of the Australian Council of Trade Unions. I'd like to thank you all for joining us for this event. </p> <p>Firstly I want to acknowledge the traditional custodians of the land on which we are meeting, the Ngunnawal people. I acknowledge and respect their continuing culture and contribution that they have made to the life of this city and of course the region. </p> <p>This presentation forms the part of a suite of virtual seminars that we're holding through National Safe Work Australia Month that show how we can work together to protect the health and safety of Australian workers. The seminars support the important goals of the Australian Work Health and Safety Strategy and showcase some of the latest thinking in work health and safety. By sharing our ideas, experiences, skills and knowledge together we can achieve the Strategy's vision of a healthy and safe and productive working lives. </p> <p>Today's discussion explores the challenging and critical nature of workplace health and safety associated with the operation of supply chains. Supply chains and networks involve the web of relationships that link the exchange of goods and services between businesses. More and more we see work being outsourced to contractors. This includes the supply of goods, services and labour. And for this reason protecting the health and safety of workers in those supply chains is identified as a National Action Area in the Australian Strategy.</p> <p>The commercial relationships within supply chains and networks can be used to improve work health and safety but as we all know they can also lead to adverse health and safety outcomes particularly in smaller businesses and for vulnerable workers. It is vital that the supply chain and network participants understand each other's businesses so as not to adversely affect workers' health and safety and further than that actively help improve the health and safety of workers throughout the supply chains in which they operate.</p> <p>There are already overarching legal obligations for various parties in the supply chain. Anyone conducting a business or undertaking must so far as is reasonably practicable protect their own workers and others who may be affected by their work. Importantly others may include workers in other businesses in their supply chains.</p> <p>Business owners must consult with their workers and health and safety representatives. And they also have a duty to consult, cooperate and coordinate activities with all other persons who have a duty in relation to the same matter – very applicable in the supply chain context. The work health and safety laws also emphasise the importance of leadership by placing positive duties on officers in organisations who must exercise due diligence to ensure that the person conducting a business or undertaking complies with their duties. </p> <p>Supply chains can be simple or very complex and can far extend beyond Australia's borders. In September 2014 the Australian Government signed the <em>G20 Labour and Employment Ministerial Declaration on Safer and Healthier Workplaces</em> which in part focuses on supply chains. During this seminar our experts will discuss how we can harness the innate strengths of the supply chain to improve work health and safety outcomes for all workers. </p> <p>Supply chains contain diversity, skills and knowledge that bring innovation and creativity to the kind of problem solving that drives high quality, robust and sustainable work health and safety solutions. Today we will hear from a leading researcher in this field, Professor Michael Quinlan from the University of New South Wales, a business safety leader Mr Christian Frost from News Corp and the President of the ACTU Ms Ged Kearney. They will together discuss the importance of focusing on supply chains to protect health and safety of workers and how this can best be achieved in practise.</p> <p>Professor Michael Quinlan is Director of the Industrial Relations Research Centre at the University of New South Wales. In addition to publishing widely on work health and safety Michael has conducted enquiries, investigations and audits on work health and safety and risk for governments in Australia and New Zealand. Michael's excellent book <em>Ten Pathways to Death and Disaster</em> – <em>Learning from Fatal Incidents and Mines and other High Hazard Workplaces</em> was published in 2014. Previously Michael drafted the report on supply chains and networks for Safe Work Australia in 2011 that provided important evidence to this topic as the National Action Area in the Australian Work Health and Safety Strategy.</p> <p>Christian Frost is the Head of Workplace Health and Safety at News Corp Australia where he leads the company's strategic health and safety approach. A highly experienced health and safety and workers' compensation leader Christian has also responsibility for establishing and leading the health and safety capability for the National Broadband Network Co – was also responsible in a former life I take it. Christian holds a science degree with a psychology major and is an accredited Business Work Health and Safety Auditor and a WH Auditor Skills Examiner. Christian is a Judge for the National Safety Awards of Excellence.</p> <p>Ged Kearney is the effective and well-regarded President of the Australian Council of Trade Unions. Ged was elected to the position in 2010. Previously Ged was an Official of the Australian Nursing Federation where she was elected National Secretary in 2008 having been an Official since 1997. Ged holds a Bachelor of Education, is a qualified Nurse and also worked as a Nurse Educator.</p> <p>Last but not least let me introduce you to today's Facilitator Mr Barry Sherriff from Norton Rose Fulbright. Barry was a member of the three-person panel that made recommendations on the structure and content that formed the basis of the model Work Health and Safety Act adopted in most jurisdictions today. Please join me – oh I should say also that Barry is the Chair – importantly the Chair of the Safety Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission. </p> <p>Please join me in welcoming our speakers.</p> <p>(Audience Applause) </p> <p>I now hand over to Barry to start the discussion.</p> <p><strong>Barry Sherriff: </strong></p> <p>Thank you Michael. Michael has very well set the scene, indicated how significant this discussion is today and also identified the very good panel of contributors that we have here today and it's not surprising that we have the particular panel members today because they each have different perspectives, are able to raise collectively and individually the issues that need to be addressed, have different experiences and most importantly can help guide us toward solutions.</p> <p>The way the session will run today is whilst it will have a sense of Q&amp;A about it – question and answer in the normal form of an interview - hopefully it will be more of an engagement, more of a discussion amongst the panel dealing with each issue in turn as we move through. There will then be time for questions from the audience and I look forward to that so that we can have your insights or delving further into some of the issues that have been raised and then there'll be a wrap-up at the end from each of the speakers to provide their final key perspectives. Hopefully you will find it informative, useful and provide you with solutions to take away for your business. </p> <p>I should say that one thing that is often important in a discussion like this is to define the topic because everyone has a different perspective and phrases such as "supply chain" can often be bandied around and seen differently by different people. For the purpose of today "supply chains" refers to the involvement of multiple parties and that's the key to it – multiple parties in the provision of labour and other inputs. Now those other inputs, often they're commonly identified as being plant and equipment and substances and so forth, but it can also be input into the design of those things and the design of process, the provision of things that do assist in work being undertaken and outcomes being achieved. </p> <p>Now this may occur linearly along the chain where you have people at different segments in the chain or it may be more complex where you have in effect satellites or side inputs along the way. So it really is about the inputs beyond a single organisation in work being done and outputs being achieved and it may involve associated companies quite often or it could be arm's length arrangements which may be short term, long term or indeed ad hoc. So it's a very open concept and I think it's important that it is dealt with in that way. And certainly you'll find that the experiences that the panel put forward this afternoon will in fact provide that broad base of experience.</p> <p>So without further to do I'd like to turn first to Michael and just ask what does the evidence, the research, the data that you've been involved in tell us about the dynamics of supply chains and how they impact work health and safety?</p> <p><strong>Michael Quinlan: </strong></p> <p>Well thanks Barry. I'd like to start off I think by looking at some of the problems and then we could talk about some of the solutions later on I think. There is actually now quite a lot of evidence across a range of industries including construction, transport and I mean road transport, aviation, maritime, manufacturing, other areas of the service sector such as home care and cleaning relating to the effect of elaborate subcontracting networks on occupational health and safety. And I'll just give you some examples. </p> <p>In terms of injury there was a study done of home-based garment makers in Australia that found they had an injury rate more than two times that of equivalent workers working in factories. There's evidence across a range of countries that labour hire temporary agency workers have injury rates higher than other workers including direct hire temporary workers. Regarding to hazard exposures a recent, very interesting study looked at agricultural harvest workers in Australia and in the UK. These are mainly immigrant, short term visa holders and they found that these workers while not engaged in actual spraying activities were exposed to levels of pesticide residues and they were exposed for a number of reasons - the poor management practices via the contractors who were supplying these workers, very poor management and hygiene and sanitary facilities on the farms, not being able to wash your hands, living in communal facilities. So there was a cross-exposure from one worker to another. What was particularly interesting about this study was it compared the UK to Australia. In Australia most of these workers until recently were backpackers and short term visa holders. Increasingly now in some Victorian towns it's undocumented immigrants. </p> <p>In the Europe however they're mainly from Eastern Europe and very different. The backpackers tend to be highly educated, often from countries with high health and safety standards whereas the Eastern European people were not so educated and came from countries with poor standards. But at the end of the day that did not seem to make much difference. So the very insecure nature of the work – backpackers you may know if they don't achieve 80 days' work in a year they don't get an extension of their visa. So they are under a lot of pressure to work and even all their knowledge of health and safety didn't seem to make any difference.</p> <p>There's also evidence in relation to mental illness amongst people at the bottom of these supply chains. Truck drivers doing the most competitive route - owner drivers tend to have high levels of stress than other drivers and a recent study, one very interesting one I've found of people – home care workers cleaning aged care people at home, when people get older their cleaning is not very good. There's hygiene issues. So apart from all the cleaning that they do there's a high risk of infection and one of the stressors for the workers that work for agencies is if they came down with an illness they couldn’t work. So this was a source of stress. If they woke up in the morning feeling a bit off colour this might ring up and not working for three days which to the person on their sort of wage is quite a significant issue.</p> <p>The final area is there's actually a link between elaborate subcontracting and major disasters across a range of industries. Examples include the explosion at the AZF Chemical Factory in France in 2001. There have been six serious aviation incidents in the US - three of them multiple fatality crashes due to outsourced aircraft maintenance that wasn't done properly - and in oil rigs almost all the recent oil rig disasters have had a subcontracting connection. Now that is Deepwater Horizon, the Montara oil rig disaster off the North-West coast of Australia and the Petrobas disaster in the Southern Atlantic to name just three.</p> <p>Now the reason – the only other thing I want to now say is it's the reasons I think these problems occur and I think there are three critical reasons here. One is economic and reward pressures. There's a lot of cost cutting associated with some of the supply chains and that's what creates some of the problems in terms of work intensification, long hours and cost cutting and corner cutting on safety. Contingent payment regimes – if you pay a truck driver by the amount of kilometres they drive and that rate isn't very good, well guess what? They're going to drive a lot of hours and that then becomes a fatigue issue and then they use drugs to combat the fatigue and that becomes another issue.</p> <p>The other factor is that often at the bottom of these supply chains, not always but often you find vulnerable workers, recently arrived immigrants, women, people who don't have a lot of bargaining power and therefore are quite susceptible to pressures and afraid to raise issues. The second issue is disorganisation. Once you bring multiple parties into a health and safety relationship you create a level of complexity. You create pressures on training regimes, supervision and also work organisation and management systems and communication. Just to give you one example and it's a pretty gruesome one. Not so long ago there was a contractor brought into a quarry in Tasmania. He was working in a crushing machine and while he was inside that crusher someone started it up. Now those problems can occur where you don't have contractors but it's much more risky and likely that you'll get hazardous forms of disorganisation in those sorts of work sites.</p> <p>And finally in terms of disorganisation these workers are often not unionised or very poorly represented. They do not have much voice. So they can't express the issues, let alone have those concerns listened to. The last area of risk is regulatory failure and one of them is the weakening of labour standards. When you get self employed workers they're not subject to wage determinations in the same way as employees. They're not subject to the same restrictions and hours of work. They're not covered by workers' compensation to a large degree. So they're areas where their working conditions are inferior and that then affects safety and health in the workplace. </p> <p>Further even though the health and safety legislation does clearly apply to self-employed workers and many other people in supply chains there's often a level of ambiguity in practice and risk shifting and obfuscation where if you ask the contractor or somebody on a work site "Who's responsible for health and safety?" people are always pointing in different directions. Or people are assuming it's all their responsibility when in fact there's other parties. </p> <p>The final element of regulatory challenge here is a logistical one. When work moves into the home, when it works into remote or mobile work situations this creates an enormous challenge for inspectorates. Where you have more than one chain of control on a work site that also creates a lot of challenges for an inspectorate in terms of resourcing. Now when you move it out of jurisdictions it even gets more challenging but I suspect we'll come back to that issue later.</p> <p><strong>Barry Sherriff: </strong></p> <p>Good. Thank you Michael. That's an astonishingly good summary of an enormous amount of research. So we're very grateful for that. Ged, Michael's raised a number of issues and it quite clearly affects the health and safety of workers. He's also raised a number of matters there that cross into the community expectations and the impact on the community. We'd be interested in your experiences. Some of the cases that you've identified in your experience where worker health and safety has been adversely affected and also to the extent that it's relevant, the community expectations on that?</p> <p><strong>Ged Kearney: </strong></p> <p>Michael touched on a couple of examples that I was going to use and there's been some fairly high profile ones lately I think. You talked about agriculture and you very clearly I think explained the problems there. There was a very high profile show on <em>Four Corners </em>recently. You might have seen where they were backpacker visas I think, workers that had been brought into the country and been basically used almost as slave labour and been dreadfully exploited on farms to a degree that really shocked everybody. And this came about as Michael explained through a very complex system of labour hire firms where it's very difficult to lay the blame or to find actually who's responsible. The minute you hone in on someone they disappear in a puff of smoke and pop up somewhere else. So it's a difficult thing. From the worker's perspective it's devastating. They're so vulnerable these workers. They are so vulnerable in so many ways. They don't have English, they don't know their rights, they have the sickle hanging over their head that they'll be sent home, their visas will be cancelled. Just on every level really they are vulnerable. </p> <p>So I think from the community's expectations it was quite a shock to think that the food we go and buy in the supermarkets and in Woollies' might have arrived there under such terrible conditions. And that agriculture one I think is a great example of where organisations have worked together Barry to sort of address it. So there was the food – the National Union of Workers, there was the Meaties' Union – the Meaties' – the Meatworkers' Union. There was the regulators, the Fair Work Ombudsman, the Fair Work Commission, even Police there and the media in this case really came together to highlight the issue and hopefully do something about it.</p> <p>So agriculture I think is an important area. Another high profile example where community expectations are very heightened was the issue you raised of transport and logistics where truck drivers - the contractual obligations of truck drivers unfortunately often makes them break the rules. This is an area where there are rules there about how long you can drive and when you have to take breaks etc. etc. But because the pressures, the contractual pressures are so high we saw a lot of truck drivers having to break the rules just to make sure they got paid or that they didn't lose the contract if they were late simply to sort of make ends meet and the very survival and their livelihoods depended on them unfortunately doing things dangerously.</p> <p>So I think, you know, Safe Work Australia have told me that there's been around 776 deaths in the last ten years from truck drivers. So how does that resonate with the community? Well, you know, I drive on the road with truck drivers and it's quite scary to think that there could be a truck driver on the road that's quite fatigued that could involve you in an accident. Now I don't know the incidence of other people being involved but of course, you know, mums, dads – we all share the roads with these truck drivers. So it's in all of the community's interests I think that we address these. The Transport Workers' Union has been tireless in working with the regulators and working with the legislators to come up with answers to that and we probably will go to that later I think, but the Road Safety Tribunal I think has been a terrific advent from those problems.</p> <p>And there's another area that I think is fairly high profile just as an example if you don't mind is the textile, clothing and footwear industry. It operates a supply chain. There's a very small supply chain domestically in Australia which operates on a system called "piece work" and this is where people, mostly women, again of non-English speaking backgrounds, fairly vulnerable, do piece work in their own homes or they work in really sweatshops, in garages and things in awful conditions. And some of the stories that we've heard about the conditions under which they work and how they are paid have been appalling. </p> <p>I remember one story that was given to us from one of our TCFUA members was she was given a contract to make clothes that actually she made for $7 a piece which sold for nearly $700 a piece so I've been told. And when you would ask her she would work all night, all night to just get the pieces that she had to deliver out and working on quite complicated sewing machinery. And when she was asked how did she stay awake all night she said "fear". Fear kept her awake. Fear that she wouldn’t meet the contract requirements. And so, you know, when people are working under those conditions clearly safety becomes a major issue and we were able again to work very well with the regulators, with the legislators to get some quite good changes to the Fair Work Act to protect people in that industry.</p> <p>Then of course as Michael mentioned, or I think Barry you might have mentioned there's the equipment that workers work with. You don't think about that but that's an important supply chain issue because if you're working with a piece of heavy machinery or not, maybe a sewing machine, you want to know that it's properly made and that it's not going to injure you while you're working with it. And also the whole interesting and amazing issue of workplace design I think also is kind of a supply chain issue as well. So we're interested in all of those aspects. We're interested in solutions. We've already got some fairly high profile outcomes that have been very good from working collaboratively with everybody that we need to.</p> <p><strong>Barry Sherriff: </strong></p> <p>Good. Thank you Ged. Christian we've heard of a number of different very high profile areas – transport, textiles, agriculture and so forth. You've had quite a variety of experiences with various different companies in different roles. Can you describe the various types of relationships and activities that you've seen and been involved in managing involving different types of supply chains?</p> <p><strong>Christian Frost: </strong></p> <p>Sure. Thank you Barry. So yeah in my current role we outsource a fair bit of work. So we deliver approximately 14 million newspapers every week. So we outsource some of the logistics associated with that. The last time I looked there's about a million kilometres of road in Australia. We actually drive over a million kilometres every week to deliver those papers. There's a fair bit of driving there. We have to get the newspaper to you every day. It's unusual that a newspaper would not turn up where it needs to. So our equipment that we use at our print sites around the country has to be very reliable. So we have a workforce that does include some contractors to help us make sure that that equipment is safe and reliable. So that's in my current role at News Corp.</p> <p>We also tackle the issue of contributors. So people who provide editorial content to us who may not be direct employees. So that's another issue that we need to face. In my previous role at NBN I was responsible for setting up the health safety and environment capability within the operations part of that business. So we had contractors who built and maintained the network. So that was the fibre network and the satellite and the wireless network. So we had a whole range of issues that we needed to deal with. So we had people who were working around electricity - so on utility power poles or at end user premises. We had people who were working remote. We had people working in man holes and pits underground because the network can often be underground and is. So there was a very complex arrangement of contracting that I was exposed to in my previous role and also my current role.</p> <p>I think some of the issues that Michael had raised around the complexity is an issue I think a whole range of organisations need to address and think about very carefully. You can have relationships with very large, competent organisations who are specialists in a particular area. And you need to think about how you build a relationship with those organisations and how you understand who's accountable and responsible for what and how you will support each other because once you engage them they will have their own supply chain who by default are yours. So you need to think about that.</p> <p>You also need to think about how as an organisation you deal with sole traders who don't necessarily – who are expert but don't necessarily have the safety net of a large organisation that will provide them with training or access to a professional safety manager, those sorts of things. And so there are very different approaches that you would take for both types of scenarios and there's a spectrum in between. </p> <p>So some of the issues that organisations need to think about is where they – is how they approach those different relationships. My final point on that particular question Barry and some of the things that I've observed in particular in my last two roles is that we certainly know that organisations have responsibilities for their supply chain and the legislation enshrines that. And so as a human being, as a leader within those organisations and what I've observed is that you're intimately familiar with your legal obligations. You know that you have skin in the game and if someone down that supply chain gets injured you're aware that possibly you could be accountable for that.</p> <p>So because of that awareness there's potentially a natural inclination for you to want to get in there and make sure that it's done your way because you're accountable. On the other hand you've engaged someone who's an expert and you've done that because they are an expert more so than what you are. They've got capacity and skills that you don't. So the real judgement and value of organisations and leaders is where they fit on that spectrum. "How much control and direction do I want to take?" because that can be risky if you apply too much control. Your direction may be based on a whole range of assumptions that are just not valid. So you need to have some trust and the only way that you can have that trust is to build relationships and focus on that and think about how you want to structure it which is my first point that I raised at the beginning. So a very complex matter this topic that we're talking about today. So hopefully there's a fair bit more discussion that we've got to go.</p> <p><strong>Barry Sherriff: </strong></p> <p>Indeed. Thanks very much Christian. Each of the speakers have raised specific challenges and issues relevant to health and safety. From the use of supply chains there's been the drivers for timeliness of delivery. There's been the marginalisation, the need for collaboration, cultural issues, altitudinal issues and so forth. Michael from the research and your experience are there other work health and safety issues from supply chains?</p> <p><strong>Michael Quinlan: </strong></p> <p>Well I think Ged raised one which is there are public health effects and public safety effects and they just don't relate to transport industry but they can relate to food safety and security and other issues. Once you create highly attenuated systems you create a whole new spectrum of risks and those risks don't just reside with workers. They can reside with the wider community as well and we need to be more cognisant of those.</p> <p>I think the other issue that – and Christian really highlighted it is that unfortunately we live in an age of fads and the term "strategy" is used a lot but it's not brought into play very often. And what I would strongly advocate is that organisations need to take a strategic approach, a long term approach, one that's built on relationships, built on mutual trust and understandings and which is designed to deliver long term value rather than short term cost cutting. When I think organisations go down of the path that "This is going to save me money in the short term," that is almost always a route to disaster for somebody in the chain. It may not be them but it will be somebody in the chain will suffer as a result of that. </p> <p>So there's a real need and because you outsource something doesn't mean you need to outsource everything. And I think that organisations also need to forget what management consultants tell them and think "What can we outsource that is effective?", "What are the control measures we need to have in place when we do that?" and "What are things we don't want to outsource because they're part of core business and we need such control of them that it really doesn't make sense to outsource that?" And maintenance is one that's often outsourced that you really need to think carefully about because a lot of your own R&amp;D is locked up in your maintenance. Now there are certain things like major shutdowns where you want to outsource. You can't. But there are other things like routine maintenance which in many respects you may want to keep control of because that is how you learn more about your own production technologies and things like that. So we need to advocate a more long term, strategic approach to this very issue.</p> <p><strong>Barry Sherriff: </strong></p> <p>Thank you Michael. You've raised some of the business perspectives as well and I'll invite Christian shortly to comment on it from the business perspective. The concept of intelligent outsourcing and use of supply chains rather than just simply doing it because it's a fad and it's important. But you've segued nicely into the solution mode which is fantastic. So Ged what is the union movement doing to help deal with these health and safety issues and assist in providing that improvement?</p> <p><strong>Ged Kearney: </strong></p> <p>It's an incredibly important part of what we do I think and something that we're really very proud of because we've had quite I think a major influence in this area working collaboratively. I think firstly and if I take it from a scale we work very closely with workers at the workplace making sure that they are aware of the laws and the regulations and their rights. We help train occupational health and safety reps, we have constant contact with occupational health and safety committees and we help them work collaboratively with their employers to raise issues at the workplace and work through to control or eliminate those problems.</p> <p>We run high profile campaigns I think sometimes when we think things need a little bit of a push along like the Safe Rates campaign for example in truck driving and that resulted in some very good legislative change I think. That has brought about some fantastic outcomes for truck drivers particularly the Road Safety Tribunal. There's the Fair Wear campaign that the textile, clothing and footwear industry ran and there's been a number of campaigns I think that have helped highlight the supply chain issues in particular.</p> <p>We work very closely with businesses. We're committed – absolutely committed to the tripartite process. So it's not only legislation and regulation but it's also working very closely with businesses to make sure that, you know, there is understanding and that we can work together and it doesn't become an issue, you know, that we can actually work at that workplace level. A regulation I already mentioned – we are quite proud of some of the regulation that we have, or a lot of the regulation. In the textile, clothing and footwear industry for example I might have mentioned we got a change to the Fair Work Act which protected the out workers, the piece workers. But internationally I think there's also a lot of work being done. People might recall for example again going back to the textile industry the awful disaster at Rana Plaza in Bangladesh where over 1,100 people died – it was terrible – in a building that collapsed. And that brought about an amazing chain of events that unions got involved with, the major brands got involved with and we created a collaborative arrangement called The Accord whereby all the major brands – not all of them, we're still working on some of them – but a lot of the major brands and unions came together into Bangladesh and are working with the Bangladeshi Government there to try to make workplaces safer. And I think that's a great example of how on a global level unions can work globally with employers and bring about change.</p> <p>We have other avenues internationally that we work on occupational health and safety. We've got the International Trade Union Confederation which my predecessor Sharan Burrow heads up and Sharan does fantastic work with our global union federations commonly known as GUFs. But they're kind of like international unions if you like where we all work together really on trying to improve supply chain management, whether it's sugar in Fiji that we buy or whether again it's textiles in Bangladesh, whether it's making our share in footballs so that child labour isn't used. Or whether it's having a major influence for example at bodies like the United Nations, the ILO where they set international standards by which we can actually use some muscle to enforce decent standards at the international level.</p> <p>We also have strong inroads with bodies like the G20 and the G7. The G20 committed to broad occupational health and safety goals this year which was fantastic. There's other areas like the Rotterdam Convention which deals with asbestos because we have a very proud track record here on asbestos. But we're still working internationally to protect workers from the hazards of asbestos and we've had some major inroads in areas like Vietnam where we've worked very closely with the regulators there and the government through the ILO and other international bodies.</p> <p>So it's an area where we are very heavily integrated globally and locally and where I think we've had some of our most wonderful successes. And Michael Borowick of course heads up our OH&amp;S Department at the ACTU.</p> <p><strong>Barry Sherriff: </strong></p> <p>Great. Thank you. If I can summarise the key message I got from that is that the union movement is there for the entire journey, from unearthing through to influencing and then collaborating to identify and initiate and implement solutions. So it's part of the whole – that wasn't written for me by the way. So it is a journey that you're on and it's not simply a case of having a specific role and only that role and it is very much importantly the collaborative role.</p> <p>Christian, Michael's raised the business aspect. Now obviously this is something that businesses undertake for obvious commercial reasons. There are various different implications from the use of supply chain and there may be different approaches and different degrees of involvement and activity in that space. What's your experience been of the focus of industry and businesses specifically in supply chain issues?</p> <p><strong>Christian Frost: </strong></p> <p>Okay. So I'll probably answer that twofold. The first thing is that what I can say is that the leaders that I've worked with in particular in my last two roles – my current role and my role before – they are genuinely committed to the safety of the people that work for them. They genuinely care and that comes through in a whole range of conversations that you have and decisions that are made. It's very important as a first focus is to establish the relationship correctly from the start. Having conversations with potential suppliers about what your expectations are and what theirs are as well. And "What are the boundaries?", "How are we going to support each other through that?"</p> <p>And then a key focus has to be – for large contracts has to be on a formal agreement generally in a contract where that's crystallised. Hopefully you don't have to draw on that contract but it's very important that it's written down so that expectations are very clear. It also sets the tone for the relationship. You need to have conversations around how you are going to support each other, what tools are you going to use so that you can fulfil those responsibilities. And I think that's for me a key focus, right up front setting the expectations for that relationship.</p> <p>And moving forward once you have a formal arrangement, supporting each other and taking an active interest in the performance of that work, the safety performance of that contract. And I think it's key for those of us that are trying to support our organisations to get our most senior leaders out and talk to people who are actually doing the work because they're the people who are impacted by a whole range of decisions that potentially could be made in an ivory tower. And I think that's very, very important. </p> <p>There's a particular anecdote or story that I've got that I think highlights that very well and it's my previous role at NBN in the early stages, in the first releases. And that we went out into the field and we were having a conversation with a contractor who was working on a pit, a fairly large pit, new design, plastic and it had a large polyconcrete lid. And we were talking to him and he had a whole range of wonderful suggestions to make this lid lighter. So when you walk along the street you'll see these lids on the footpath etc. and so it was a no-brainer. I mean what a wonderful piece of insight. So we were able to engage that individual and his company and talk to the supplier of that equipment. We'd go for a trip to the supplier and involve our design team and actually come up with a new prototype which worked. So it's lighter, it's easier to work with, takes less time which is really important in an emergency situation - you need to get the job done – and it built trust. So that individual feels like their opinion is really important because it was and it sets a tone and expectation for other contractors and for other people who work with you. "Well that's what they need from us." </p> <p>And so I think that that relationship aspect and the trust building is very, very important. In fact I'll leave you with one point. It was such an important initiative that I actually went out and got one of the old prototype lids. I took a drive out to the supplier and left it outside the door of our design team. So we just left it sitting there as a permanent reminder. As they turned up for work, left, went to the rest rooms and had lunch every day it was a permanent reminder to make sure that they thought about safety in the design of any other aspect of the network. So it was a really wonderful story that started with a conversation with the person who's actually doing the work.</p> <p><strong>Barry Sherriff: </strong></p> <p>That's another demonstration of the fact that good work health and safety performance is in fact good business. And it's not just about avoiding the downsides of people becoming injured. </p> <p><strong>Christian Frost: </strong></p> <p>That's correct.</p> <p><strong>Barry Sherriff: </strong></p> <p>It can positively contribute to the business.</p> <p><strong>Christian Frost: </strong></p> <p>And innovation is important.</p> <p><strong>Barry Sherriff: </strong></p> <p>And innovation.</p> <p><strong>Christian Frost: </strong></p> <p>If you're having conversations and you're involving people with a variety of backgrounds in the conversation you will get innovation and that's very important.</p> <p><strong>Barry Sherriff: </strong></p> <p>Yep. I'm interested from a solution perspective – and I'll deal with them one at a time, if you could very briefly unfortunately given the time we're limited to…</p> <p><strong>Christian Frost: </strong></p> <p>Sure.</p> <p><strong>Barry Sherriff: </strong></p> <p>How you've seen supply chain issues addressed in for example the use of third party labour or independent labour? Have there been any particular things that stand out as being answers?</p> <p><strong>Christian Frost: </strong></p> <p>We currently engage some labour to help us at our print sites and in my previous consulting environment I did support some labour hire organisations who put labour in. And again I come back to the relationship. It's very important that relationships are set between the organisations because people who are transient or have temporary jobs can be vulnerable if those relationships are not established and if they're not engaged because you've got piecemeal issues. You've got the fact that they might be on a short term contract which is very easy not to renew and those relationships need to be build on trust because if they're not then the people who are most vulnerable will miss out and possibly get injured.</p> <p>So I come back to that setting the expectation around relationships which ultimately end in a high level of trust.</p> <p><strong>Barry Sherriff: </strong></p> <p>Yeah.</p> <p><strong>Michael Quinlan: </strong></p> <p>Can I come in on that?</p> <p><strong>Barry Sherriff: </strong></p> <p>Yes. Please do.</p> <p><strong>Michael Quinlan: </strong></p> <p>We looked at labour agencies in Queensland and one of the things we've found that worked was where labour hire agencies provided a niche they only provided certain types of labour. They built up very strong relationships with host employers and that meant that they understood the risks. And also the hosts were responsible enough to say "I can't hire workers on that short term basis because I can't manage the health and safety. So I can't bring in somebody for one night shift because I can't manage that." And so there are ways of developing that relationship.</p> <p>I think in some industries – I mean what the supply chain literature says very clearly is that for supply chains to work positively for health and safety there needs to be a conducive external environment. There has to be something that drives the organisation at the top of the supply chain to really want to care about health and safety. That's either a reputational issue, a competitive – sorry, community pressure. In some industries that are really competitive the only way to get industry in is to mandate and that's where the clothing and textile industry trucking ones work because there will be members of the industry which will in fact be quite happy with that path. But the only way they're going to get there is by creating a level playing field and the only way you can create that is by mandating. So that will get industry buy-in but only some of them will initially come to the party.</p> <p>So almost when you're looking at a supply chain model you need to look at the specifics of the industry and what you're doing. And the one other point I would raise that I flagged earlier is that when you're dealing with overseas suppliers you really need to look at the risks of dealing with particular countries, their regulatory regimes, their governance, whether there is endemic corruption and what the general standards of health and safety are. If they've got a very weak OHS regulatory regime, a weak environmental regulatory regime, poor governance, no open enquiries, no dissent, endemic corruption, then if you're dealing with them you have a high risk situation. And unless you - you're going to have to go in and do all the quality assurance, all the controls yourself because otherwise you're going to buy a product. Now I had a case in my own university brought in some chemicals from a particular country. It was a dangerous good and how they got round that was they simply labelled the good "non dangerous" so to get around the regulations because that's what they did in their country.</p> <p><strong>Barry Sherriff: </strong></p> <p>Christian what's your experience been in responding to those challenges of overseas procurement or indeed procurement and design of the inputs?</p> <p><strong>Christian Frost: </strong></p> <p>So we're currently going through an upgrade at some of our sites of our equipment - specialist equipment that only comes from certain parts of the world. So for a lot of you who are watching this you'll be aware that other countries have different standards to our own. So in this case we're very mindful of making sure that whatever equipment we bring into our print sites from overseas complies with Australian standards. So the relevant one for us being AS4024 which is the Standard for Machine Guarding. And so for us we're treating this so importantly that we're actually sending a small specialist team over to the supplier of that equipment, to their manufacturing facility to identify any potential issues to make sure that they're addressed at the design and manufacturing stage before it's put on a ship here. Once it's here if it has problems it's very hard to fix and so it's really important that we get that right.</p> <p>By doing it early it means that we can think about the training that we provide our people with that equipment and we know what maintenance is required. So it saves us a lot of time later on down the track if we get it right, right up front with those companies that supply to us.</p> <p>Barry if you don't mind?</p> <p><strong>Barry Sherriff: </strong></p> <p>Yep.</p> <p><strong>Christian Frost: </strong></p> <p>There was a point that Michael raised earlier about the drivers of organisations, what motivates organisations and I'll just maybe provide some insight from my experience consulting and the last couple of roles that I've had. A couple of the drivers for organisations obviously is about complying with the law, costs associated with workplace injury, reputation and your moral and ethical obligations. So from my perspective if you're looking for motivators the ones for me that have resonated the most is the moral obligations first. I have not met a senior leader that doesn't care genuinely for people. When it comes down to it we care. The other is they are concerned with their reputation. So it's important that they have a good corporate reputation, a social reputation and the other is the legal responsibilities. And I think it's in that order to be really honest with you just from my perspective. I'm not 100 percent sure if the research backs that up but it's what I've observed.</p> <p><strong>Barry Sherriff: </strong></p> <p>Finally and putting you still under the spotlight, the one aspect of supply chain that hasn’t been dealt with to much degree today is that question of the design of networks and processes. We talked about the people, the labour input.</p> <p><strong>Christian Frost: </strong></p> <p>Yes.</p> <p><strong>Barry Sherriff: </strong></p> <p>We've talked about the input of machinery and so forth or as Michael indicated chemicals. But what about the processes, the systems, the networks and things that sit behind all this?</p> <p><strong>Christian Frost: </strong></p> <p>I think – Barry I think you may have had some influence in the current harmonised legislation and I think that it was very clever the way that it was put together and the obligations that people have who can influence the design of a process. And when you think about this for a lot of organisations out there particularly those that engage consultants who help design with restructures. Or they help design with how we're going to outsource or they help design a workflow or a process flow. For me that's a very new area and I believe Safe Work Australia has a draft publication out shortly that will help inform us. But it's very important to consider design not just in the traditional "We are going to design a widget" sense. We also now need to think about "We are going to design processes and systems that inevitably will have an impact on how we work." And so I think it's very important that all the people who are influencing that process are aware of their responsibilities and I think well done for getting that into the legislation the way that it is.</p> <p><strong>Barry Sherriff: </strong></p> <p>Thank you. Ged you've been sitting there taking all this in. Are there things that you can add from a solution perspective or responding to the issues in each of these particular areas, whether it be labour supply, whether it be supply of goods or systems?</p> <p><strong>Ged Kearney: </strong></p> <p>I hear what Christian's saying about everybody cares about their people, absolutely and I'm not questioning that. But the power of competitive advantage is very powerful. So for example when we were trying to pull The Accord together for the Bangladesh workers and we had all the major brands - we were seeing them – they would say "Okay. We'll sign up only if they sign up because if they don't sign up then they're going to get things cheaper," and that competitive advantage was a strong driver even though they knew if The Accord didn't get up we would still have people working in Bangladesh in terrible situations. So it is a very powerful driver.</p> <p>So when you are looking I guess at supply chains it's much easier to be mindful of the people here in your workplace, in front of you. But when you're working with international supply chains it's one bit removed and it is quite different. So I think the key in that situation was getting everybody in the room together to look at everybody in the eye and say "Okay. If you do it, we'll do it. We'll do it, we'll do it." So, you know, whilst that ethical drive is compelling it's not the only consideration unfortunately I think though. That's just the nature of the world in which we live. So I think that's important.</p> <p>I think relationships are very important as you said and we form relationships and form alliances which have been very successful. I mentioned Fair Wear and Ethical Clothing. They're very powerful because brand is all important and if it adds value to your brand to say that you are part of that then I think that is a very powerful mechanism as well and we've used that very effectively because not only is it protecting you from a bad brand but it's value adding to your brand to say "Well, you know, it's Leichardt safe," or whatever, you know. "We're part of Ethical Clothing." So it actually value adds and I think that's an important part. And again just, you know, the only other thing that I would add - I think everybody's touched on everything here really very well - is just to keep the momentum going and be ever vigilant, ever, ever vigilant. You can't sit back from it.</p> <p><strong>Barry Sherriff: </strong></p> <p>One very strong theme that's come through from both yourself and Christian which is good to see some would say from different sides of the coin that issue of collaboration and consultation and relationships working together which is of course consistent as Michael said in his opening with the duty that was put into the law to consult, cooperate and coordinate activities which is essential to making it all work. It's great to see that you've each very much focused on that as a critical point. It's not just about the nuts and bolts and mechanics is what you're saying there.</p> <p>Before we move to questions because we are running over time I just want to raise with you and I'll sort of leave it open but don't shout across each other what's happening internationally – particularly Ged and Michael – internationally that may well be useful for us to adopt here and where the trend is heading internationally?</p> <p><strong>Michael Quinlan: </strong></p> <p>Well if I could go back to one point to raise that I think is incumbent. What Christian really talked about a lot was the relationship at board level. And what I think is missing from my studies of health and safety is not enough ownership of health and safety at board level. And I think once we move into that plane we can move along that direction.</p> <p>The Australian initiatives in terms of mandatory supply chain regulation are actually world firsts and they are something that really needs to be promoted. They're something that are being looked at. I understand the International Transport Federation is trying to move the supply chain debate not just in road transport but in maritime safety which has very similar issues along that plane. So in fact there are ways that we can actually and should be influencing the world. I know the US has been influenced in some ways of what's been going in the road transport industry here.</p> <p>I think the next step is the one that Ged talks about. We need to move towards a more global approach which has some regulatory bite and that – and we can talk about global framework agreements at industry and union level which buy into these countries where they say "Well yes you can supply to us but in order to do that you're going to have to meet certain agreed standards."</p> <p><strong>Ged Kearney: </strong></p> <p>I think that's the key.</p> <p><strong>Michael Quinlan: </strong></p> <p>And I think that's the next big challenge because unfortunately all the trade agreements we've got don't have anything about labour standards in them and the ILO has no enforcement powers. And if we are really going to move to a global society we need to move to one where we can see people advancing everywhere and we can actually be happy that the goods we buy in every country or the service that we purchase has been produced under what we would regard as acceptable conditions and ones that are lifting standards everywhere not simply at the expense of someone else.</p> <p><strong>Ged Kearney: </strong></p> <p>That's true.</p> <p><strong>Barry Sherriff: </strong></p> <p>Ged do you…</p> <p><strong>Ged Kearney: </strong></p> <p>Well not withstanding the fact that ILO's stand is unenforceable I think it's an indication of how supply chains are becoming much more of an issue is that the ILO is going to actually focus on supply chains next year I think it is. And for those of you who don't know the ILO is a tripartite body. So there are employers, there are governments and there are unions who try to build international standards. And so it's quite ground-breaking that all those bodies have agreed supply chains are an issue that we need some international standards about.</p> <p>And just one quickly, internationally – there have been good news stories internationally. You know, I think – I understand the Olympic stadium in London was built very well on a collaborative basis with unions and contractors and there weren't any deaths and it was built on time and on budget. The Sydney stadium actually for the Sydney Olympics was done extremely well here in Australia on the same basis and there are good examples of where things do work. I think compliance is a big issue. I think we really have to look at compliance domestically as well as internationally. But the last thing I'll say I think that we haven't really touched on is consumer power. Consumer power might actually drive a lot of the changes for supply chains. People are very - the community is becoming more and more aware, really acutely aware of these issues and as brand is everything, you know, the last thing we wanted for big superannuation industries or anyone to divest out of companies because of consumer pressure on them around supply chains. And so – or maybe we do want that? I don't know.</p> <p>But, you know, I think ultimately it is becoming an issue and people are much more aware of it and we're going to have to be on top of it and be ready to run with it.</p> <p><strong>Christian Frost: </strong></p> <p>And I think that power of the consumer can't be understated. I mean we all look very beautiful today but surprisingly we've had some make-up done earlier and the lady – the lovely lady who was doing my make-up, we actually spoke about this. And I asked her "Knowing what you know about where clothes can come from and the environment that those are made in, does it influence your decision?" and the answer was "Yes. Absolutely it does." So I don't think it can be understated at all. I think that's a fantastic point.</p> <p><strong>Barry Sherriff: </strong></p> <p>Well hopefully or no doubt we'll have all learnt quite a lot today from our three panel members. Certainly many of us will have learnt for the first time about GUF and I might say that hopefully no one suggests that there's been any guff spoken today. On that point can I pass to members of the audience to ask questions?</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Audience member: </strong></p> <p>Hello. My name's Joel from Safe Work Australia. I'd first like to take the opportunity to thank all the panel members for their contributions, to the very insightful discussion. My question is what are the key performance indicators that can be used to monitor the management and effectiveness of supply chain work health and safety, I suppose processes and systems?</p> <p><strong>Christian Frost: </strong></p> <p>Sure. I might tackle that first if you don't mind. There's an obvious one. One of the indicators can be the number of injuries that occur and the type of injuries. That's very obvious. Other indicators could include some benchmarks that you've set early on at the relationship setting stage. So "Have we done audits like we said we would and what happened?", "What did we learn in those audits?", "Any issues that popped out of those?" and "Have we closed those off?" So indicators can be around "We said we were going to do some proactive, preventative things. Have we done those?" and "Have they been effective?" So there's a couple to get the conversation going.</p> <p><strong>Michael Quinlan: </strong></p> <p>Performance indicators can be problematic. A number of systems have failed because they've rated contractors on their safety performance and that's discouraged contractors from reporting problems which is the last thing you want to do. So you need to use indicators but you need to be quite clever about it and you need to encourage a situation where contractors are reporting problems and that's seen as a positive rather than… You also need and we were talking about this prior to the session - if you've got contractors you need to look at their investigative procedures into incidents. You need to look at near misses because they teach you a lot. You learn a lot from near misses. Very few disasters have occurred without almost identical near misses shortly before the fatal event. And you need a range. I would look at work in – if I was looking in other countries I wouldn't just be looking at raw injury. I would be looking at the working conditions, the wages that I would want that those people are decently paid and that they're not working too long hours. I would also want an investigative device onto the point that there wasn't some secret subcontracting going on because that happens as well where things are offloaded down the chain and you're not actually seeing what's the place that's producing it.</p> <p>So it's a good question you ask and you need to be quite cluey and design assistive performance indicators in conjunction with on-the-ground auditing so that you know what you're actually – the measures you're getting are actually what you think they are saying.</p> <p><strong>Christian Frost: </strong></p> <p>And on that I think it's very important around incident reporting and you do want that as an indicator because if you're not getting any it probably means there's a few failures and there's probably a lack of trust because there's fear.</p> <p><strong>Barry Sherriff: </strong></p> <p>Yep.</p> <p><strong>Christian Frost: </strong></p> <p>So that’s a great point and the other is I think when you're setting KPIs – objectives and KPIs – the first question you need to ask is "What behaviours do I want to drive?" because what gets measured gets done. And so that's – you've got to be really clear on the behaviours first and then start asking questions around "Well what are the indicators that we're going to put in place specific to encourage those behaviours?"</p> <p><strong>Barry Sherriff: </strong></p> <p>Good. Ged do you have any comment?</p> <p><strong>Ged Kearney: </strong></p> <p>Well the only thing I'd add and I'm not an expert on this area - these guys are – but the only thing I'd add is, is there a way of getting feedback from the workers? Do you have frequent meetings with occupational health and safety reps who feed things back up to you? Is there a way that you can measure that and that you actually engage with your workforce and that you act on those things too? Like "The lids are heavy," you know. So that sort of thing.</p> <p><strong>Christian Frost: </strong></p> <p>I think that's a great question and in the roles that I've been in one of the things that we've actually asked senior leaders who may not necessarily be involved in that contract, we want them to do what we call "leadership walks". So get out from behind your desk and there might be a target for them to complete and it's an important process for them to get out into the field and talk to people who are doing the work. But importantly the most powerful part for that leader is the debrief at the end. So going back and debriefing with their peers about what they observed and what insight they have and then holding their reports accountable for addressing those issues and enquiring back.</p> <p>So absolutely you should have measures in there about getting senior leaders out there to get feedback from the people including representatives on how to do their work.</p> <p><strong>Michael Quinlan: </strong></p> <p>We do walk-around audits with health and safety reps. Better workplaces I've been to do that. I think the question is really important. You need to get worker feedback.</p> <p><strong>Christian Frost: </strong></p> <p>Yep.</p> <p><strong>Michael Quinlan: </strong></p> <p>There are often opinion leaders in the workplace who will tell you things and good managers know who these people are. They will have hopefully structures in place and they will ensure the workforce is well informed. The problem with agriculture is a lot of these workers weren't aware of the hazard exposures.</p> <p><strong>Ged Kearney: </strong></p> <p>That's right. That's right.</p> <p><strong>Michael Quinlan: </strong></p> <p>So you need to inform the workforce about them and then use that information accordingly because your injury with things will not talk about exposures to hazardous substances the consequences of which may not manifest for months if not years later. So it is something we really need to address and we need to get dialogue going and I think that's a really good measure of an effective supply chain…</p> <p><strong>Christian Frost: </strong></p> <p>That's right.</p> <p><strong>Michael Quinlan: </strong></p> <p>…is where there is a really good dialogue at the bottom of the supply chain of information feeding back up the systems. Systems are very good at driving down. Really effective systems are where there's a report back of information and that information is actioned. If you don't action it people won't report.</p> <p><strong>Barry Sherriff: </strong></p> <p>A very good, perceptive and practical question. We are running short of time but I'd like to invite anyone else to ask a question. No?</p> <p>I think we've probably covered pretty much the ground that we can in the time allocated. We could go on for days and I'm sure people would love that particularly given the quality of the people that we have to pass on their experiences and views. What I'd like to do is call on you each in turn starting with Michael just to make a final single point that you believe is a strong take-away message?</p> <p><strong>Michael Quinlan: </strong></p> <p>Supply chains are one of the ways that really is governing the way workers organise today and it is one we really need to look at carefully if we are going to improve health and safety in the future and deal with underlying causes rather than symptoms.</p> <p><strong>Barry Sherriff: </strong></p> <p>Ged?</p> <p><strong>Ged Kearney: </strong></p> <p>I agree. Supply chains are going to be a vital part of how we look at occupational health and safety because a worker is a worker is a person is a person, no matter what country you're in, no matter what part of the supply chain or whatever. And workers don't expect to die or be injured at work. So it's very important.</p> <p><strong>Barry Sherriff: </strong></p> <p>Christian?</p> <p><strong>Christian Frost: </strong></p> <p>I think when we talk about supply chain I think it's very important to again I highlight – focus on the relationship and the relationships in the chain and take every opportunity that you can to build trusting and collaborative relationships. And with that comes a whole range of benefits including a safer workplace but also innovation and those two things are very, very important. So I think there's a whole range of benefits from collaboration and relationships.</p> <p><strong>Barry Sherriff: </strong></p> <p>Good. Thank you. I'd like to thank the audience and the viewers for the time you've taken today to watch this presentation in a very, very important area. What we'd like to hope is that it has informed you but also challenged you and left you with questions that you would like to look further into and explore in your business so that you can make that difference and move forward. Hopefully and I'm fairly sure that's the case, this afternoon's discussion will certainly take you a long way towards that and assist you. And on that note I'd like to thank each of the panel members – Michael, Ged and Christian for their stunningly wonderful contributions this afternoon and I'd call on you to join with me in thanking them.</p> <p>(Audience Applause) </p> <p>§ (Music Playing) §</p> <p><strong>[End of Transcript]</strong></p> </div> <div class="field field--name-field-downloadable-transcripts field--type-entity-reference field--label-hidden field__items"> <div class="field__item"><article class="media media--type-file media--view-mode-default"> <div class="field field--name-field-media-file field--type-file field--label-hidden field__item"> <span class="file file--mime-application-pdf file--application-pdf"> <a href="" type="application/pdf">supply-chains-and-workers-health-and-safety-application.pdf</a></span> </div> </article> </div> <div class="field__item"><article class="media media--type-file media--view-mode-default"> <div class="field field--name-field-media-file field--type-file field--label-hidden field__item"> <span class="file file--mime-application-vnd-openxmlformats-officedocument-wordprocessingml-document file--x-office-document"> <a href="" type="application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document">supply-chains-and-workers-health-and-safety-application.docx</a></span> </div> </article> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> Thu, 19 Mar 2020 11:13:53 +0000 Broadcast in 2015 The right start: building safe work for young workers <div class="node node--type-media node--view-mode-rss layout layout--onecol"> <div class="layout__region layout__region--content"> <div class="field field--name-body field--type-text-with-summary field--label-above"> <div class="field__label">Body</div> <div class="field__item"><p><span style="line-height: 20.8px;">Watch this video to see two young workers going about their day’s work, and how their interactions with their supervisors can have such an effect on the outcome – for good or bad.</span></p> <h2>Who is this presentation for?</h2> <p>Supervisors and managers of young workers in the construction industry, young workers and their families, work health and safety professionals and practitioners, and those within the construction supply chain.</p> <h2>About the presenter</h2> <p>Elliot Parkinson is Principal Advisor, Workplace Health and Safety Queensland. Other presenters are construction industry leaders.</p> <h2>Useful resources</h2> <ul style="line-height: 20.8px;"> <li><a href="/node/1799">Making the voids safe in house construction</a></li> <li><a href="/node/1800">Construction: work design in complex supply chains</a></li> <li>Infographic: <a href="/node/18006">hotspots in the construction industry</a></li> <li>Infographic: <a href="/node/18001">Construction industry – fatalities, injuries and solutions</a></li> <li><a href="/node/1816">Good planning comes first</a></li> <li><a href="">Information on young workers from WorkCover Queensland</a></li> <li><a href="">Case study on a young worker injured at work</a></li> <li><a href="">Good work design for young workers webinar</a></li> <li>Safe Work Australia report <a href="/node/1192"><i>Work productivity loss in young workers</i></a></li> </ul> </div> </div> <div class="field transcript-group"> <div class="field__label">Transcript</div> <div class="clearfix text-formatted field field--name-field-html-transcript field--type-text-long field--label-hidden field__item"><p><strong>The right start: building safe work for young workers</strong></p> <p><strong>Elliot Parkinson (Principal Advisor, Workplace Health and Safety Queensland):</strong> Workplace Health and Safety Queensland is excited to share this short film about managing young workers - 'The right start'. Young workers, particularly those employed in the construction, manufacturing, transport and warehousing, agriculture and labour hire industries are a priority group that we target in order to achieve our goal of reducing the number of work-related injuries and fatalities in Queensland.</p> <p>This group is a priority because about one in every one hundred young workers suffers a serious injury at work in Queensland every year.</p> <p>Each one of those injuries happens to someone who is just starting out in their careers and it has a significant impact on them, their colleagues, families and friends.</p> <p>Over the last few years, we've done a lot of work to better understand what makes young people more prone to getting injured at work.</p> <p>What we have learnt is that relying on young workers to speak up when they feel unsafe is not effective.</p> <p>Young people are more likely to avoid asking questions and jump straight into work to try and impress their supervisors and co-workers. So it's these people that can have the biggest influence on a young person's safety at work.</p> <p>This film focuses on the important role that supervisors and managers play in designing work that keeps young workers safe.</p> <p>It follows two young workers throughout their day and highlights the different experiences they have based on the effectiveness of their supervisor. You will also hear insights provided by industry leaders on how they are actively engaging with their young workers to keep them safe today and develop them into future leaders in health and safety.</p> <p><strong>Onscreen text:</strong> The right start – building safe work for young workers</p> <p><strong>Narrator:</strong> Workers aged between 15 and 24 years make up about 18% of the Queensland workforce. 4,000 young workers suffer a serious injury at work each year.</p> <p>That's an injury that keeps them off work for at least five days and possibly one that will affect their ability to work for the rest of their life.</p> <p>A serious injury affects not just the worker but their colleagues and supervisor, their family and their friends.</p> <p>As a supervisor or manager of a young worker, you have the greatest influence on their attitude to work safety. This means ensuring an appropriate level of supervision relevant to the tasks that they are performing.</p> <p><strong>Damien Goodwin (Shamrock Civil Engineering):</strong> With a young worker, they normally just come out of school, so they wanna work, they wanna earn a bit of money, so they like to try and impress straightaway. And to impress, you normally think you need to get in there and do flat-out work and that sometimes could create a bit of drama.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Neil Ivison (Rail Systems Project Manager, Laing O’Rourke):</strong> You try and open up dialogue with them around what have they actually experienced, and if they've just been in school and then they've just joined us, well, we know we've got to look after them that little bit more.</p> <p><strong>Damien Goodwin (Shamrock Civil Engineering):</strong> We have a lot of dangers in our industry. They mightn't look dangerous until you start doing stuff like jumping down steps or whatnot. You just gotta be aware they'll come up to a hole - instead of just taking the way down, they think, "Ooh, jump down and get it done quick and easy", that's where they find themselves in strife.</p> <p><strong>Narrator:</strong> Young workers have a unique risk profile. They may not notice when a situation becomes dangerous or they may misjudge the level of risk. They may be less likely to ask questions or raise safety concerns. And they model their behaviour off others, whether that behaviour is right or wrong.</p> <p><strong>Onscreen text: Induction and training, Supervision and feedback, Support and mentoring </strong></p> <p>Effective induction, proper training, regular supervision and support and mentoring is vital for a young worker to adopt the right attitude to safety and develop safe work practices.</p> <p>Let's follow two young workers as they go about their work day to see how the interactions with their supervisors and their experiences can differ.</p> <p>This is Adam. He is 19 and lives with his mum and dad. He's been working as a civil construction trainee for the last three months. His boss, Ray, values young workers. Ray knows that his business's safety system needs to accommodate Adam's unique risk profile. To ensure he is safe at work and is productive for the business, Ray follows the "tell me, show me, watch me" approach. </p> <p>This is Ryan. He is 21 and he is a first-year apprentice tiler. He has just moved in with his girlfriend, Emily. Ryan hopes one day to be his own boss with his own business. Ryan's boss, Dan, thinks young workers are often a hassle, slow, and spend more time checking their phones than focusing on their work.</p> <p><strong>Onscreen text: Induction and training</strong></p> <p><strong>Ray:</strong> Hey, Adam. Could you come over here for a minute, please, mate? Um, I'm just going to get you to do a bit of work on the excavator today. OK, I know you've done your unit of competency, but, you know, using one on site's a different story.</p> <p><strong>Adam:</strong> Yeah.</p> <p><strong>Ray:</strong> So what I'm going to do is get you to move that pile of dirt on that flat over to here.</p> <p><strong>Adam:</strong> Alright, cool.</p> <p><strong>Ray:</strong> Do you feel comfortable with that?</p> <p><strong>Adam:</strong> Yeah.</p> <p><strong>Ray:</strong> Alright. Wonderful. We'll just start off with a pre-check. Then we'll just jump inside the cab and check all the controls, because they can vary from machine to machine, OK?</p> <p><strong>Adam:</strong> Yep.</p> <p><strong>Ray:</strong> OK? And then together we're just going to go through the safe work method statement, OK?</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Adam:</strong> Too easy.</p> <p><strong>Ray:</strong> So you've probably seen a SWMS before on other high-risk activities. So, but we'll still go through, just so that you understand the measures we have in place to ensure the safe operation of the excavator.</p> <p><strong>Adam:</strong> Yeah.</p> <p><strong>Ray:</strong> OK? So we'll be doing a few easy navigation tasks. I'll be in constant contact and watching you at all times.</p> <p><strong>Adam:</strong> Alright.</p> <p><strong>Ray:</strong> OK? Just remember, the exclusion zone is marked out. If anything or anyone comes inside that zone, you need to immediately stop.</p> <p><strong>Adam:</strong> Alright, cool.</p> <p><strong>Ray:</strong> OK? Any questions?</p> <p><strong>Adam:</strong> No, I'm ready to go.</p> <p><strong>Ray:</strong> Alright. Whoa! (LAUGHS) Nice enthusiasm. What do you need to do? Uh, just be moving the excavator around. I'll lift up the bucket. You'll be in eye contact just in case anything goes wrong. And if anyone enters the exclusion zone, I'll stop.</p> <p><strong>Ray:</strong> Excellent. Great stuff. OK, you reckon you can handle it?</p> <p><strong>Adam:</strong> Yeah, definitely.</p> <p><strong>Ray:</strong> Alright, onya go.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Dan:</strong> Ryan, awesome that you can grace us with your presence from college. Now, look, mate, we've got a lot on our plate today. Know how to use a tile cutter?</p> <p><strong>Ryan:</strong> Yeah.</p> <p><strong>Dan:</strong> Alright, good. What about a grinder?</p> <p><strong>Ryan:</strong> Uh... Yeah, yeah, we've done that.</p> <p><strong>Dan:</strong> Alright, good. I need you to head out to the ute and get the tile cutter and grinder, and change the blade on the grinder. Then I want you to make a dozen cuts with a 60-mil trim and then I want you to cut two with a 90-mil waste with a 4-inch grinder. You good to do that, mate?</p> <p><strong>Ryan:</strong> Yeah.</p> <p><strong>Dan:</strong> Alright, good. Let's get stuck in. And, Ryan, no mucking around today, mate. We've got a lot on our plate.</p> <p><strong>Ryan:</strong> Yep.</p> <p><strong>Onscreen text: Supervision and feedback</strong></p> <p><strong>Ray:</strong> Great job. Good stuff. Were you comfortable with that?</p> <p><strong>Adam:</strong> Yeah, I just stick to the plan and it's all sweet.</p> <p><strong>Ray:</strong> That's it. That's what they're there for. Yeah, just do everything according to the book, OK? That means following the work plan and SWMS, and that way we don't even have any near-miss incidents on this site. OK. Any questions?</p> <p><strong>Adam:</strong> Nah, I'm all good.</p> <p><strong>Ray:</strong> What I'm going to do now is get you to do something a little bit more interesting than that. I'll get you to move the materials from here over to the stockpile. Alright?</p> <p><strong>Adam:</strong> OK.</p> <p><strong>Ray:</strong> But first of all, I'll do a demo. I want you to watch that closely. I'll ask you to step outside the exclusion zone. And just watch me carefully, OK?</p> <p><strong>Adam:</strong> Alright.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Dan:</strong> Yeah, righto, mate. That sounds good. We've got a lot on the go at the moment. Hang on a sec, mate. Ryan! Ryan! (GRINDER WHIRRS, THEN STOPS)</p> <p>Mate, where's the guard for the grinder? What's going on with the glasses and the earplugs? I thought you knew what you were doing.</p> <p><strong>Ryan:</strong> Yeah, I do. It's the other guys. They didn't have it on, so I thought I didn't need it. I'm sorry, but...</p> <p><strong>Dan:</strong> Mate, head to the back of the trailer and get the guard for the grinder and don't worry about what these other guys are up to, OK? Just focus on what you have to do. I haven't got time to babysit today, mate. I really need you to get stuck in and get this job done, OK? And then come see me. Alright?</p> <p><strong>Ryan:</strong> Yeah.</p> <p><strong>Dan (on the phone):</strong> Alright. Sorry about that, mate. Yeah. Yeah, no, we've just got a few dramas with the apprentice. Yeah, no. We'll sort it out. All good.</p> <p><strong>Onscreen text:</strong> <strong>Support and mentoring</strong></p> <p><strong>Ray:</strong> Adam! How did your week at training college go this week?</p> <p><strong>Adam:</strong> Oh, yeah, it was OK. You know, the teacher's alright. But, actually, it's really good using the simulator first. But I'd rather be doing real stuff on site, you know?</p> <p><strong>Ray:</strong> Well, I'm really glad you're enjoying it. Obviously, you know, you're paying attention because you're picking things up really quickly.</p> <p><strong>Adam:</strong> Oh, thank you.</p> <p><strong>Ray:</strong> Speaking of college, I probably should take a look at your training records before you take off hey?</p> <p><strong>Adam:</strong> Oh, yeah, that would actually be pretty good.</p> <p><strong>Ray:</strong> Alright. Well, I'll come with you now.</p> <p><strong>Adam:</strong> Sweet.</p> <p><strong>Ray:</strong> No worries. So, I hear you play in a band.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Dan:</strong> Ryan, there you are, mate. Shipping off early today.</p> <p><strong>Ryan:</strong> Alright. Do you want me to just finish this up, then?</p> <p><strong>Dan:</strong> Mate a couple of guys will finish off the ensuite. They'll shut up shop, but I want you to finish those cuts, put them in the corner, ready for the morning.</p> <p>(PHONE RINGS)</p> <p><strong>Dan:</strong> Dan speaking.</p> <p><strong>Ryan:</strong> so just with this next placement, do you want me to put it, like...</p> <p><em>(Guitar music as Adam plays, Ryan sits in waiting room with a bandage on his hand)</em></p> <p><strong>Elliot:</strong> An effective form of inducting a young worker into a particular task can be using the "tell me, show me, watch me" approach. So that involves providing a verbal and written instruction into performing the task, demonstrating how to perform it safely, and then providing feedback while watching the young worker actually demonstrating the task.</p> <p><strong>Dr David Drummond (Head of Health, Safety and Environment, Laing O’Rourke Australia):</strong> With our young workers, in terms of how we manage inductions and characteristics of supervision, we think about how they learn, their learning styles. These days it's more around about visual rather than just general written communication.</p> <p><strong>Neil Ivison:</strong> We're trying to use more visual aids, which is always in your face rather than some guy reading from the piece of paper.</p> <p><strong>Elliot Parkinson:</strong> So an induction's really important into a particular task or using a particular piece of equipment, making sure that that worker's competent in performing that work. They understand the work that's going on around them but they're supervised.</p> <p><strong>David Drummond:</strong> In terms of supervision, we talk about supervisors being more understanding of how young workers learn, how important it is that they actually have more interactions with the supervisor on a day-to-day basis rather than being left alone.</p> <p><strong>Neil Ivison:</strong> We have to have good conversations with them. "We've told you not to use your phone. Are you sure you're alright? You seem a bit distracted". You know, it's just another level of engagement with our workforce.</p> <p><strong>Elliot Parkinson:</strong> We know that providing mentoring and social support is really important to allow young workers to engage with their work environment socially.</p> <p><strong>David Drummond:</strong> We have a mentoring program that we use on a regular basis which identifies a supervisor to take more action or someone who's been in the industry a long period of time and takes them under their wing and helps them through their new career probably for the first three to six months.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Neil Ivison:</strong> You can usually tell when you first meet someone, you know, perceptual, and you can usually judge how....whether someone's a strong character or, you know, a bit more reserved and you sit down and have your one-to-one with them and "What's your experience?" and then you start to look at, "Hold on, he'd probably be better going with that guy. He's a little bit withdrawn and we need to give him that little bit more support". Whereas you get some youngsters who are very brash, know-it-all, done it all before, and they need a bit of temper, so we put them with one of our stronger guys who's probably a little bit more outspoken.</p> <p><strong>David Drummond:</strong> Their values are different than older people. They've been in the industry a long period of time. So we try and leverage off those values and use them to guide them through their decision making throughout their career. We also try not to ostracise them and highlight them by wearing different-coloured hats. So they are part of the workforce. The supervisors really need to have a one-to-one relationship with them.</p> <p><strong>Elliot Parkinson:</strong>  Proactive initiatives around financial skills, mental health and wellbeing, physical health and wellbeing, even literacy, those kind of issues can impact on a young worker's health and safety. While it might not be directly a safety initiative, it has positive safety outcomes by engaging young workers within the work environment. Some of the examples that we've seen where industry is engaged with their young workers around safety has had really positive outcomes.</p> <p>So it's helped them to understand some of the documentation and systems that they've got in place and why they're important. It's helped them to understand why they do the role that they do that way and the dangers that might be associated with those roles.</p> <p><strong>Narrator: </strong>Through effective induction and training, appropriate supervision and good feedback and supportive mentoring, young workers will become more aware of how to do the job safely.</p> <p>Engaging with young workers through consultation will also enable them to share their ideas around work health and safety and help to improve the way that safety is managed in your workplace.</p> <p><strong>David Drummond:</strong> Unless we get in and support it as an industry the importance of the young workers and their interactions and the value they bring, recognising this, they are a little bit in that risk group of high incidents. However, we can actually manage risk no different than any other risk that we see in our sites.</p> <p><strong>Neil Ivison:</strong> The best advice I would give to anybody is keep open communication, keep talking and make them feel part of what we do. </p> <p><strong>David Drummond:</strong> There is a lot to be gained from young workers and the information and knowledge that they can impart to us to learn as an organisation and as an industry as a whole.</p> <p><strong>Onscreen text: </strong></p> <p>Work safe. Home safe. Visit <a href=""></a></p> <p>Workplace Health and Safety Queensland thanks the following organisations and people for their participation in this film.</p> <p>Ausbuild</p> <p>Laing O’Rourke Australia</p> <p>Roadtek, Transport and Main Roads</p> <p>Shamrock Civil Engineering</p> <p>Turnbull Carpentry Service</p> <p>Watpac Construction Pty Ltd</p> <p>Damien Goodwin</p> <p>David Drummond</p> <p>Elliot Parkinson</p> <p>Neil Ivison</p> <p><strong>Elliot Parkinson:</strong> We would like this film to be used at workplaces to start a conversation with supervisors and managers that encourages them to reflect on how they engage with their young workers about health and safety. </p> <p>Show the film at meetings and use it in presentations.</p> <p>Lead a discussion about improving the way your leaders provide inductions, training, supervision, feedback, support and mentoring.</p> <p><strong>Onscreen text: </strong>Copyright: The State of Queensland 2015. Copyright protects this film. The State of Queensland has no objection to this material being reproduced, but asserts its right to be recognised as author of the original material and the right to have the material unaltered. The material presented in this film is distributed by the Queensland Government as an information source only. The State of Queensland makes no statements, representations, or warranties about the accuracy or completeness of the information contained in this film, and the viewer should not rely on it. The Queensland Government disclaims all responsibility and all liability (including, without limitation, liability in negligence) for all expenses, losses, damages and costs you might incur as a result of the information being inaccurate or incomplete in any way, for any reason. </p> </div> <div class="field field--name-field-downloadable-transcripts field--type-entity-reference field--label-hidden field__items"> <div class="field__item"><article class="media media--type-file media--view-mode-default"> <div class="field field--name-field-media-file field--type-file field--label-hidden field__item"> <span class="file file--mime-application-pdf file--application-pdf"> <a href="" type="application/pdf">the-right-start-building-safe-work-for-young-workers-application.pdf</a></span> </div> </article> </div> <div class="field__item"><article class="media media--type-file media--view-mode-default"> <div class="field field--name-field-media-file field--type-file field--label-hidden field__item"> <span class="file file--mime-application-vnd-openxmlformats-officedocument-wordprocessingml-document file--x-office-document"> <a href="" type="application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document">the-right-start-building-safe-work-for-young-workers-application.docx</a></span> </div> </article> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> Thu, 19 Mar 2020 11:13:53 +0000 Broadcast in 2015 Minimising musculoskeletal disorders <div class="node node--type-media node--view-mode-rss layout layout--onecol"> <div class="layout__region layout__region--content"> <div class="field field--name-body field--type-text-with-summary field--label-above"> <div class="field__label">Body</div> <div class="field__item"><p><span style="line-height: 20.8px;">Featuring a hospital, a fine art restoration service, and an artisan bakery, this video shows how risk management and the hierarchy of controls can be used to protect workers’ health and safety.</span></p> <h2>Who is this presentation for?</h2> <p>The video is for general audience viewing, and is particularly relevant to business and government leaders, workers, health and safety representatives, and work health and safety and human resource professionals.</p> <h2>About the presenter</h2> <p>The video is hosted by SafeWork SA. Speakers are Heather Brown (Assistant Director, Artlab Australia), Cos Lamberto (WHS Manager) and Annie Filsell (Pre-Admission Clinic Coordinator) from St Andrew’s Hospital, Jo Bills (Occupational Health Physiotherapist Director, Physiolink) and Adrian Fahey (CEO, SAGE Automation).</p> <h2>Useful resources</h2> <ul style="line-height: 20.8px;"> <li><a href="/sites/swa/about/publications/pages/hazardous-manual-tasks-cop">Model Code of Practice – hazardous manual tasks</a></li> <li><a href="">Hazardous manual tasks – code of practice fact sheet</a></li> <li><a href="/sites/SWA/about/Publications/Documents/512/Research_Prevention_Workrelated_Musculoskeletal_Disorders_Stage_1_Literature_review.pdf">Research on the prevention of work-related musculoskeletal disorders<b>. S</b>tage 1<b>:</b> literature review</a></li> <li><a href="/sites/SWA/about/Publications/Documents/232/priority-mechanism.pdf">National OHS Strategy 2002–2012 – priority mechanism progress</a></li> </ul> </div> </div> <div class="field transcript-group"> <div class="field__label">Transcript</div> <div class="clearfix text-formatted field field--name-field-html-transcript field--type-text-long field--label-hidden field__item"><p><strong>Minimising Musculoskeletal Disorders</strong></p> <p> </p> <p>§ (Music Playing) §</p> <p><strong>Host: </strong></p> <p>Hello and welcome. I'd like your full attention while I briefly go through some safety concerns in this short workplace safety presentation. There are three key steps towards safety in the workplace – identifying the risk, assessing the risk, controlling the risk and reviewing its effectiveness. Put simply the best way to prevent injuries or illness is to find potential hazards and fix them.</p> <p>Please take the next few moments to consider the following key procedures. Wherever possible eliminate the risk. Simply remove the hazard. Substitute the hazard. Substitute the hazard with a new piece of equipment or work practice. Isolate. Isolate the hazard or hazardous work practice. Engineering controls. Adapt tools or equipment to minimise risk. Administrative controls. Change work practices or implement more training and of course make sure personal protective equipment is worn when required. </p> <p>§ (Music Playing) §</p> <p>Remember safety is an ongoing practice. Just because it's safe today doesn't mean it's safe tomorrow.</p> <p>§ (Music Playing) §</p> <p>Hazardous manual tasks like lifting, pushing, pulling or carrying are common in every workplace. The most frequently injured parts of the body from these kinds of tasks are the back, shoulders and wrists. These injuries are known as musculoskeletal disorders or MSDs. Most arrive from repetitive sustained or awkward movements as well as high or sudden force.</p> <p>By managing these hazards through consideration of posture, movement and the environment we can create a safer workplace. To do this the simplest approach is: step back and be aware of every aspect of the task at hand every time. If injuries continue to occur more rigorous actions may need to be taken.</p> <p>§ (Music Playing) §</p> <p>(Spray can) </p> <p>(Jack) </p> <p><strong>Annie Filsell:</strong></p> <p>At St Andrews Hospital bariatric management of patients is an important factor to help prevent injuries to nursing staff. The patient throughout their stay will move from a variety of settings from admission to the ward, to theatre, to recovery and then back to the ward. This patient is moved several times within a short period of time and may cause injury to nursing staff to their shoulder or to their back.</p> <p><strong>Host: </strong></p> <p>Sometimes a hazard can be removed by simply performing the manual task differently - perhaps by pushing not pulling, sliding rather than lifting.</p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Cos Lamberto:</strong></p> <p>At St Andrews we believe by conducting job safety assessments on our high risk tasks we are able to reduce the number of workplace injuries. Some of the safety equipment that we have implemented to reduce manual handling injuries have been the hover mat, bariatric wheelchairs and also slippery Sams which has reduced the amount of manual handling injury significantly across the hospital.</p> <p><strong>Jo Bills:</strong></p> <p>Equipment is now available and widely used to enable the safe manual handling of people in all environments and should be used throughout all these facilities.</p> <p>§ (Music Playing) §</p> <p>(Neck cracking) </p> <p>(Squeaky trolley wheels) </p> <p><strong>Heather Brown:</strong></p> <p>Artlab is a pretty amazing place. It's responsible for caring for the state's collections. That means restoring or looking after the artefacts and artworks that are held in the Art Gallery of South Australia, the South Australian museum. So the conservators are highly skilled professionals. They're a bit like brain surgeons only they work on cultural objects rather than human beings. The major health issue is that these conservators often work for a long time in static poses and they're often quite awkward poses. So the conservators were at a high risk of developing musculoskeletal disorders.</p> <p>Because of our experiences and learnings from working with Eureka Flag and reducing the risks Artlab went out to seek advice from a local manufacturer who worked with Ergonomist Jo Bills and with Artlab staff to custom design and to build motorised equipment that would enable the conservators to have height adjustable tables and sloped surfaces to work on. So the results have been fantastic for Artlab staff. So in fact we've conserved the conservators.</p> <p><strong>Jo Bills: </strong></p> <p>This is an excellent example of an organisation utilising participatory ergonomics and thinking outside the square. When safety of workers is involved external expertise can assist an organisation to come up with their own unique solutions to problems that have been traditionally difficult to solve.</p> <p><strong>Host: </strong></p> <p>Almost 50 percent of workplace injuries occur because of hazardous manual tasks. Soft tissue injuries like sprains and strains along with nerve compression, muscular and vascular disorders are common. Some workplaces will require specialised actions or movements to achieve the particular job task. Sometimes to get the best outcome for awkward or sustained posture is to innovate the solution.</p> <p>§ (Music Playing) §</p> <p><strong>Adrien Fahey: </strong></p> <p>SAGE Automation is an industrial automation and controls company who specialises in advanced manufacturing. It's this capability that enabled us to assist one of South Australia's famous artisan bakeries Perryman's Bakery.</p> <p>Neil Perryman came to SAGE with an exciting challenge in that what they were looking to do was expand their production - produce more of their gingerbread babies to sell all over Australia. This created a new challenge for him in that the gingerbread babies were individually iced by his employees. Now this task was very labour intensive and quite fatiguing. </p> <p>The solution that we landed upon was a combination of a robot and a vision system. Now one of Neil's specific requirements was to make sure that he continued to employ the same number of people in his operation but deliver a much faster and more efficient outcome. But it's also created a new and exciting opportunity for the employees to up-skill and really focus on the part that Neil really wanted them to focus on which was the artisan – the creation of artisan bakery goods.</p> <p><strong>Jo Bills: </strong></p> <p>If a task is highly repetitious then a robot is a very good solution to this task and leave the people to do what their best at.</p> <p><strong>Host: </strong></p> <p>A fact sheet and checklist has been developed to reduce risks in all workplace environments. So please take the time to read them. This will ensure you're aware of any potential hazards in your work area. Be aware and be safe.</p> <p>§ (Music Playing) § </p> <p><strong>[End of Transcript]</strong></p> </div> <div class="field field--name-field-downloadable-transcripts field--type-entity-reference field--label-hidden field__items"> <div class="field__item"><article class="media media--type-file media--view-mode-default"> <div class="field field--name-field-media-file field--type-file field--label-hidden field__item"> <span class="file file--mime-application-pdf file--application-pdf"> <a href="" type="application/pdf">2015-vss-minimising-musculoskeletal-disorders-be-aware-be-safe-application.pdf</a></span> </div> </article> </div> <div class="field__item"><article class="media media--type-file media--view-mode-default"> <div class="field field--name-field-media-file field--type-file field--label-hidden field__item"> <span class="file file--mime-application-vnd-openxmlformats-officedocument-wordprocessingml-document file--x-office-document"> <a href="" type="application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document">2015-vss-minimising-musculoskeletal-disorders-be-aware-be-safe-application.docx</a></span> </div> </article> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> Thu, 19 Mar 2020 11:13:53 +0000 Broadcast in 2015