Transcript Health & Safety Stakeholder Reference Group Meeting

Health & Safety
Stakeholder Reference Group
30 August 2012
2 - 4pm
Level 7, 222 Exhibition Street
Agenda
Time
Agenda item
2.00
Welcome, Minutes, Action items
2.10
Enforcement Group Update
2.40
Social Research Unit: Flagship Survey Overview
3.10
Prevention Strategy Update
3.30
Legislation Policy & Information Services Update
3.50
4.00
Other Business
Close
Apologies, Minutes, Actions
Apologies
Previous Minutes - SRG dated 26 July 2012
Action items from previous meeting
26th July SRG meeting action item 3: WSV to
clarify the status of reach stackers in the plant
registration and LHRW systems
• Revised or new competency units and assessment instruments are
currently under development by relevant industry skills councils for
the remaining four HRW classes.
• As of August 2012, it is estimated that competency unit publication
will occur as follows:
> Standard boiler operation (revised) – September 2012
> Advanced boiler operation (revised) – September 2012
> Reach stacker (new) – late 2012, and
> Concrete placing boom (revised) – late 2012
• Further information can be found on the Safe Work Australia website:
http://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/sites/SWA/SafetyInYourWorkplace
/TrainingSkillsAndLicensing/Licensingandcertification/Pages/Licensi
ng.aspx
Enforcement Group Update
Marlo Baragwanath
Creation of the Enforcement Group in February
2010 to ensure consistency in investigations and
prosecutions
Director
Kate Despot
Enforcement Group
Investigations
Review, Audit &
Advice
Manager
A/Principal Lawyer
Compliance
and
Peter Anderson
Enforcement Division
(previously within IS&S)
Compensation
Investigations
RTW & Project Team
Worker Employer Team
Prosecutions
Principal Lawyer
Legal Services
and
Vacant
Investigations Division
(previously within HSBU)
Dermot Moody
Health & Safety
Investigations
Investigations
East Team
West Team
AuditNorth Team
Audit & Analysis
Fatalities
VCAT
Comp, Industrial &
Mandatory
Investigations
Advice & Subpoenas
Strategy
State Support Team
Legal
Metro Team
Emergency Response
Legal
Serious Risks & Injuries
Information Officer
(Family Support)
Compensation enforcement program results for
2011/12
Annual
Target
Result
2009/10
Result
2010/11
Result
2011/12
No. of Health Practitioner Reviews
1001
1003
1039
1000
No. of completed investigations
221
199
164
150
% of investigations completed in 6
months of an investigation commencing
90%
93%
84%
90%
% of investigations completed in 12
months of an investigation commencing
98%
99.5%
99%
100%
21
31
19
-
91%
87%
100%
95%
No. of completed prosecutions
% of successful prosecutions
09/10-11/12
H&S enforcement program – issues and challenges
Legal team operating model was not sustainable
Timeliness of investigations and prosecutions
Insufficient prosecutions commenced to sustain targets
Long standing cultural resistance to challenge and accountability
First step was legal team reform
Multi-skilled operating model implemented in early 2011
Personnel changes to ensure requisite skill sets and experience
to turn around performance
Consistency in decisions about prosecutions
Encouraging progress in 2011/12
Page 9
Enforcement Group legal team reforms are gaining
traction in health and safety KPIs
Target
2011/12
Result
2011/12
Result
2010/11
Target
2010/11
No. of completed investigations
300
340
291
300
% of investigations completed within
9 months
95%
82%
74%
85%
Investigation conversion rate (% of
investigations that are recommended for
prosecution/enforcement)
80%
53%
77%
80%
% of charges laid within 12 months of an
investigation commencing
75%
40%
29%
75%
No. of commenced prosecutions
130
102
75
N/A
No. of completed prosecutions
150
116
103
150
% of successful prosecutions
90%
86%
74%
90%
H&S Enforcement – Perceptions of Enforcement –
Results over time
94%
93%
92%
92%
92%
91%
91%
91%
90%
88%
r
Ap
un
-J
12
11
12
ar
ec
-D
M
nJa
t
Oc
11
11
un
-J
ep
l-S
Ju
r
Ap
10
10
10
11
ar
ec
-D
M
nJa
t
Oc
un
-J
10
ar
ep
l-S
Ju
r
Ap
M
nJa
Quarter
Percentage of respondents who regard Worksafe as being effective in
catching and prosecuting employers who break OHS laws
H&S Enforcement – Perceptions of Enforcement
2011/12 – WorkSafe employer representative
survey
92% of employers agree Worksafe is effective in catching and
prosecuting employers who break OHS laws
52% heard or read about an employer being prosecuted for
violations of the OH&S Act or Regulations
Of which, 55% considered making changes to the health and
safety of their workplace as a result of hearing about prosecutions
H&S Enforcement – Average fines under the OHS
Act
$60,000
$40,000
$30,000
$20,000
$37,577
$51,505
$51,255
11
20
10
20
09
20
08
20
07
20
06
20
05
20
04
20
03
20
02
20
01
20
00
20
/12
/11
/10
/09
/08
/07
/06
/05
/04
/03
/02
/01
Financial Year
$57,111
$26,114
$15,893
$25,970
$17,431
$20,189
$20,654
$0
$13,249
$10,000
$15,000
Average Penalty
$50,000
Significant convictions and enforceable
undertakings in 2011/12
Fonterra Australia Pty Ltd – fined $300,000 for a fatality at
Stanhope
Three companies (Asian Pacific Building Corporation, SMS
Scaffolding, EGI Bricklaying) – fined $410,000 for a scaffolding
collapse
Coates Hire Operations Pty Ltd – fined $500,000 on appeal for a
fatality
Manumatic Industries and its director – fined $124,000 for two
separate guarding incidents in Epping
John Holland and Thiess entered into an Enforceable Undertaking
to undertake research into the H&S aspects of managing
contractors – valued at $225,000
Where we’re not successful – VCAT matters
Has a decision changed WorkSafe’s understanding and
application of the law?
Impact of the decision on WorkSafe’s operations
Whether there are grounds for appeal
Prospects of success in an appeal – impact on WorkSafe
operations if we lose an appeal.
Where we’re not successful – OHS prosecutions
• DPP appeal against sentence:
• Is it in the public interest?
• Manifest inadequacy – inconsistency in sentencing standards or
setting new standards
• This is the DPP’s decision (although WorkSafe is usually
consulted)
• DPP appeal due to an error of law:
• Has a decision changed the understanding and application of the
law?
• Impact of the decision on WorkSafe’s operations
• Grounds for appeal?
• Prospects of success of appeal – impact on WorkSafe’s
operations if we lose an appeal
• This is the DPP’s decision (although WorkSafe is usually
consulted)
Recent reforms in the investigations team will
assist to improve overall H&S enforcement
program outcomes in 2012/13 and beyond
Introduction of 5th Investigation Team
Consistent decision-making for strategic investigations
New method for case assessment and selection (ARP)
Selection of matters for investigation:
When a matter is referred to the Enforcement Group, in deciding whether to
comprehensively investigate, we consider:
whether employees are exposed to a risk of serious injury or death; and
the risk has arisen in a workplace or from the conduct of an undertaking.
(A)
WorkSafe’s
Core
Jurisdiction
OR
whether members of the public are exposed to a risk of serious injury or
death; and
the risk has arisen in connection with a workplace or the conduct of an
employer or self-employed person; and
(B)
WorkSafe’s
Extended
Jurisdiction
the matter falls within a prevention strategy target area.
OR
any matter which involves such a high degree of culpability or risk that it
should be investigated (even if it does not fall within (A) or (B).
(C)
WorkSafe’s
Residual
Jurisdiction
The focus into 2012/13 and beyond is on improving
operations in the investigation team to improve
overall H&S enforcement program outcomes
Improved case selection
Stronger case management
Improve quality of briefs
Improve actual conversion rate
Investigation focus areas for 2012/13 include:
Work-related fatalities
Other ‘notifiable incidents’ where there is a high degree of
culpability
Focus areas for prevention
Non-compliance with a notice or direction
Offence against a WorkSafe inspector/HSRs
Incident notification and site preservation
Social Research Update
Rachael Minton
Social Research update
Today
Summary of the research program
Refining the research to understand more of the how and why
History and latest views from Hazard Exposure monitoring
After today
Look into specific areas in more detail
Regular updates with the SRG
Social Research
WorkSafe has a long history of listening to the community and
collecting feedback to monitor change over time
We have an ongoing program of monitoring and evaluating
services that WorkSafe and its Agents provide, including:
> H&S and RTW inspectorates
> Other client contacts (eg Advisory, Premium)
> RTW support and claims management (Agents, ORs, IMEs)
Findings also help us to better understand the community’s
attitudes towards OHS, RTW, compensation, and perceptions of
workplace hazards to add to other data sources
Social Research at a glance
Four flagship surveys
• Injured Worker Survey
• Employer Rep Survey
• Worker Rep Survey
• Community Perceptions Survey
Data collection
- Telephone interviewing
Audiences
- Employers and workers (direct contact with
WorkSafe & general community), and
injured workers (with agents and self insurers)
Transparency
- Surveying undertaken by independent specialists
Strategic priority projects
As required, driven by H&S and IS&S’s top priorities
Strategy 2012
Client Service Index
Client Service Index
Employer satisfaction with OHS inspectorate (20%)
Employer satisfaction with advice and guidance (10%)
Employer satisfaction with Agents (20%)
Worker representative satisfaction with OHS inspectorate (20%)
Injured worker satisfaction with Agents (30%)
• CSI served us well to monitor
client satisfaction over time
• Limited interpretation with
general satisfaction
• Narrow focus - missing critical
service delivery points
WorkSafe 2017
Community Service Monitor
Worker
service
Employer
service
Community
service
A measure of WorkSafe’s service to workers consisting of:
• injured worker service from Agents (50%)
• level of service from advisory to workers (15%)
• effectiveness of inspector interactions with workers at the workplace (20%)
• quality and helpfulness of written guidance and verbal advice (15%)
A measure of WorkSafe’s service to employers consisting of:
• employer service from Agents (50%)
• level of service from advisory to employers (15%)
• effectiveness of inspector interactions with employers at the workplace (20%)
• quality and helpfulness of written guidance and verbal advice (15%)
• employer service with premiums from Agents (to come in 12/13)
• More detail on how we are
performing
A measure of our service to the community consisting of: • Includes more of the important
• enforcement effectiveness (40%)
service delivery areas (Advisory,
• employer expectations of an inspector visit (40%)
Premium)
• prosecution effectiveness (20%)
• Stronger connection to service
initiatives for employees
• Reflects views of more employers
and workers across the State, not
just those that an inspector
visited
Worker perceptions of hazards and their controls
Today
A recap of the views we gather on exposure & controls
The long term trends
Industries with highest reported exposure
After today
Provide the Hazards report
Regular updates
Reported daily exposure
Manual Handling
100%
Stress
90%
UV Rad
80%
Bullying
70%
Plant
60%
Airborne Subs
50%
Chem Subs
40%
Hazardous Subs
30%
Violence
20%
Noise
Heights
10%
Asbestos
0%
May.05 Nov.05 May.06 Nov.06 May.07 Nov.07 May.08 Nov.08 May.09 Dec.09 Jun.10 Dec.10 Jun.11 Dec.11 Jun.12
< Omnibus | CPS >
Effectiveness rating of workplace
controls
Plant
100%
Hazardous Subs
90%
Heights
80%
Chem Subs
70%
Violence
60%
Manual Handling
50%
Asbestos
40%
UV Rad
30%
Airborne Subs
20%
Noise
10%
Stress
Bullying
0%
May.05 Nov.05 May.06 Nov.06 May.07 Nov.07 May.08 Nov.08 May.09 Dec.09 Jun.10 Dec.10 Jun.11 Dec.11 Jun.12
< Omnibus | CPS >
Manual handling and heights
100%
90%
80%
70%
Manual Handling: Exposure
60%
Heights: Exposure
50%
Heights: Control
40%
Manual Handling: Control
30%
20%
10%
Ju
n.
12
Ju
n.
11
De
c.
11
De
c.
10
Ju
n.
10
De
c.
09
No
v.
08
M
ay
.0
9
No
v.
07
M
ay
.0
8
No
v.
06
M
ay
.0
7
No
v.
05
M
ay
.0
6
M
ay
.0
5
0%
High powered machines and
asbestos
100%
90%
80%
70%
Plant: Exposure
60%
Asbestos: Exposure
50%
Plant: Control
Asbestos: Control
40%
30%
20%
10%
Ju
n.
12
De
c.
11
Ju
n.
11
De
c.
10
Ju
n.
10
De
c.
09
ay
.0
9
M
No
v.
08
ay
.0
8
M
No
v.
07
ay
.0
7
M
No
v.
06
ay
.0
6
M
No
v.
05
M
ay
.0
5
0%
Industries with highest reported
exposure 2011/12
Daily exposure 11/12
All industries
Industry with highest reported
exposure 11/12
Daily exposure 11/12
Highest industry
Man. handling
67%
5
Construction
79%
3
Stress
47%
2
Professional, scientific and technical
services
63%
11
UV rad
24%
1
Agriculture
65%
13
Bullying
24%
1
Health care and social assistance
33%
1
Plant
20%
Manufacturing and construction
51%
3
Airborne subs
20%
4
Transport
43%
6
Chem subs
18%
1
Health care and social assistance
30%
5
Haz subs
15%
1
Transport and manufacturing
27%
2
Violence
9%
1
Health care and social assistance
18%
Noise
9%
1
Manufacturing
24%
14
Heights
4%#
1
Construction
16%
13
Asbestos
2%#
Transport
7%
1
Movement from 10/11 to 11/12
No significant changes
Gathering more detailed info
We’re adding additional questions on
the priority areas to better understand:
• how people are exposed
• what types of controls are in place
• are controls always available
Page 33
Next steps
• Provide the Hazard Exposure Report – produced
twice a year, next release in 2 – 3 weeks
• Continue our ongoing monitoring and analysis
• Visit the SRG regularly with latest info
• Regular revision of the questions to ensure we
gather useful info on the types of hazards and
range of controls
Prevention Update
Bernie Dean
SRG Prevention update- Aug 2012
Updates on:
•
Dangerous Machines
•
Aged Care
•
WorkSafe Awards
Main focus today
36
36
Dangerous machines update
37
38
Dangerous machines
Campaign material published and available
Email to stakeholders on 27 August
‘Who can register, and what‘
"An organisation profile needs to be established within the system via a unique
ABN in order to permit an Item of Plant to be registered. While the location of this
organisation is not restricted to Victoria;
• Only Fixed Items of Plant located in Victoria will be accepted; and
• Mobile Items of Plant can be registered by an Interstate organisation
provided the plant is predominately operated in Victoria."
Communications to build awareness
•September- Free media and Safe Towns coverage
•October- Direct mail and free media driving people to WorkSafe Week
•November- Paid media and public relations
39
Aged Care
First meeting Monday 13 August
Great attendance- approx 20 reps across large, medium, small employers, union,
govt bodies
Consensus on scope and key area of focus- hazardous manual handling
Ideas and areas of work:
Systems of work - Availability and suitability of equipment; design issues; home
environment
Training - A standardised competency based training package?
Culture - High client focus- OHS expense- What motivates it and how can this be
managed?
Ageing workforce - Risk controls are needed to accommodate ageing workforce
Return to Work – What lies behind failures in RTW?
Best practice- What does it look like. Peer and other comparisons
40
WorkSafe Awards 2012 program
Final results
2012
2011
20
13
Best solution to a workplace health and safety issue
114
98
Best health and safety initiative in a small business
23
4
Health and safety representative of the year
12
6
8
6
177
127
49
17
Treating health practitioner achievement
9
3
Return to Work Coordinator excellence
13
13
Worker return to work achievement
15
5
Employer excellence
11
1
Occupational rehabilitation consultant achievement
10
10
58
32
OHS Management system of the year
Health and safety committee of the year
Commitment to workplace health and wellbeing
OVERALL TOTALS
284
176
Page 41
Re-shaping of Awards event
• Review of 2011 event – Surveyed and spoke to Awards
community, finalists, stakeholders, WorkSafe staff, previous
Awards dinner attendees
• Consulted VTHC and VCEA
• Overall positive, but a few opportunities for improvement were
identified:
increase the exposure of finalist's and their practical
solutions, and
scope to improve networking opportunities on the night.
Page 42
Re-shaping of Awards event
The formal sit down gala dinner will be replaced by a program of
events on the same day:
• A sit-down, VIP lunch specifically to recognise finalists
from 12.30pm to 2.30pm.
• A 2 hour Awards presentation from 3.00pm to 5.00pm in
the plenary theatre at the MCEC (Work Safe Week venue).
• A 1.5 hour networking event (with refreshments) from
5.00pm to 6.30pm
In total the event would run from 12.30pm until 6.30pm,
commensurate with previous 5-6 hour evening Award dinner. The
event will be held on Thursday 1 November 2012.
Page 43
Legislation, Policy and
Information Services
Angela Jolic and Cath Duane
Remake of Dangerous Goods
(Storage and Handling) Regulations
• Still on track to remake the regulations by 1 December
• Meetings with peak body / key stakeholders were held on 5
July and 6 August
• Expect public comment in September / October
Email address for any comments:
• [email protected]
Page 45
Codes Review Project
• Currently mapping Victoria’s guidance materials against the
existing 23 Model Codes
• Interim Project Update – refer to handout
• Next steps
> Preliminary recommendations due in October
Page 46
Report on national OHS forums
National model Mines Regulations
> Out of session SWA members approval 24 August
Strategic Issues Group - OHS meeting – 26/27 July
> Draft Code of Practice on Workplace Bullying
> Revised post-public comment Codes:
> Draft guidance material
> Updating Workplace Exposure Standards
> 2014 Review of the WHS Act
Page 47
Regulators Harmonisation Project
Heads of Workplace Safety Authorities (HWSA) met 14
August 2012
• Noted overall status for RHP work
• Model guide on EPH/right of entry – although endorsed by majority,
now to be withdrawn in favour of pending SWA Interpretive Guideline
• Noted Points of Proof guides for WHS Act offences for use in
inspector training
• Endorsed Operational procedure on regulator’s remedial action (to
make workplace safe in certain circumstances) and cost recovery
• Endorsed model guidance for PCBUs to select “competent person” to
inspect, maintain and test plant
• Noted stocktake of extent of adoption by all WHS regulators of
endorsed RHP deliverables (will be referred to SWA for OHS reform
evaluation/reporting to COAG); updates on stocktake to occur
annually
• Noted evaluation report of inspector training on WHS legislation
Page 48
Heads of Workplace Safety
Authorities
Heads of Workplace Safety Authorities (HWSA) met 14
August 2012
• Remaining work on some sub-projects now not to progress
(EUs and cost recovery formula; template letters for MHF’s
administration; points of proof guides on WHS Regulations
offences)
• Discussed extent of incident notification requirements in
relation to schoolyard incidents (also discussed at SWA
Implementation TAG and to be subject of new guidance)
• Discussed issues relating to WHS Regulations requirements
for:
• registration and annual inspection of inflatable amusement
devices (also discussed at SWA Implementation TAG –
work progressing); and
• ROPS and FOPs for earthmoving machinery (exemptions
proposed to limit application of regulations).
Page 49
Other HWSA agenda items
• Common approach to be agreed to exemptions from WHS
Regulations requirement for independent clearance certificate in
asbestos removals
• A new issue arising from WHS laws implementation flagged for
out-of-session comment - power of regulators to cancel plant
design registrations
• Agreed to asbestos alert (for publishing), and to working group for
dealing with imported products containing asbestos
Next HWSA meeting:
- 20 September 2012 (includes consideration of RHP audit
tool for regulators’ monitoring of approved HSR training)
- Focus on topics for future national projects/campaigns
- Leaders Forum to also discuss topics including future
collaboration on improved regulatory practice
Page 50
SWA Implementation TAG
Last met 16 August 2012
> Various “workability” and “technical” amendments to
model WHS Regulations discussed (some to go to SIGWHS or for further work)
> Guidance to be developed by SWA - Incident
Notification and schoolyard incidents; meaning of “minor
contamination” (asbestos); competency of load-shifting
equipment operators
> SWA communications strategy being developed –
comments to be submitted (this is really only about
written information products produced by SWA)
> Noted significant jurisdictional differences in some
licensing fees, but no further action intended
Page 51
Compliance and Enforcement Policy
• National Compliance and Enforcement Policy endorsed by
Workplace Relations Ministers’ Council in August 2011
• WorkSafe Victoria to update 2005 C&E Policy to
incorporate as much as possible of the NCEP (and retain
other Victorian content that is not included in NCEP)
• Stakeholder consultation to occur (September) after initial
internal consideration
Page 52
Any questions?
Page 53
Other Business
Close
Next SRG meeting
27 September 2012
2 - 4pm