Industrial Safety News September-October 2015 by Media Solutions

INDUSTRIAL

SafetyNews

PPE • ACCESS • CHEMICALS • HEALTH • INJURY • MANAGEMENT • ENVIRONMENT • FOCUS

sue Free in this isat & online .co.nz

turenews infrastrucn is .co.nz

September-October 2015 VOL 10 NO. 4 Price $9

Full coverage inside Free H&S Handbook

Know Your Chemical Labels SIMPLE STEPS TO MANAGING YOUR WORKPL CHEMICAALCE S

Health Hazards

Acute Toxicity (fatal or toxic)

Explosives 1

2.1 including Flammable Gas 2.1.1A & B ol 2.1 including Flammable Aeros 2.1.2A

Non-Flammable2.2 Non-Toxic gas Toxic gas 2.3

d 3.1 including Flammable Liqui D 3.1A, B, C & 3 including ed Explosive Liquid Desensitis 3.2A, B & C ustible) 4.1 (readily comb Flammable Solid 4.1.1 A & B reactive) (self 4.1 Flammable SolidE, F & G D, C, B, A, 4.1.2 ed explosive) 4.1 (desensitis Flammable Solid 4.1.3 A, B & C 4.2 including Combustible Spontaneously 4.2 A, B & C including 4.3 Wet Dangerous When 4.3 A, B & C including Oxidiser 5.1 - 5.1.2 A 5.1.1 A, B & C ing ide 5.2 includ Organic Perox E & F 5.2 A, B, C, D, ing s see 2.3) Toxic 6.1 includ ds & Solids only - Gase (Liqui C & B A, 6.1 6.1 including Toxic Cyanides 6.1 A, B & C tances 6.2

Infectious Subs Radioactive

Materials 7

ing 8 PG I & II includ Corrosive Acid 8.2 A & B ing i 8 PG I & II includ Corrosive Alkal 8.2 A & B including III PG 8 Corrosive Acid 8.2 C ing i 8 PG III includ Corrosive Alkal 8.2 C Ecotoxic 9.1

A&B OTES]

OF HA

4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 ✔ ✘ 1 4 ✔ ✘ ✔ 1 ✔ ✘ 1 4 ✘ ✔ ✔

HSNO COP

• Irritant (skin and eye) • Skin Sensitizer • Acute Toxicity • Narcotic Effects • Respiratory Tract Irritant • Hazardous to Ozone Layer

16 version

• Skin Corrosion/Burns • Eye Damage • Corrosive to Metals

2.0 June 201

storing and everyone 76, 78, 87, ved Handlers s 21, Charge, Appro rements of regulation 2001, Industry s e Persons in gation requi ols] Regulation intended to enabl ly with the segre This code is ses 1 to 5 Contr tances to comp tances [Clas Hazardous Subsof the Hazardous Subs 117 95, 105 and and the NOTES Best Practice her be stored toget ances that can ate so that Compatible subst Must be separ gate by a stored together. segre must NOT be separate compounds or in substances that Incompatible not come in contact. Keep substances doleast 3 metres ated by three separ 0 minutes,or distance of at rated 120/120/12 resistant wall rement: Fire Separation requi 20/120 metres wall rated 120/1 ses 1 ant resist Fire HS [Clas rements for 5.1: ce required in Separation requi ate by the correct distan 87 and 95 minutes, or separ or separated Regulations appropriate use, to 5 Controls] wall rating for Regulation 105 and 117 ols] Fire resistant rements for 5.2: in HS [Classes 1 to 5 Contr red Separation requi requi ce lations 2001 distan by the correct 5 Controls] Regu [Classes 1 to HS Refer ge. re special stora Explosives requi

KEY

Ecotoxic

Miscellaneous

OTES]

4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ 4 4 4 ✔ ✘ ✔ ✔ ✔ 2 3 ✔ ✔ ✔ 1 ✔ 1 ✔ ✔ 1 1 ✔ ✔ ✘ ✔ ✔ ✔ 1 2 3 ✔ 1 1 1 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

✘

GOODS

Tracking

atibility

S ✱ Sheet (SDS) or Supplier to confirm comp NOTE the Safety Data Consult

liance for the

a means of comp code provides] Packaging: This containers [IBCs transportable

1.1. 1.2 & 1.3

• Explosives • Self-Reactives • Organic Peroxides

• Flammables • Pyrophorics • Self-Heating • Emits Flammable Gas • Self-Reactives • Organic Peroxides

Elevated Temperature Substances

Excepted Quantities Dangerous Goods

Limited Quantities Dangerous Goods

Limited Quantities (Air) Dangerous Goods

ges and

storage of packa

Responsib le for secur ity and manageme nt of chem icals [HSNO].

Identify each chemical prod particularly Tracked subst uct you have, ances. Record the Hazard class maximum ification and quantities at any one in this Regis time, ter. Obtain Comp liant Safet y Data Shee (SDS) from your supp lier [ACoP]. ts

✔ ✔ ✱ animals, and for humans or ✔ ✘ ✔ ✔ which may food or drink ✔ ✔ ✔ ✘ s both d for use as known, intended for, or n or ✔ ✔ ✘ ✔ Food Item: mean is used or represente be ded for huma ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ that expected to substance inten ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ (a) Anything ging known, reasonably ✔ ✔ ✘ ✘ ✔ ✔ , or any other 4 ✔ ✔ ✔ (b) Any packa used to contain food, drink Dangerous Goods 2005) ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✘ ✔ ✘ ✱ ✔ port Rule: ✔ future be ✔ the Trans ✔ in d same as ✘ (Land 3 ✔ ✔ mption. should be store ✔ ✔ ✔ animal consu 6.9 1 1 2 ✔ 4 ✔ ✔ ✔ and 1 6.8 ✔ 6.7, 1 ✔ 6.6, 1 ✘ 6.5 6.1E, 6.3, 6.4, 3 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✘ ✔ 1 ✔ Classes 6.1D, 1 1 2 4 ✘ ✘ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✱ Toxic 6.1 1 1 ✔ d same as 8.2C ✔ ✔ ✘ ✔ should be store ✔ 1 ✔ ✔ ✔ and 8.3 1 2 3 ✔ 4 1 1 ✔ Classes 8.1 1 1 1 &B ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✘ ✱ ✔ 1 same as 9.1A ✔ 1 ✔ ld be stored ✔ 9.3, & 9.4 shou 1 2 3 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ 1 ✔ 4 1 1 ✔ 9.1C, 9.1D, 9.2, 1 Physical Hazards ✔ xic Ecoto ✔ 1 ✔ ✘ 3 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ 1 1 ✔ ✱ or 1 1 2 2005 gram can be 4 1 1 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ 1 ✔ erous Goods Ecotoxic picto 1 Dang ✘ : Rule ✔ ✱ LT ✔ ✔ 1 ✔ covered by the 1 2 3 ✔ Food Item are 1 1 ✔ ✔ 4 1 1 ✔ 2.2, 6.2 & 7 and 1 1 1 ✔ ✘ 1 1 ✱ Classes 3 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✘ 1 1 class 6.1 2 2 ✘ ✔ 1 ✔ 2 4 1 1 ✘ 2 ed by HSNO 1 atibility cover 2 is comp 1 2.3 rm 1 ✘ SDS to confi ✱ Class : consult the 3 2 2 ✘ ✔ 1 1 and 3 ✘ ✔ 2 2 ✔ 4 1 1 ✔ tities marks 3 3 3 ty 2 2 2 Limited Quan rm compatibili 3 ✘ ✘ SDS to confi ✘ 2 2 ✘ ✱ DG 3 ✔ 3 ✔ : consult the 3 ✔ 3 ✔ mark 4 2 2 ✔ Quantities 3 3 3 DG Excepted ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✘ 3 3 2 3 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✘ ✱ 4 3 3 ✘ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ NCES ✔ ✘ ✔ ✘ lations 2001 3 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✘ REFERE ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ 5 Controls) Regu 4 ✔ ✔ ✔ (Classes 1 to ✔ ✔ 2 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ Substances ✔ ✔ dous ✔ Hazar ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ lations 2001 ✘ ✘ ✔ ✔ ✘ ✔ ✔ ■ sification) Regu 4 ✔ ✔ ✔ tances (Clas ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✘ ✘ ✘ ✔ ✔ Hazardous Subs ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ■ ✘ ✔ ✘ ✘ Goods 2005 4 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✘ ✔ ✔ ✔ Rule: Dangerous ✘ ✘ ✘ ✘ Land Transport ✘ ✔ ✘ ✔ ✔ ✘ ✘ ✘ 1 2 3 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✘ ■ Zealand 4 ✘ ✘ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ Care New ✔ ✘ ✘ ✔ ✘ Responsible ington 6145 Phone: +64 4 499 4311 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ 2 3 ✔ ✔ ✔ 1 ✔ ✔ 4 ✔ ✔ ✔ Well ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ PO Box 5557 arenz.com 2014 ✘ ✔ ✘ ✔ responsiblec RCNZ June ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ z.com © 1 2 3 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✘ Email: info@ 4 ✔ ✔ ✔ onsiblecaren Act 1996 www.resp ✔ ✔ ✔ ✘ ✔ ✔ ✔ the HSNO tice under 3 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✘ Website: ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ Code of Prac 14/06/2014 4 ✔ ✔ ✔ Approved ✔ 1 2 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ Dated: ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✘ ✔ ✔ ✘ ✘ ✘ ✔ ✘ 4 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✘ ✔ ✘ ✘ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✘ ✘ 4 ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✘ ✔ ✔ ✔ Another 4 ✔ ✔ ✔

Food Item [seeN

DANGEROUS

Mixed Class

Appoint a ‘Person in Charge

Maintain a Site Haza rd Register

✔

Food Item [seeN

Materials 7

Radioactive

ing 8 PG I & II includ Corrosive Acid 8.2 A & B ing i 8 PG I & II includ Corrosive Alkal 8.2 A & B III including PG 8 Acid Corrosive 8.2 C ing i 8 PG III includ Corrosive Alkal 8.2 C A&B Ecotoxic 9.1

Environmental Hazard

tances 6.2 Infectious Subs

d 3.1 including Flammable Liqui D 3.1A, B, C & 3 including ed Explosive Liquid Desensitis 3.2A, B & C ustible) 4.1 (readily comb Flammable Solid 4.1.1 A & B ive) 4.1 (self react Flammable SolidE, F & G D, 4.1.2 A, B, C, ed explosive) 4.1 (desensitis Flammable Solid 4.1.3 A, B & C 4.2 including Combustible Spontaneously C 4.2 A, B & ing Wet 4.3 includ Dangerous When 4.3 A, B & C including Oxidiser 5.1 - 5.1.2 A 5.1.1 A, B & C ing ide 5.2 includ Organic Perox E & F 5.2 A, B, C, D, ing see 2.3) Toxic 6.1 includ ds & Solids only - Gases (Liqui 6.1 A, B & C 6.1 including Toxic Cyanides 6.1 A, B & C

Toxic gas 2.3

Explosives 1

2.1 including Flammable Gas 2.1.1A & B ol 2.1 including Flammable Aeros 2.1.2A Non-Flammable2.2 Non-Toxic gas

STORAGE

NCES

SUBSTA ZARDOUS

• Carcinogen • Mutagenicity • Reproductive Toxicity • Respiratory Sensitizer • Target Organ Toxicity • Aspiration Toxicity

’

Ensure chem icals are corre packaged ctly and labelled. Ensure SDS are available 10 minutes within [ACoP]. Provide corre ct Personal Protective Equipment [PPE].

SAFELY YOUR SI MANAGE chemicTE als

MANAGE THE RISK

Obtain advic e from: Person in Charg e, Approved Handlers. Chemical Supp liers. Group Stand ards includ Site and Stora ing ge Conditions . Approved Codes of Pract ice [ACoPs]. Health & Safet y Inspectors . Hazardous Substance s Enforceme nt Officers. Test Certifiers. Industry Asso ciation.

Correctly segre gate and store chemicals [ACoP]. Ensure Seco ndary Cont ainment is place [ACo in P]. Provide appro priate fire extinguish ers and spill kits. Install Emer gency Show adjacent to ers/E chemical opera yewash tions. Provide traine d First Aider s. Review site signage [ACo P] Develop and annually test emergenc y response plan [ACo P].

Verify the

need for: Test Certificate s. Approved Handlers. Location Test Certificate s. Stationary Container Systems [Bulk Stora ge] [ACoP].

Gases Under Pressure

a helping hand Site Plan must

include: Hazardous Substance s Locations Hazardous . Atmosphe re Zones. Hazardous Control Zone s.

Lithium batteries New 1 Jan 2015

HSW

Oxidizers

HSNO

RuLE

RMA IBUILDING

CODE

Responsible Care New Zealand workplace chemical safety initiative Phone +64 4 499 4311 DATED MAY 2015

Another Resp

onsible Care

New Zeala

IT’S ALL HERE! www.resp

nd chemical

onsiblecar

safety initia

enz.com

tive

Our unique HSNO Approved Codes and chemical safety posters make it as easy and stress-free as possible to safely manage your workplace chemicals. RESPONSIBLE CARE NZ PROVIDES PRACTICAL PRODUCTS AND SERVICES TO ENABLE COMPLIANCE WITH NEW ZEALAND’S WORLD CLASS CHEMICAL MANAGEMENT REGIME.

OBTAIN YOUR COPIES FROM WWW.RESPONSIBLECARENZ.COM/SHOP OR EMAIL INFO@RESPONSIBLECARENZ.COM BULK DISCOUNTS ARE AVAILABLE.

Ph: 04 499 4311 ANOTHER RESPONSIBLE CARE NZ WORKPLACE CHEMICAL SAFETY INITIATIVE

Evolution not revolution

is the best way forward The requirement is clear - develop a workplace health and safety regime which will deliver a superior result to what is presently being achieved

he solution will reflect key government policies such as upskilling the workforce, less government involvement and greater self-sufficiency by businesses, without increasing costs. An effective regime would ideally include: • bi-partisan legislation setting realistic expectations to improve national workplace health and safety performance • minimal legislation with best practice performance objectives described in regulations noted for clear and concise, plain language • the 15-year experience with our world-class chemical management regime • comprehensive supporting infrastructure to

chemical-related duties safely and efficiently. Your Approved Handler is also every employer’s immediate source of safe chemical handling advice, facilitating compliance in 120,000 workplaces and reflecting another key government policy of requiring greater industry self-reliance and independence from ‘Big Government’.

enable implementation from Day One • universal applicability without exceptions. Are we getting there? An over-excited media focuses on Kiwi work sites deemed ‘high risk’ such as worm farms and miniature golf, not to mention the prospect of destroying children’s’ playgrounds, while demonstrably unsafe workplaces are exempted. Sadly, a lazy media prefers controversy and sound bites to investigating the substance. The government has not helped with a poor response rather than proactively focusing on key advantages of the new regime. Responsible employers know they must provide a safe workplace. Identifying, eliminating, isolating or minimizing the hazard is well known, whereas including the site chemical inventory in the mandatory site hazard register less so. Exemptions are to be avoided, particularly before new performance requirements are bedded in and demonstrate fine tuning is necessary. An exemption-free goods and services tax avoids complicated and expensive compliance. Compulsory health and safety committees with worker representatives attracted the ire of both business and labour. Critics argued that smaller businesses, comprising some 97 percent of our economy, should not be required to have a compulsory health and safety representative organisation. Examination reveals a widely misrepresented situation. Our much-maligned workplace chemi-

attend subsidised local courses. Critics are reluctant to realistically compare the investment in training and equipping their workers with the true cost of a preventable incident – replacing a dead or injured worker, loss of business reputation and perhaps customers and not forgetting increasingly severe legal consequences which could close a business. Worst of all is knowing you were responsible for harming another person. There are of course many ways of achieving a desirable outcome. What if every business, regardless of size, was required to have at least one person qualified as a health and safety representative within (say) two years? This person would have qualified on a combined HSNO approved handler and workplace health and safety representative course, passing modules ranging from basic risk management and workplace safety issues such as PPE to special-to-task requirements for agrichem users, construction workers, etc. With subsidised, multi-skill packages undertaken online and confirmed during convenient, practical assessment sessions at a local WorkSafe NZ office, training qualifications could quickly incorporate changing priorities, such as a drive on occupational health or machinery safety. Skilled personnel would be identified and onsite numbers would reflect the extent of business operations. Feasible? Having obtained your hard-won driver’s licence, you are expected to operate your

cal management regime (HSNO) reflects present government policy by requiring a competent person to manage selected chemicals over a specified quantity. Thousands of HSNO Approved Handlers are performing important roles in workplaces, large and small, competently carrying out their daily

vehicle legally and safely.You must ensure your vehicle is fit for purpose and operated responsibly for a multitude of tasks. Compliance and enforcement is both necessary and increasingly expected by the community at large. What would be so different about obtaining a formal ‘licence to operate’ in your workplace?

Proven process The Approved Handler ‘product’ is not perfect, but would we have thousands of Approved Handlers if it were not mandated? Railing against the ‘cost’ of training a competent employee overlooks the fact H&S representative training involves two paid days each year to

A wallet-sized card confirming your competency to carry out designated workplace chemical responsibilities safely, providing a role model for both colleagues and new entrants while continually improving workplace health and safety performance. Improved performance and clear accountability are threatened by emulating the worst aspects of the HSNO regime – complex legislation, failing to provide the required comprehensive infrastructure and a reluctance to address failing policies and processes, compounded by a reluctance to establish a mutually rewarding partnership with the chemical industry. Fifteen years’ experience with HSNO offers a formidable yet valuable foundation for improvement. Retention of an improved test certification regime, including the mandatory ‘competent operator’ requirement and our unique DG/GHS regime, is vital. Regulations required to support the Health and Safety at Work Act can rely heavily on the controversial Australian model or preferably build in the huge investment in HSNO by providing clear, comprehensive and universally applicable chemical safety management and compliance requirements; thus improving our poor workplace health and safety performance. The Health and Safety at Work Act is likely to be implemented from 4th April 2016. An early casualty is the regrettable loss of bi-partisan support for legislation better than what we currently have. The draft regulations will be out for public comment before Christmas. We therefore have time for considered discussions about options for successfully enhancing workplace chemical safety performance, encapsulating our invaluable experience with the world’s only integrated DG/ GHs chemical management system. Let’s ignore the trivial distractions and collectively focus on ensuring we provide the safe workplaces we deserve – evolution not revolution! Barry Dyer is the Chief Executive of Responsible Care NZ, which provides practical products and services to enable compliance with New Zealand’s world-class chemical management regime. Tel: +644 499 4311, email: info@responsiblecarenz.com, visit: www.responsiblecarenz.com

THIS ISSUE >> September/October 2015 12-26 Cover story The Health and Safety at Work Act Evolution not revolution is the best way forward (3) The H&S at Work Act which will come into effect on 4 April next year has made several key changes to health and safety. The most important covers the responsibilities of a Person Conducting a Business or Undertaking - PCBU (12-17). The Act includes a series of obligations concerning worker engagement, participation and representation which are prescriptive and will establish new obligations (18-20) Business NZ Chief Phil O’Reilly (20) labels the Act “practical” while Workplace Relations and Safety Minister Michael Woodhouse describes it as “a major step forward” (21) Federated Farmers board member Katie Milne says farmers will not shirk their responsibilities (24) Council of Trades Union economist Bill Rosenberg (22-24) calls it a farce and a tragedy and the Green Party’s Denise Roche (25-26) sees it as a missed opportunity Comment 3 Develop a workplace health and safety regime which will deliver a superior result by evolution not revolution says Responsible Care’s Barry Dyer 6 Absolutely Essential Health and Safety Toolkit for Small Construction Sites can help. It’s a starter course in the basics of good health and safety practice that you can slip into your back pocket and use again and again according to WorkSafe New Zealand 10-11 Improved workplace health and safety requires behaviour change. Workplace chief executive Katherine Percy advises on how to motivate people to do things differently 34-35 It is often also found that in underperforming companies, employees have a tendency to ignore

the HSE rules that are intended to protect them in the workplace says NOSA’s Lance Hiscoe 38 A strong safety climate is usually associated with a safer workplace, and a safety climate is hard to achieve without strong employee safety attitudes and overtly safe behaviour says PeopleCentric’s Moira Howson Environment 7 Spill containment berms are increasingly being used to cost-effectively prevent clean-up costs and minimise the risk accidents 27 One of the most direct ways to cure noise, vibration and harshness issues in commercial and industrial buildings is to install inexpensive simple inflatable or solid rubber mounts 28-29 Nelson Pine found a stateof-the art solution that emphasised control and safety while improving productivity when it updated its aging plant 31 Solar Bright is lighting the way with icy-road warning technology with solar-powered blue road markers that flash when road conditions are icy Access 8 ACTIV’Shield Bar incorporates an alert that warns the operator of potential entrapment situations and features a Safety Gap which prevents full entrapment 33 The Rollgliss Rope-Mate provides a safe and reliable tamper proof mechanical prusik that eliminates the use of knots or hitches that could be tied incorrectly PPE 9 3M has released a hearing protector fit test system to help combat noise-induced hearing loss which routinely shows the highest number of recordable illness cases in private industry manufacturing Management 10-11 Advice on how to motivate

Editor Geoff Picken 0212 507 559 geoff@ mediasolutions.net.nz Managing partner Phil Pilbrow 027 564 7778 or 09 489 8663 phil@mediasolutions.net.nz

September/October – 2015

Design & pre-press Jamie Laurie jamie@mediasolutions.net.nz Web development Neo Chen neosync@icloud.com

Mike felt it was time to express his health and safety concerns at work

OUR COMMITMENT TO SUSTAINABILITY

Industrial Safety News is endorsed by NZ Safety Council people to do things differently and improve workplace health and safety 32 The Vulnerable Children Act 2014 came into effect on July 1 and requires organisations that provide services to children to conduct safety checks on staff 34-35 Underperformance is often clearly illustrated through the occurrence of serious accidents and lack of management control from an occupational health, safety and environment risk perspective 38 What can organisations do to drive safer attitudes and behaviours, not only in ensuring employee safety but also meeting their increasing responsibilities ubder the H&S at Work Act

Technology 8 ACTIV’Shield Bar incorporates an alert that warns the operator of potential entrapment situations and features a Safety Gap which prevents full entrapment 30 MBIE has issued a RFP for the development of a mobile app and web service that will allow emergency services in New Zealand to better respond SITE SAFE Awards 36-37 The initiative shown by two small companies in winning awards last year clearly demonstrate that site safety is a major priority in organisations of all shapes and sizes and sets the benchmark for this year’s awards in November

Publisher Mike Bishara 09 444 5140 027 564 7779 mike@mediasolutions.net.nz Subscriptions mail@mediasolutions.net.nz Rates: $30 incl GST and postage for 5 issues, plus digital editions to five email addresses. Overseas rates available on request.

Supporters Action Safety P9 Autoline P27 Buddle Findlay P15 Geosciences P17 & 26 Impac P19 Innovative Ceiling Systems P21 Intaks P35 Lynn River P31 Paramount Safety P37 People Centric P5 PBI Height Safety P7 Quality Safety P29 Red Cross P40 Responsible Care P2-3 Safety & Apparel P23 Safety Ladderlegs P25 Safety N Action P13 Technical Compliance Consultants P11 Telarc P39 Vertical Horizonz P8

www.isn.co.nz Free access online to an interactive digital edition. Free access to the industryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s most comprehensive, key word searchable archives in eight key industrial safety categories: PPE, Access, Hazmat, Health, Injury, Management, Environment, Focus. Free access to daily updated news with the ISN online carousel Printed by Crucial Colour 24 Fairfax Avenue, Penrose, Auckland +64 9 589 1550 Published by Media Solutions Ltd 3c 12 Tamariki Ave, Orewa 0931 PO Box 31397, Milford 0741 09 444 5140

Neglecting psychological health and wellbeing in the workplace costs Australian businesses $10.9 billion and New Zealand businesses over $2 billion a year. What is it costing you?

VAcciNAte AgAiNst the cost of work stress contact Peoplecentric today to foster employee health and wellbeing while enhancing performance and productivity.

+64 9 963 5020 www.peoplecentric.co.nz

www.isn.co.nz

F I R S T W O R D > > To o l b ox Ti m e

Reduce the risk when

moving materials We all know building sites are risky places. There are a hundred and one things that can go wrong and keeping on top of all those risks is no easy task

hat’s where WorkSafe New Zealand’s Absolutely Essential Health and Safety Toolkit for Small Construction Sites can help. It’s a starter course in the basics of good health and safety practice that you can slip into your back pocket and use again and again. The toolkit covers a range of topics, from working at height to personal protective equipment – including moving materials. You can’t build without the concrete, timber, glass or whatever other materials you are using – but moving those materials about is a major workplace risk all by itself. And it’s not just throwing your back out lifting a bag of concrete. All too often WorkSafe finds itself investigating serious and even fatal incidents where workers are crushed by falling building materials or struck by forklifts. Whether you are shifting materials by hand or with a vehicle you can make things a whole lot safer with a bit or forethought and planning. Before you start ask yourself if there are heavy items such as roof trusses, kerbstones or concrete lintels that could cause problems if you move them by hand. If there are, can you: • choose lighter materials? • use trolleys, hoists, telehandlers or other plant or equipment to minimise the need to lift heavy objects manually? • order your materials such as cement and aggregates in units that are at a manageable weight, say 25kg bags? • avoid the repetitive laying of heavy building blocks or other masonry units? (weighing more than 20 kg) The best way to avoid injury from shifting heavy items by hand is to reduce the need to do so in the first place. But realistically that’s not always going to be possible. So make sure that everyone on site who might need to do heavy lifting has been trained to do so safely. You should also ensure they’ve been instructed on how to use lifting aids properly. All that training will come into play from the moment any building materials arrive on site on the back of a truck – in fact even before that, if you or your crew have been involved in loading the materials for transport in the first place. Loading and unloading goods is another time to think about managing your risks. • have you checked that the load has not moved or destabilised in transit? • is there an exclusion zone around the loading/unloading area to keep people who are

September/October – 2015

not involved away from the work? • h ave you planned your method of unloading and picked a safe spot to do so? • have you picked the right lifting equipment for the job and does it have a current annual certificate? Of course, the best kind of risk is one you can avoid altogether. Working on the back of a truck creates risk – do you have to access it at all or can the preparation work be done from ground level? If it can’t: • do you have a safe way to get up and down from the back of the vehicle? • what are you doing to prevent workers from falling off the back of the truck? • are you providing sensible safety footwear with a good grip for your employees? A lot of construction jobs will also include excavation work. You’ll be digging out and clearing away soil, rock and lots of different fill material in-between. You may be using some pretty serious machinery. It is inherently risky work. Take the time before you start to dig to think about those risks – such as collapsing walls, people or vehicles falling into your excavation site and how workers will get in and out safely. • is there a support system in place for the excavation, or has it been sloped or battered back to a safe angle? Forethought and planning reduces the risk when moving materials by hand or with a vehicle

• i s a safe method used for putting in the support, without the need for people to work in an unsupported trench? • are there barriers in place to stop people and vehicles falling in? • do you have adequate stop blocks in place to stop tipping vehicles falling in? • think about neighbouring properties – could your work affect the stability of nearby structures or services? • are materials and plant stored well away from the edge of the excavation to reduce the chance of a collapse? • is the excavation regularly inspected by a competent person with the results fully recorded? Planning is the key to a safe worksite. Identify your hazards and take action to minimise the risk. Investing a bit of time at the start of a job could be the difference between a safe, smooth job and one where someone gets seriously injured or worse. The Absolutely Essential Health and Safety Toolkit for Small Construction Sites is available on the WorkSafe New Zealand website. It does not cover legal requirements and is a guide only. There is also plenty more information at business.govt.nz/worksafe/construction.

ENVIRONMENT

Careful berm selection for best spill protection and containment Spill containment berms that prevent fuel and chemical leakage into the environment or onto workplace surfaces are increasingly being used by industry to cost-effectively prevent clean-up costs and minimise the risk of slip and fall accidents

he berms are used for a variety of applications such as mining and energy, oil and gas sites, construction sites, farms, factories, public utilities including civil engineering plant and machinery wash down and maintenance facilities. To ensure the best and most suitable protection from berms there are a number of questions potential users should ask first, says leading safety technology supplier Enware Australia, which represents the globally recognised Enpac range of hazard reduction and spill containment products. “One of the first questions that should be asked is whether the particular item being sought is part of a comprehensive range of spill protection and containment

products, because spill protection issues seldom arise in isolation,” says Enware Business Development Manager – Safety Allan Lane. “More typically, a variety of spill protection and containment issues will arise across a site or across a company and they want to be Enware Australia’s Snap-Up able to get access to a range of berm from Enpac features the safety-compliant technology that chemical resistance required in provides answers to a range of an enormous variety of industrial issues.” applications Mr Lane says that berms range from those that will accommodate These include: forklifts and drum pallets through • portability - is it a permanent to models that can enclose entire installation or is it going to be heavy trucks and tankers. “There moved regularly such as a rail or is a big difference, and when you road construction? are sorting through the number of • does it require a true drive in/drive berms on offer there are a few quesout capability with one-time set tions that should be asked before a up? particular berm is recommended.” • product to be contained - fuel,

Uncompromising safety, uncomplicated solutions

chemical,

acids,

contaminated

water etc. • containment capacity – important for regulation compliance • set up location – inside or outside? • ground type - rough, smooth, sharp rocks etc • is a Tracmat or Ground Pad required?

Consulting to collaborating, concept to completion Efficient, flexible solutions for cost effective height safety compliance. Protecting from danger, harm and litigation. PBI Height Safety is the integral safety partner that provides secure height safety, access and compliance to any type of building, elevation or environment.

For the latest innovations in height safety for legislative compliance, talk to experts today.

Stay connected Take care P: 0800 357 003 E: info@phiheightsafety.com www.pbiheightsafety.com

www.isn.co.nz

ACCESS

New system helps avoid entrapment The ACTIV’Shield Bar Entrapment Prevention System activates from 18º and sounds an alarm

nited Forklift and Access Solutions are introducing the ACTIV’Shield Bar Entrapment Prevention System of one of the world’s leading manufacturers of powered access equipment, Haulotte Group. ACTIV’Shield Bar incorporates an alert that warns the operator of potential entrapment situations and is unique in that it features a Safety Gap which prevents full entrapment in such situations. “This allows the operator to remove himself out of danger,” says United spokesperson Andrew Macdonald. It is widely applicable to industries such as construction, civil engineering, maintenance and installation engineering, local government and municipal works, including lighting

logistics, manufacturing, bulk materials handling, electrical installation and maintenance, safety and transport and warehousing. Boom uses include installation, inspection and maintenance tasks as well as general access to elevated areas and machinery. ACTIV’Shield Bar is available on all new Haulotte booms, with a retro kit also available that can be fitted to older Haulotte booms from 2008 onwards.

and tree maintenance, mining, energy, oil and gas, infrastructure,

will sound to warn of danger • Safety Gap allows operators to

System features include: • the ACTIV’Shield Bar will automatically stop the machine when activated from 18° and sounds an alarm alerting the operator and others nearby – if the bar doesn’t reach the full 18º, only the alarm

place themselves out of danger, giving them opportunity to rescue themselves before serious situations arise • only reverse/lowering movements are allowed after the alert if activated, preventing more serious situations arising. “While incorporating the unique and outstanding safety features of ACTIV’Shield Bar, Haulotte have maintained operator visibility of controls, which further extends safety, ergonomics and productivity,” Mr Macdonald adds. The system has been designed to preserve the machine’s working envelope and to maintain easy access to controls, which means no change in working practice for the operator. Following activation of the system’s safety alert, reverse/ lowering movements are permitted to allow the possibly panicked operator to get out of trouble without making the situation worse.

Prepare to advance. Workplace safety with certainty.

In safety with certainty. At Vertical Horizonz, we empower revolutionary change for industry, business and individuals by providing exceptional health & safety training experiences.

For us, it’s not just about ensuring workplace safety, it’s about Advisory results. Our mission is to provide real training that saves lives, and this is reflected in everything we do. Partnerships WeTraining like to think of ourselves as conscientious boundary-pushers. We thoroughly assess your specific needs before we act, Development ensure all your bases are covered, and are empowered to push the limits to deliver exceptional workplace health & safety NZ industries can relydelivers on. We don’t just offer our training services Vertical Horizonz exceptional to New Zealand. Vertical Horizonz operate training experiences, empowering you worldwide from to advance with certainty. Australia to in thesafety middle east in countries such as Qatar or the United Arab Emirates. We promote revolutionary change, helping you achieve standout results by

Our world-class advisory, partnership, providing real training that saves lives.development and training services enable you to achieve standout business performance, ultimately creating safety certainty.

Contact us now to revolutionise your safety training. P 0800 72 33 848 E info@verticalhorizonz.co.nz www.verticalhorizonz.co.nz Vertical Horizonz Group | Australia | New Zealand | International

September/October – 2015

After being triggered, the system is easy to reset and reactivate from the basket, which means there is no machine downtime – and if the operator is shaken up, he can bring the machine down safely and efficiently. “There is no need to wait for a person on the ground to bring the unit down,” says Mr Macdonald. “With the innovative ACTIV’Shield system, Haulotte has gone much further than current industry requirements in Australia and worldwide, giving the operator the opportunity to not only potentially prevent a full entrapment situation, but also the means to self-rescue should one occur.”

PPE

Earplug effectiveness made simple

M Hearing Protection Solutions has released a hearing protector fit test system to

muffs from inside the employee’s ear, providing accurate, quantitative results for both ears simultaneously.

needed to better protect their workforce,” says Luciana Macedo, Senior Occupational Hygienist at 3M. “The dual-ear system enables companies to quickly identify employees at risk for noise -induced hearing loss, and assist with training on the selection and use of hearing protectors.” While other systems rely on the employee’s subjective response to test signals, the 3M fit-testing system measures sound pressure levels objectively. Therefore, the test can be performed in relatively high levels of background noise and is

help combat noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL), which routinely shows the highest number of recordable illness cases in private industry manufacturing. The new 3M E-A-Rfit Dual-Ear Validation System measures the effectiveness of earplugs and ear-

The system now tests both ears for all seven standard frequencies in seconds, generating a Personal Attenuation Rating (PAR) to customise hearing protector selection. “The 3M E-A-Rfit Dual-Ear Validation System provides employers with the resources and confidence

not affected by the hearing level of the employee. Once the measurement is complete, the software displays the PAR along with a pass/fail indicator based on the worker’s noise exposure level. The system helps employers ensure proper use of

the hearing protection and helps identify earplug or earmuff models offering the best protection, such as the 3M E-A-R Classic Earplugs or the 3M PELTOR Earmuffs X Series. The 3M™ E-A-Rfit Validation System includes all the hardware and accessories needed, including a speaker, software, stand, dual-element microphones, cables and a trial quantity of probed test plugs. A leader in hearing protection, 3M offers a complete solution including earplugs, earmuffs, sound detection and fit validation tools. Its comprehensive, diverse portfolio of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) solutions includes fall protection, respiratory protection, hearing protection, reflective materials for high-visibility apparel, protective clothing, protective eyewear, head and face protection, welding helmets, and other adjacent products and solutions such as detection, monitoring equipment, and active communications equipment.

ACTIONSAFETY

www.isn.co.nz

H E A LT H & S A F E T Y

How to change health and safety behaviours – and make it stick

Nobody goes to work intending to get injured or killed yet every year thousands of New Zealanders are harmed on the job, notes Katherine Percy

mproved workplace health and safety requires behaviour change and advises how to motivate people to do things differently. It is common to rely on health and safety systems and written policies and procedures to keep people safe, backed up by health and safety meetings, manuals and signage. All of these will achieve some results because employees in many organisations are used to being told what to do and will try to comply with instructions. However far bigger improvements

This is demonstrated in recent Australian research, which found a greater acceptance of risk taking and rule breaking among front-line employees in a number of high-risk sectors such as construction, mining and manufacturing. The researchers found that employees in small and medium-sized businesses were more likely to agree that not all health and safety instructions were strictly followed. About a third of factory process workers thought that workplace conditions and management pres-

particularly so in workplaces and jobs where people are routinely under time pressure to get the work done. This is important because pushing home a message that health and safety is a priority will achieve nothing if workplace expectations force people to cut health and safety corners. Getting people to make the effort to change requires management commitment to safety and for managers to convince employees that it is not only necessary but will also

by developing an in-depth understanding about the nature and causes of the workplace’s risks and hazards. This will also help them to prepare for the upcoming law change that will broaden the focus from hazards, to risks and hazards. Considering risk identifies the probability or likelihood that something could be harmful and the potential consequence of that harm. Considering hazards identifies sources of potential damage to something, or potential mental or physical harm to someone. For ex-

can only happen if employees understand and see relevance in the health and safety processes and procedures they are expected to follow and then change their everyday safety behaviours accordingly. Effecting significant behavior change requires employees to be involved in thinking and talking about safety to raise their awareness about the risks and hazards involved in their work. Employees and managers also need to understand how their own attitudes influence safety.

sure stopped them from working safely and contributed to rule breaking. These findings suggest that attitudes to safety are heavily influenced by workplace cultures, expectations and accepted behaviours. The same is true in New Zealand and Workbase routinely encounters employees who put themselves at risk because they accept minor injuries as a normal part of the job and believe they are doing what is expected by their employer. This is

make a difference. It is not just up to employees to change and managers need to demonstrate their own commitment to health and safety and lead by example. Effecting sustainable behavior change also requires employers to shift from compliance thinking to getting everyone in the organisation believing in the value of good health and safety practice because they know how it matters to themselves and their workmates. Employers can start this process

ample, when carrying heavy items (the risk) there is a chance of sprains, strains and trips (the hazards). Evolving thinking from purely hazards and controls to a risk management approach means shifting the focus from inspection to enquiry and investigation. Talking in a ‘no-blame’ way with employees who are responsible for the work activities and are consequently at risk of harm can reveal how they currently operate, their degree of understanding about what to do, and the work’s hazards and risks.

“Getting people to make the effort to change requires management commitment to safety and for managers to convince employees that it is not only necessary but will also make a difference” - Workbase CEO Katherine Percy

Employee involvement Involving employees can also show any differences between what is actually happening, and what is prescribed in health and safety policies or standard operating procedures. Discussions should take into account scenarios such as shift handovers, tiredness towards the end of shifts and when there is pressure to complete tasks. Non-standard situations also need to be reviewed because operators may be making judgements about what should be done without having all the information about the risks and hazards, for example when there is a breakdown or non-scheduled maintenance. Involving employees in hazard and risk identification will get them

September/October – 2015

thinking about the risks of tasks in more depth. In addition to helping employees to understand and manage risks, their involvement helps to shift thinking away from assuming health and safety is someone else’s responsibility, to thinking ahead about potential risks and actively managing them. When discussing health and safety with employees, it is not helpful to tell them to be careful because people don’t deliberately set out to have an accident! Instead involve everyone in identifying and discussing safe behaviours so these are known and are top of mind. This will help managers and employees to identify barriers to good health and safety practice and to understand why current behaviours exist. For example, safety equipment may be difficult to access or awkward to use, or people may be measured and rewarded on how well they meet time targets rather than whether they operate safely. If a “she’ll be right” attitude prevails then encourage employees to talk about their near-miss and

injury experiences to help overcome assumptions that “it will never happen to me”. Also talk with employees to: • identify reasons for changing their behaviours • be aware of how bad the consequences would be for them and their families if they were injured or killed at work • consider how a significant injury would affect their income and what the consequences would be on their families • think about the ways in which being in pain or being incapacitated would affect their happiness, relationships and ability to do the things they enjoy. Addressing employees’ acceptance of risk-taking and rule breaking, and understanding people’s motivations for change in relation to things that they care about, will help improve their willingness to put effort into good health and safety practice. Even if employees are genuinely motivated to make changes, they will also need the right skills so employers should identify all of the

practical skills and knowledge that people need to work safely. Research shows that most employees can read but may still need support to be able to manage unfamiliar health and safety tasks and information, and complex procedures and systems. This is significant because the upcoming health and safety law changes are expected to require that every employee who undertakes a potentially risky or hazardous activity has the necessary safety equipment, knowledge and skills to avoid harming themselves or others – or is supervised by someone who has that experience or knowledge. It is important to ensure that written health and safety information and procedures are clear and concise because research shows that few people will read right through (or even understand) bureaucratic or long health and safety documents, procedures, or hazardous material safety data sheets. Training needs to be understood by the person receiving it and that includes knowing how to apply that

knowledge on the job. Supervisors also play a vital role in engaging and upskilling employees and can do so by involving their teams in discussions about what they know about specific risks, what caused hazards, how those hazards and risks could affect them and what could be done to prevent the hazards. This is important because people inevitably take on and remember far more of what they discuss than what they are just told. Discussion also helps to raise everyone’s awareness about why incidents and near misses matter and gets them thinking about preventative action that they can take. Engaged employees who understand the causes of risks and hazards are more likely to make good safety decisions and take effective action should the unexpected occur. Katherine Percy is CEO of Workbase, a not-for-profit trust with over 20 years’ experience in developing adult literacy skills and helping organisations to work smarter and safer

Technical Compliance Consultants (NZ) Ltd Hazardous Substances Training – WorkSafe NZ Compliance Certifiers – Regulatory Affairs Consultants Who we are At TCC (NZ) Ltd, we strive to be widely known as the providers of leading edge professional advice on chemical regulatory compliance and the safe management of hazardous substances. We aim to provide professional service through long-term friendly partnerships with our clients, with the knowledge and tools necessary to enhance and improve the safety of chemical handling in the workplace.

We can help with:

Approved Handler Certification Chemical Handling Courses Spill Response Management Emergency Response Planning

Exempt Laboratory Audits Site Assessments HAZCHEM Signage Safety Data Sheet Authoring Label Reviews

Policy/Procedure Review HSNO applications ACVM registrations Technical Advice

Come talk to us. Ph: (09) 475 5240 email: info@techcomp.co.nz website: www.techcomp.co.nz

www.isn.co.nz

FOCUS >> Health and Safety at Work Act

A change for

the better New health and safety legislation recently passed by Parliament seeks to make New Zealand workplaces much safer

he forthcoming Health and Safety at Work Act that is slated to come into effect on 4 April next year has made several key changes to health and safety. The first and most important is the introduction of a Person Conducting a Business or Undertaking, or PCBU, who is judged to be in the best position to control risks to health and safety in the workplace. A PCBU will usually be a business entity such as a company rather than an individual person – though a person might also be a PCBU if they are a sole trader, a self-employed person or a householder who operates a business in their home. It replaces the current focus on the employer and employee with duties on carefully defined participants – employers, principals, the self-employed, persons controlling a place of work and suppliers of plant. Several workplaces and roles are, however, not defined as PCBUs: • those employed or engaged solely as a worker, or an officer such as a company director • a householder who engages or employs someone to do residen-

September/October – 2015

tial work on or in a home • a volunteer association if it’s for a community purpose and none of the volunteers have employees. All PCBUs have a primary duty of care in relation to the health and safety of workers and others affected by the work carried out by the PCBU. This requires all PCBUs to ensure,

work environment, plant and systems of work that are without risks to health and safety • ensuring the safe use, handling and storage of plant, structures and substances • providing adequate facilities at work for the welfare of workers, including ensuring access to those facilities

“There is a tiered penalty and fine regime, with graduated categories of offences, providing better guidance to the court about appropriate fine levels” so far as is reasonably practicable: • the health and safety of its workers or those workers who are influenced or directed by the PCBU such as its workers and contractors • and that the health and safety of other people is not put at risk from work carried out as part of the conduct of the business or undertaking – for example visitors and customers. Specific obligations include: • providing and maintaining a

• p roviding information, training, instruction or supervision necessary to protect workers and others from risks to their health and safety • monitoring the health of workers and the conditions at the workplace for the purpose of preventing illness or injury. A self-employed person such as a householder working from home is a PCBU and must also ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, his or her own health and safety while

at work. PCBUs who manage or control the workplace, fixtures, fittings or plant at workplaces do not owe a duty to people who are there for an unlawful purpose. Similarly, the duty of the PCBU only extends to the farm buildings and structures necessary for the operation of the business or undertaking and the areas immediately surrounding them – nor does the farm workplace include the family home. Workers and workplaces A worker is a person who carries out work in any capacity for a PCBU, which includes employees, contractors, sub-contractors, employees of contractors or sub-contractors, outworkers, labour hire workers, volunteer workers, trainees and people gaining work experience. A workplace is defined as a place where work is carried out for a business or undertaking, and any place where a worker goes or is likely to be while at work – including a vehicle, vessel, aircraft, ship or other mobile structure. PCBUs have a duty, so far as is rea-

sonably practicable, to ensure that the health and safety of other persons, not just of workers, is not put at risk from the work carried out by the business or undertaking. Toiling together PCBUs need to work together when duties overlap – for example, there may be a number of different businesses working together or alongside each other on a single work site such as a construction site and through contracting or supply chains. Overlapping duties do not automatically require PCBUs to duplicate efforts: instead, PCBUs will need to consult, co-operate, and co-ordinate activities to meet their shared responsibilities. A PCBU that has less direct control and influence is more likely to fulfil its duty by making arrangements with the PCBU that is closer to the work and therefore has more direct influence and control. For example, both a labour hire PCBU hiring out a worker to a host PCBU and the host PCBU itself owe a

duty of care to the worker and need to consult and co-ordinate activities to ensure the health and safety of the labour hire worker. An important change with the new PCBU concept is that subcontractors on a site where they affect each other’s work or have a crossover of work will also need to work with each other to meet their duties – even if they don’t have a direct contractual relationship with each other. Risk reduction Ensuring health and safety requires the duty holder to manage risk through eliminating or minimising the risk, so far as is reasonably practicable in the circumstances. Depending on the circumstances and the risk, minimisation may include isolating the risk, coming up with engineering solutions, adapting work methods and procedures, or providing personal protective equipment. Upstream PCBUs PCBUs that are upstream from the

workplace (for example designers, architects and engineers, manufacturers, suppliers or installers of plant, substances or structures) also have a role to play in managing risks to health and safety at work. Specifically they have a duty to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, that the work they do or the things they provide to the workplace don’t create health and safety risks. These explicit duties include ensuring the plant, substances, or structures are without risk to people who: • use the plant, substance or structure at a workplace • handle the substance at a workplace • store the plant or substance at a workplace • construct the structure at a workplace • carry out any reasonably foreseeable activity (inspection, cleaning, maintenance or repair) at a workplace • are at or in the vicinity of a workplace and who are exposed to the

plant, substance or structure at the workplace. Due diligence A new duty requires an officer of a PCBU (such as a director, board member or partner) to exercise due diligence to ensure that the PCBU complies with its duties. The officer duty will apply only to those who have a very senior governance role in the organisation – other than those holding specific roles such as directors or partners. This governance role must exercise significant influence over the management of the business or undertaking, such as a chief executive, but doesn’t include a person who merely advises or makes recommendations to an officer of the organisation. The definition of an officer is also clarified: • for a PCBU that is a company - the officers are its directors • for a PCBU that is a partnership the officers are its partners (but

Continued on page 14

www.isn.co.nz

FOCUS >> Health and Safety at Work Act Continued from page 13

note in limited partnerships, only general partners are officers) • for other types of business structures or undertakings - people who hold a position comparable to a director of a company, such as board members. Certain officers are exempt from prosecution if they fail in their due diligence duty: • volunteers • elected members of local authorities (councillors) under the Local Electoral Act 2001

• m embers of local or community boards elected or appointed under the Local Electoral Act 2001 • members of school boards of trustees appointed or elected under the Education Act 1989. Officers must make sure they perform certain due diligence functions to ensure the PCBU complies with its duties, including taking reasonable steps to: • know about work health and safety matters and keep up-to-date • gain an understanding of the operations of the organisation and the hazards and risks generally associated with those operations

• e nsure the PCBU has appropriate resources and processes to eliminate or minimise those risks • ensure the PCBU has appropriate processes for receiving information about incidents, hazards and risks, and for responding to that information • ensure there are processes for complying with any duty, and that these are implemented • verify that these resources and processes are in place and being used. Volunteers valued Several amendments have been made with regards to volunteers,

recognising that volunteers contribute greatly to New Zealand communities and ensuring the new law will not negatively affect volunteering. A purely volunteer organisation where volunteers work together for community purposes and which does not have any employees is known as a volunteer association – which is not a PCBU and therefore the Act will not apply to it. A volunteer organisation which has one or more employees is a PCBU and will have the same duties as a PCBU to ensure, so far as reasonably practicable, the health and safety of its workers and others.

All PCBUs must engage with workers on health and safety matters All PCBUs must have effective worker participation practices

PCBU may develop its own worker participation practices

The Act does not specify practices

September/October – 2015

All workers may refuse to do unsafe work Workers may request or PCBU may choose to have Health and Safety representatives (HSRs)

Workers may request or PCBU may choose to have Health and Safety committees (HSCs)

(with some exclusions)

All workers have protections from adverse conduct

This is the same approach taken by the current law – the volunteer organisation will have to do what is reasonably practicable for it to do, and what is within its influence and control. Where volunteers carry out work for a PCBU, the Act distinguishes between casual volunteers and volunteer workers – the latter are people who regularly work for a PCBU on an ongoing basis and are integral to the PCBU’s operations. People volunteering for the following activities will not be volunteer workers under the new law: • participation in a fundraising activity • assistance with sports or recreation for an educational institute, sports or recreation club • assistance with activities for an educational institution outside the premises of the educational institution • providing care for another person in the volunteer’s home.

gagement and participation in work health and safety matters by setting out two overarching PCBU duties for involving workers in work health and safety. The PCBU must: • engage, so far as is reasonably practicable, with workers who work for its business or undertaking and are directly affected, or likely to be directly affected, by a health and safety matter of the PCBU • and have effective worker participation practices that allow workers who work for its business or undertaking to have an opportunity to participate in improving work health and safety on an ongoing basis. Effective worker participation practice (s) include health and safety representatives (HSRs) and/ or health and safety committees (HSCs), which bring together workers (including HSRs) and management to develop and review

Worker participation The Act strengthens worker en-

Continued on page 16

Get guidance

orkSafe New Zealand is currently developing guidance to help people understand and meet their obligations and is working closely with key industry stakeholders from a number of sectors to make sure that all new guidance is clear, accurate and simple to use. Guidance on the new legislation will include: • a comprehensive Guide to the Act, covering what everyone needs to know about general workplace health and safety • factsheets on key topics including: • what is a PCBU and what are its duties? • who is an officer and what are their duties? • what are the notification requirements for workplace incidents? • what does “reasonably practicable” mean? • an Approved Code of Practice (ACOP), outlining the

•

Worker Engagement, Representation and Participation requirements in the Act an ACOP giving practical information for the Management and Removal of Asbestos a Good Practice Guide (GPG), explaining how workplace risks can be managed, and the requirements under the Health and Safety at Work (General Risk and Workplace Management) Regulations guidance on major hazard fa cilities and the changes to the hazardous substances regime factsheets to support the ACOPs and GPGs.

Once the regulations are finalised WorkSafe will start issuing formal guidance to support the Act and regulations in the New Year. Sign up to find out more about what guidance is coming by visiting www.worksafe.govt.nz

Working smarter. Our experienced team is dedicated to providing expert employment and health and safety legal advice with a strategic and commercial approach. We offer assistance and representation on all health and safety issues, investigations and prosecutions. ........................................... Sherridan Cook, Partner 09 358 2555 // sherridan.cook@buddlefindlay.com Hamish Kynaston, Partner 04 499 4242 // hamish.kynaston@buddlefindlay.com Peter Chemis, Partner 04 499 4242 // peter.chemis@buddlefindlay.com Kerry Smith, Partner 03 379 1747 // kerry.smith@buddlefindlay.com Susan Rowe, Partner 03 371 3517 // susan.rowe@buddlefindlay.com

www.isn.co.nz

FOCUS >> Health and Safety at Work Act Continued from page 15 workplace health and safety policies and procedures. An HSC may be requested by the workers or chosen by the PCBU as an effective way to involve workers in health and safety at the workplace. The Act sets out how HSRs and HSCs will work, including their functions and powers, and the PCBU’s obligations to provide support. It also continues the right for workers to refuse to do unsafe work, and expands protections for workers who raise workplace health and safety matters. However, it doesn’t specify what types of worker participation practices PCBUs must have – different types of practices will suit different workplaces and the important thing

Powerful penalties The Independent Taskforce on Workplace Health and Safety considered that the current penalties under the Health and Safety in Employment Act 1992 were too low and the range of compliance and enforcement tools available to inspectors too limited. The Act therefore provides a range of new and existing enforcement tools and compliance mechanisms

to the regulator, inspectors and the court that include in addition to prosecution: Improvement notices Where an inspector reasonably believes that a person is breaching (or is likely to breach) the Act or regulations, they can issue that person with an improvement notice to remedy the breach. The improvement notice will stipulate a reasonable time by which the person must comply with the notice (compliance period). An inspector may extend the compliance period by written notice. Prohibition notices Where an inspector reasonably believes a workplace activity is occurring (or is likely to occur) involving a serious risk to health or safety of anyone arising from an immediate or imminent exposure to a hazard, they can issue a prohibition notice (including verbally).

The person given the notice must stop carrying out the activity, as directed, until the inspector is satisfied that the matter or activity giving rise to the risk has been remedied. Where reasonable steps are not taken the regulator may take remedial action to make the workplace or situation safe. Non-disturbance notices An inspector may issue a non-disturbance notice to the PCBU who manages or controls the workplace requiring the PCBU to preserve the site at which a notifiable event has occurred (for a specified time) or prevent the disturbance of a particular site (including the operation of plant) for a specified time that is reasonable in the circumstances. Certain actions can still be taken even if a non-disturbance notice has been issued – for example, assisting an injured person. Failing to comply with an improvement, prohibition or

Max. prison term

Max. fine

Offence of reckless conduct in respect of a health and safety duty (clause 42)

A person who has a health and safety duty, without reasonable excuse, engages in conduct that exposes a person to a risk of death or serious injury or illness, and the person is reckless as to the risk

Individual (e.g. a worker)

5 years and/or

$300,000

Officer of a PCBU or an individual who is a PCBU (e.g. self-employed)

5 years and/or

$600,000

Body Corporate (e.g. a company)

$3 million

Individual (e.g. a worker)

$150,000

Officer of a PCBU or an individual who is a PCBU (e.g. self-employed)

$300,000

Body Corporate (e.g. a company)

$1.5 million

Individual (e.g. a worker)

$50,000

Officer of a PCBU or an individual who is a PCBU (e.g. self-employed)

$100,000

Body Corporate (e.g. a company)

$500,000

Offence of failing to comply with a health and safety duty that exposes individual to risk of death or serious injury or illness (clause 43)

Offence of failing to comply with a health and safety duty (clause 44)

is that workers can be involved in an effective way. PCBUs with fewer than 20 workers that are in the low-risk sectors to be defined in the new Worker Participation regulation don’t have to initiate an election for HSRs or set up an HSC. However, this doesn’t stop smaller, non high-risk PCBUs from voluntarily deciding to have health and safety representatives or a committee to meet their worker participation requirements.

September/October – 2015

A person who has a health and safety duty fails to comply with the duty and that failure exposes a person to risk of death or serious injury or illness

A person that has a health and safety duty fails to comply with that duty

Enforceable undertakings An enforceable undertaking is a commitment by a person to address a failure or alleged failure to comply with the Act or regulations – failure to comply with an enforceable undertaking is an offence to which a fine applies. Where a person fails to do what they have agreed, the regulator can apply to the court to obtain an appropriate order – for example, Infringement notices payment of the fine or an order diThe regulator can issue a person recting that the person comply with with an infringement notice requir- the enforceable undertaking. ing payment of a fine for breach of The regulator is not required to an infringement offence. accept an enforceable undertaking Infringement offences will be and cannot accept one where the breaches of specific health and regulator believes the failure or alsafety obligations in the Act or in leged failure would amount to an The Resource Manageregulations. The amount of the fine offence of reckless conduct in rement the duty. Nafor each infringement offence will Act spect(RMA) of a healthand and safety be set out in regulations. tional The Act specifically acknowledges Environmental A person issued with an in- that the giving of an enforceable for Assessing fringement notice only has Standards limited undertaking does not constitute an grounds to have the court consider admission of guilt in respect of the and Managing Contamthe matter. failure or alleged failure to which non-disturbance notice is an offence and the person will be liable to pay a fine. In certain circumstances, an eligible person is able to apply to the regulator to review a decision about a notice that has been issued (internal review). The person can also appeal the outcome of any internal review to the court on the grounds that the decision was unreasonable.

the enforceable undertaking relates. Inspectors may also display a copy of a notice in a prominent place where the work is being carried out, which ensures those affected are made aware of the notice. Failing to comply with an improvement, prohibition or non-disturbance notice (or intentionally removing or damaging a copy of a notice displayed by an inspector) is an offence and the person will be liable to pay a fine. Several new kinds of court orders have been made available, including the ability to order a person to undertake a specific project for the general improvement of work health and safety or undertake training. The court can also make adverse publicity orders requiring an offender to publicise or advise specific people of certain matters, including the nature of the offence, its consequences and the penalty imposed by the court. The Act also carries

over from the HSE Act the ability to bring a private prosecution. There is a tiered penalty and fine regime, with graduated categories of offences, providing better guidance to the court about appropriate fine levels. The penalty and fine levels are tiered to distinguish between individuals and corporate entities (such as companies). There are three offences in relation to breach of a health and safety duty, graduated based on the conduct of the duty holder and the outcome of the breach with the maximum fine and penalty levels tiered based on who the duty holder is – an individual, an officer of a PCBU, or corporate entity. The fine levels for breaches of other obligations under the Act are provided in the clause that creates the obligation, and are also tiered based on who the duty holder is in the circumstances.

once the regulations are finalised, starting in 2016. The new health and safety law is based on that in force in Australia,

where there has been a 16 percent reduction in work-related deaths since 2012 and which recently reported the lowest number of work-related deaths in 11 years.

inants in Soil to Protect Human Health (NES) are the key pieces of legislation applicable to Air, series of regulations are • general risk and workplace information to help the workforce Land Water managebeing developed to sup- andmanagement prepare for the forthcoming legislaport the new Act,ment which in • major hazard facilities New Zealand. tion and will issue formal guidance

Regulation revision

will replace the Health and Safety in • asbestos Employment Act 1992 and the Ma- • engagement, worker participaGSL works the rules of chinery Act 1950. tionwithin and representation. These include: WorkSafe is developing general the above pieces of legisla-

Geosciences Ltd strives to deliver practical, cost effective, and sustainable solutions for our clients and the environment. Our Specific Areas of Expertise include:  Soil and Groundwater Contamination Investigations  Hazardous Building Materials (incl. Asbestos) Surveys  Environmental and Asbestos Management Plans  HAIL sites Compliance and Consenting Resolution

info@geosciences.co.nz www.geosciences.co.nz +64 (0)9 476 0454 www.isn.co.nz

FOCUS >> Health and Safety at Work Act

New commitments

for worker involvement The long-awaited Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 that will come into force on 4 April 2016 includes a series of obligations concerning worker engagement, participation and representation

lthough these matters are currently provided for in the Health and Safety in Employment Act 1992, the Act is more prescriptive in this area and will establish new obligations. The primary duty holder under the Act will be a ‘person conducting a business or undertaking’ (PCBU), who will assume new obligations when the provisions come into force next year. PCBUs in the mining sector should also be aware that the Act will establish further obligations for that sector (see Schedule 3 to the Act). Worker engagement and participation Under the Act, a PCBU will have a duty to: • …so far as is reasonably practicable, engage with workers • who carry out work for the business or undertaking; and • who are, or are likely to be, directly affected by a matter relating to work health or safety. The circumstances in which a PCBU will be required to engage with workers on health and safety matters are broadly defined. They include when a PCBU is identifying hazards and assessing risks in relation to its work, in developing health and safety procedures and worker participation practices (referred to below), and in determining work groups (also discussed below). Note that the Act’s definition of ‘worker’ is not limited to employees, and includes contractors, subcontractors, employees of a labour hire company, apprentices and trainees. A PCBU’s duty of engagement will involve: • sharing relevant information with workers • giving workers a reasonable opportunity to express their views, raise issues, and contribute to decision-making processes on health and safety matters • taking workers’ views on health

September/October – 2015

and safety into account in decision-making • and informing workers of the outcomes of work engagement in a timely manner (i.e. after consulting with workers on a particular health and safety matter, advising them what the decision is and the reasons for it). In addition, PCBUs will be obliged to have practices that “provide reasonable opportunities for workers who carry out work for the business or undertaking to participate effectively in improving work health and safety…on an ongoing basis” (‘worker participation practices’). In designing these, PCBUs must

provide their views about health and safety issues through a designated email address or intranet space. It will be an offence not to comply with the duties summarised above. A maximum fine of $100,000 (or $20,000 where the PCBU is an individual) may be imposed for a failure to comply. Health and safety representatives and work groups The Act provides a series of functions and powers for health and safety representatives. These include representing workers in relation to health and safety, inves-

“If a worker notifies a PCBU that they would like a representative to be elected, the PCBU will have to respond to their request following the process set out in the Act” comply with any industry-specific requirements, and take into account any relevant codes of practice. Such practices could include establishing or maintaining a health and safety committee and consulting with workers through that committee. Managers could also make health and safety a regular item for meetings, and workers could be given the opportunity to

tigating complaints, monitoring health and safety measures, inquiring into potential risks, making recommendations, providing feedback to their PCBU and promoting the interests of workers. The Act will not require every workplace to have a representative. However, if a worker notifies a PCBU that they would like a representative to be elected, the PCBU will have to

respond to their request following the process set out in the Act (discussed below). Generally speaking, representatives will only represent workers in their own ‘work group’. Where a worker requests the election of a representative, the relevant PCBU will have to determine the work groups that make up the business or undertaking (and engage with workers in doing so). Determination of work groups The default position provided for in the Act is that a work group is made up of all of the workers of a business or undertaking. However, a PCBU will be able to determine alternative work groups if it considers that the default position “would be inappropriate having regard to the structure of the business or undertaking.” This might be the case where, for example, various different types of work are carried out in the PCBU and health and safety issues could better be addressed by having a work group for each type of work, or where work is carried out at different locations and this makes it impracticable to have one work group for the PCBU. If a PCBU decides to determine an alternative work group or groups, it will have to ensure that the

alternative arrangement groups workers in way that “most effectively enables the health and safety interests of the workers to be represented”. A PCBU will also have to take into account the need for representatives to be accessible to the workers they represent. Two or more PCBUs may also be able to agree to a ‘multiple PCBU work group arrangement’. Where such an arrangement

exists, individuals carrying out work for different PCBUs may be part of the same work group. This type of arrangement may be suitable where more than one PCBU has duties for the same work or workers (e.g. a construction project involving employees, contractors and subcontractors from various PCBUs working together). Obligation to initiate an election How a PCBU must respond to a worker requesting the election of a representative will depend on: • how many people are carrying

out work for the business or undertaking; and • whether the work carried out falls within the scope of any ‘high-risk sector or industry’. High-risk sectors or industries will be listed in regulations. Draft regulations are expected in a few weeks. If a PCBU’s work is carried out by fewer than 20 workers and falls outside the ‘high-risk’ categories, the PCBU will be able to (but does not have to) refuse a request to initiate an election for a health and safety representative. In this event, the PCBU will have to provide written

notice to the worker who made the request within a reasonable time. If the work of a PCBU’s business or undertaking is carried out by 20 workers or more, or is ‘high-risk’, a PCBU who receives notification from a worker will be required to initiate an election for a representative. Time limits and other requirements for elections will be set down in regulations. If a PCBU fails to comply with any of these obligations, it will be liable for a fine of up to $25,000 (or $5,000 if the PCBU is an individual).

Continued on page 20

working to keep your work safe

Training

helps you get home safe

Safety leadership

Risk Manager

starts at the top

online safety intelligence

Consulting how can we help?

PREQUAL contractor evaluation

Health and Safety is changing...

Are YOU ready?

www.impac.co.nz | contactus@impac.co.nz | 0800 2 impac (0800 246 722) www.isn.co.nz

FOCUS >> Health and Safety at Work Act Continued from page 19 Health and safety committees Health and safety committees are another form of worker representation found in the Act. Their functions will include facilitating cooperation in relation to health and safety matters, helping to develop health and safety “standards, rules, policies, or procedures” for the relevant workplace, and making health and safety recommendations. Where a committee has been established in a PCBU, that PCBU will be required amongst other matters to consult with the committee about health and safety (so far as is reasonably practicable), to provide the committee with the information it requires to carry out its functions, and to adopt health and safety recommendations made by the committee or explain in writing why a recommendation will not be adopted. Establishing a committee As with representatives, the Act will not require every workplace to have a committee. A PCBU may however be requested to establish a committee either by a representative, or by five or more workers at the

workplace. Where the work of the business or undertaking is carried out by fewer than 20 workers and is not within a ‘high-risk’ sector or industry, the relevant PCBU will not be required to decide whether to establish a committee. Where a request to establish a committee is not considered by a PCBU for this reason, the persons who made the request must be given written notice to this effect within a reasonable time. If work is carried out by 20 workers or more, or is ‘high-risk’, a PCBU will have two months to decide whether it will establish a committee for all or part of the business or undertaking. Written notice of the PCBU’s decision will need to be made “as soon as practicable” to workers with an interest in the decision. A PCBU will be able to decide not to establish a committee where it is satisfied that the worker partic-

ipation practices it has in place already provide workers with reasonable opportunities to “participate effectively in improving work health and safety in the business or undertaking on an ongoing basis”. A PCBU will need to give written notice of a decision not to establish a committee,

together with the reasons for the decision and advice that the refusal may be raised as an issue under the conflict resolution provisions of the Act (see Subpart 6 of Part 3). Again, not meeting these obligations will be an offence, and will give rise to liability for a fine of up to $25,000 (or $5,000 if the PCBU is an individual).

Ella McLean is a Law Clerk and Joss Opie is a Senior Associate in the national employment team at Buddle Findlay, one of New Zealand’s leading commercial law and public law firms with offices in Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch. Either can be contacted for advice on the Act, or health and safety more generally

New safety bill

more practical New legislation for health and safety is being made more practical says the country’s leading business advocacy group

hanges to the Health and Safety Reform Bill will help small businesses, farmers and others provide safer workplaces, BusinessNZ Chief Executive Phil O’Reilly says. The draft legislation continues to require those controlling a workplace to do everything reasonably practicable to keep it safe. However, among other areas, it now clarifies that: • the area where work is being undertaken on a farm will be categorised as a workplace, while areas where work is not being undertaken will not be categorised as a workplace – this addresses

September/October – 2015

the concern of farmers being liable for people such as hunters or trampers present in non-working areas of a farm • small businesses with fewer than 20 employees, in lower risk occupations, will not be required to have safety reps. Mr O’Reilly says the amended provisions helped address concerns about unfair liability and compliance for small business. “The new draft Bill also makes clearer the issue of control over a workplace,” he believes. The ‘person conducting a business or undertaking’ (PCBU), with the primary duty for safety under the new

law, will usually be a business entity, such as a company, but may be an individual in the cases of sole trader or self-employed person. “This makes it clearer where the primary duty for safety is.” The new Bill also responds to concerns about the weight of penalties where an accident results in death, Mr O’Reilly maintains, with provision for guidance to courts requiring

them to consider this serious charge when sentencing. “It is positive that the new legislation has been drafted from a sound base and has been further improved in responding to issues raised by business,” he adds. “It will also be important for WorkSafe to work with business in a non-bureaucratic way to put in place systems to ensure business can actually comply with the new rules.”

FOCUS >> Health and Safety at Work Act

A major

step forward

he passing of the Health and Safety Reform Bill marks a major step in addressing New Zealand’s unacceptable workplace death and injury toll, says Workplace Relations and Safety Minister Michael Woodhouse. “This is the first significant reform of New Zealand’s health and safety laws in more than 20 years. It delivers a system that strikes the right balance between safe workplaces for workers and unnecessary red tape on businesses,” Mr Woodhouse says. “Under the new law, the duty for all businesses, regardless of size and risk level, to have effective worker engagement and participation practices has been strengthened. However there will be some flexibility in how a business can choose to do this, to suit their size and need.”

The new law emphasises that everyone in the workplace is responsible for health and safety. “It recognises the complexity of modern working arrangements, moving away from the narrow employer/employee focus, to ensure that everyone has an appropriate level of responsibility to make sure their health and safety, and that of others, is protected at work,” he believes. Every worker deserves to come home safely each day and this new law will help reach the goal of a 25 percent reduction in workplace deaths and injuries by 2020, Mr Woodhouse adds. “But it will also require leadership and commitment from businesses and workers alike to change our culture and attitude towards health and safety in every day work practices.”

Introducing Innovative Ceiling Systems, the safest, most efficient answer to fall prevention

brian@icsltd.co.nz, 0800 629 464 6637 www.isn.co.nz

FOCUS >> Health and Safety at Work Act

When farce becomes tragedy The farce created by the government’s ham-fisted changes to the Health and Safety Reform Bill is a tragedy according to CTU Policy Director and Economist Bill Rosenberg

he Pike River tragedy created a chance in a generation when seemingly everyone agreed that New Zealand’s appalling workplace safety record must change. The government had the mandate and authority to say to all New Zealanders: you know we must change, we will take the decisions needed for real change, and we will support you in that change. It will require change in the way the regulator, businesses and everyone in them think and act. But it will pay off in less pain, fewer grieving families and more productive workplaces. The new law was to have been the cornerstone of change. Instead it will be remembered as a farce about worm farms and paper hanging being higher risk than quarries, explosive handling, sheep, cattle or dairy farms. The government has lost its moral authority and risks squandering this unique opportunity. Rather than hear the message that change is essential, people will see the law as a result of powerful interest groups clamouring for exceptions – “everyone has to change except me, no matter how many people have died in my industry”. How can our health and safety culture change in such an environment? It didn’t have to be like this. The government commissioned an Independent Workplace Health and Safety taskforce, of which I was a member along with three business representatives, two safety experts and an experienced secretariat, to design a new health and safety system that would bring down our terrible toll of death, injury and disease. Its report recommended a balanced and comprehensive set of actions saying: “It is our firm conviction that the government must adopt the full range of recommendations made in this report if we

September/October – 2015

representative legislation and levels of engagement operating in comparable jurisdictions.” As with many of are to deliver the outcomes that all its findings, this was consistent with working New Zealanders deserve.” those of the Royal Commission. Picking it apart is folly. Health and safety is about minAll the government had to do is imising risk to people in the follow the recommendations of its workplace. But Pike River showed own taskforce. As time has dragged there is another risk: the failure on it has piece by piece weakened of the health and safety ‘system’ many recommendations, often on itself – laws, regulations, regulator, scant evidence. Some have margin- businesses’ and workers’ practices, al detrimental effect, others more education and support. substantial. However the current The system itself must be dedebacle is over a crucial element: signed to be fail-safe. It is sometimes the participation and engagement described as a three-legged stool. If of workers in their own health and one leg fails, the stool will collapse. safety. The three legs are the government The taskforce found that “Worker as regulator, businesses providing engagement in health and safety leadership and management sysis generally ineffective and often tems, and workers participating in virtually absent. New Zealand falls designing and monitoring workwell short of the strength of worker place systems and safeguarding

“The government has lost its moral authority and risks squandering this unique opportunity” CTU Policy Director and Economist Bill Rosenberg

themselves and their co-workers. Multiple failures System failure is not just a theoretical possibility: the Royal Commission found all three legs failed at Pike River. When all three are acting effectively with a degree of independence, however, if one starts to fail another can sound the alarm and take action. At Pike River, the employer failed in multiple ways including excessive focus on production, financial problems and attracting investors rather than safety. Lack of expertise and cost reduction was described as “innovation” – such as putting a vital extractor fan in the bottom of the mine where it would be destroyed by the explosion. Inspectors had been starved for resources for years and worked under the principle that employers should be relied on to do the right thing. This was brought about by lack of funding and political support from successive governments for the stronger stance that was needed. The inspectors had lost both the ability and the independence to act. Worker participation was weakened by non-enforcement, employer hostility, and production pressures reflected in pay systems. The taskforce, and the Bill when introduced into Parliament, recommended that workers should have the right to elect Health and Safety representatives if they wished. This was not mandatory for all workplaces: it was only if a worker requested it, but the right to request applied to all firms and industries without exception. The recommendation should not be controversial: since 2003, workers in New Zealand have had the right to request such elections in all workplaces. For firms larger than 30 employees, representatives have by law been the default worker participation system, and in smaller firms, workers have the right to them on request. Not all have them. The new law is based on an Aus-

SHOWCASE

ADVERTISING ENQUIRIES PLEASE CALL 09 360 3727 OR EMAIL JACQUELINE.WATTERS@THOMSONREUTERS.COM

tralian model law which requires sidise the training, which I estimate representatives on request. The UK would cost well under $1 million a and many European countries with year. much better workplace health and NEWrecords PRODUCT safety than usRELEASE have similar Practical problems systems. But there are also severe practical Leading researchers includ- difficulties with the amendments. ing David Walters in the U.K. and It is impossible in practice to deterMichael Quinlan and Richard John- mine risk on an industry basis with stone in Australia have found that sufficient reliability for such crucial health and safety representative policy purposes. As the taskforce systems are effective in raising found, our data on workplace health health and safety performance. No and safety is poor. Where data exists other research-backed worker par- it is largely about injury whereas ticipation systems were found by occupational disease is a far greater the taskforce, though good worker killer (estimated at 600-900 deaths SAFETY AND APPAREL excited announce theessential new Oliver participation practice may wellisexist pertoyear) and is an conAT 45 series with the Oliver SOFTstride® comfort system with in other forms in some firms. sideration in safeguarding workers’

OLIVER FOOTWEAR ADDS EVEN MORE UNDERFOOT COMFORT AND STYLE TO AT45 SERIES FOOTWEAR underfoot cushioning that softens and absorbs impact with a

There is a simple way for layer of open-cell low-density urethane foamthe in the insole that contours to foot shape. government to regain higher moral ground: implement what its own Oliver’s SOFTstride® provides superior protection, reassurance and comfort to get through long working hours without Taskforce recommended and wasbeing in weighed down, making it the ultimate in work boot comfort. its original Bill, receiving widespread The new AT 45 Non-Metallic series features premium watersupport” resistant leathers, hi-impact non-metallic safety toecaps in the Health and NATUREform® safety representatives health –and traditional wide profile 45%safety. lighterThe thanminister steel have specific duties powers says the high0risk category will be yet exceeding safetyand standards.

not available to all workers, must extended to include asbestos and Oliver COMFORT cushion® Impact Absorption protects the other receive training to carry out these silica dust, but there are many foot, while Odorban™ Control Technology protects the boot responsibilities, are protected from possible sources of exposure. lining from odour, and deterioration. reprisals if they act staining in good faith The data also suffers from unand can be removed for using their der-reporting did not and includes EH The AT 45 series outsole will resist 130oC heat (two-thirds powers improperly (though Aus- make an ACC claim on reasonably (Electrical Hazard) protection. tralian regulators say they have not serious injuries according to one The such AT 45problems). Non-Metallic Series includes had Representastudy ofa 150mm farming) Zip-Sided and there are boot (pictured) with a TECtuff® toe bumper protects tives can therefore bring important many other that problems. Wide indusknowledge and commitment to trysided categories may have passably against scuffing, as well as elasticand lace-up boots the good data for injuries (but not ocin aworkplace. range of colours. The government’s changes have cupational disease) but inescapably Safety and Apparel drawn a line at 20 workers in the include some subsectors with low offers highly competitive workplace. Below that number, risk and some with high risk, creatpricing a fullonly to “high ing the kinds of absurdities we have the rulesacross will apply size range, including risk” workplaces. There are multiple seen. half sizes. A 30-day problems with this. Most importantThe data at a sufficiently narrow Comfort Guarantee ly, it is wrong in principle to exclude subsector level is unreliable and allows wearers toofreturn arbitrarily hundreds thousands of not fit for critical decision-making. boots within 30 daysfrom of being In any case annual injury or fatality New Zealand workers purchase (with receipt able to choose effective worker par- rate data does not tell the whole ticipation story. For example, rates may be and tag)practices. for full refund is also inconsistent: why should unacceptably high in some seasons orIt exchange. small firms (which are known to (such as during calving) but low at have poorer health and safety per- other times, giving a below-threshformance than larger firms) have a old annual average. Ultimately it is ‘risk’ criterion applied to them when impossible in practice to identify it is not applied to large firms? Why ‘high risk’ without drawing arbitrary is a representative a burden when lines. It becomes political risk rather many small firms desperately need than risk to workers. the training they bring? If cost is an issue the government should sub4 SAFEGUARD M AY/J UNE 2015 Continued on page 24

NATIONWIDE SALES SAFETY SPECIALISTS SAFETY & APPAREL LTD commenced operation as a small regional safety specialist supplier in the Coromandel region in early 2002. Since those small beginnings the company has established a loyal national following of customers and provides distribution of PPE and PPC overnight nationally. The company has a team of dedicated Sales Safety Specialists throughout the country in order to provide customers with advice and recommendations for their PPE and PPC choices. This team is backed up by our customer support team located in our main distribution centre based in Te Rapa in Hamilton. The company is also supported by our key supply partners to provide customers with on-site training education seminars and tool box training as required. The company in turn provides in-house and on-site porta count respirator fit testing, height safety equipment servicing and testing and portable gas detection equipment calibration and servicing. We are pleased to announce that we have now opened a safety showroom in Penrose. Safety & Apparel Ltd has safety showrooms located at: • 706 Great South Road, Penrose, Auckland. • 82 Vickery Street, Te Rapa, Hamilton. • 40 Carmen Road, Hornby, Christchurch. This is backed up by overnight courier service from our distribution centres in Te Rapa and Hornby for safety products and apparel that are represented in our catalogue.

www.isn.co.nz

FOCUS >> Health and Safety at Work Act Continued from page 23

Other practical hurdles include determining the position of firms covering multiple sectors (such as a farm engaged in cropping, cattle farming and tourism) and how and when workers are counted given that the threshold is for a ‘business or undertaking’, not a firm. Workers may be permanent employees, contractors, temporary employees or some types of volunteer. A farm with a handful of permanent workers may have well over 20 during the year, including seasonal peaks with contractors or temporary staff carrying out shear-

ing, harvesting and other jobs. The minister says that the employers in small firms still must have effective worker engagement if they do not have a representative system. But there is an almost identical duty under the current law and the evidence is that far too many employers don’t effectively engage their workers. Such a vague requirement is very difficult for inspectors to enforce. But also think of the three-legged stool. A worker participation system that depends on the skills, knowledge and goodwill of the employer is sub-

ject to failure if the chief executive or other key manager changes or if the firm comes under financial or production pressure (like Pike River). It lacks the independence that is essential for each leg of the stool: if the employer fails in its duties, then almost certainly an employer-created worker participation system will fail with it. The representative system is established good practice. Employers have the option to persuade their workers that they have a better system, but a fallback must be available to all.

There is a simple way for the government to regain higher moral ground: implement what its own taskforce recommended and was in its original Bill, receiving widespread support. Make health and safety representatives available to all workers who request them.

will incentivise everyone who has an ability to influence the risks faced by workers to ensure they do their part. For farmers, that means a legal obligation to manage the risks within their control for all contractors and staff. The application of legal duties has also been expanded to include any person who holds a governance position in a business like a partner, trustee or director. In many cases that will mean farmers’ family members, as well as farm owners. All this is backed by significantly higher maximum fines and strengthened regulator oversight,

whether you’re working in a highrisk industry or not. These are not small or insignificant implications for farmers; nor are they the only thing being done to make our farms safer. Together we will continue to work hard to make this a reality.

Bill Rosenberg is Policy Director and Economist at the Council of Trade Unions

Farmers not sidestepping health and safety reform The rural community is committed to workplace safety says Katie Milne

he Health and Safety Reform Bill has grabbed many recent headlines because of what is deemed a high-risk industry - and what is not. Because most farming industries fall on the low-risk side, many people seem to have rushed to a judgement that farmers are excluded from these reforms. This is simply not the case. The reforms are designed to improve the safety of every industry and every workplace. Farms included. What’s more, the bill passed by Parliament is welcomed by Federated Farmers for the very reason it will further help our members to address the high level of workplace incidents and fatalities on our farms.

dress this. Federated Farmers’ focus to date has been on gaining acceptance by the sector of its poor track record and raising awareness of the key risks on New Zealand farms. Something we’ve found very effective is sharing the circumstance and causes of safety incidents within the sector. Another key initiative has been to team up with WorkSafe and industry associations to identify and share best practice safety management. Most farming industries falling outside the classification of high risk, and therefore not requiring an employee safety representative if under 20 employees, does not mean the reform Bill will not force further changes on our farms.

Farmers know this performance is not good enough. They – and Federated Farmers – accept there is a problem, and the changes being brought about by the Health & Safety Reform Bill are just some of the ways that we’ll continue to ad-

Its reforms are much broader than that. This legislation is about supporting all industries to provide a safer environment for all workers. It strengthens the current regulatory framework in a number of ways and

September/October – 2015

Katie Milne is a Board Member of Federated Farmers, a membershipbased organisation consisting of 24 provinces and seven industry groups encompassing some 26,000 members

FOCUS >> Health and Safety at Work Act

A missed

opportunity Denise Roche believes that the Health and Safety at Work Act isn’t as strong as it could and should be

he final passage of the Health and Safety Reform Bill through the legislative process in Parliament at the end of August was accompanied by drama and farce – and the raw grief of families of loved ones who had lost their lives at work. Their grief was raw and a stark reminder to politicians of our duty to create laws that protect our citizens. The parents, partners and children of men who had died in forestry accidents and in the Pike River mine tragedy came to Parliament to ask the government to pass a law stronger than the 1992 Health and Safety in Employment Act – and for a law that would keep all workers safe in whatever industry they worked. They were very disappointed. When the Bill was introduced in

March 2014 it received cross-party support. Although it was complex it started off with a clear vision of what needed to be done to achieve the goal of reducing workplace accidents by 25 percent by 2020 – and the government’s interim measure of a 10 percent reduction by 2016. The Greens fully supported this target as we acknowledge that our country’s health and safety record has been woeful. Just under 300 people were killed at work over the last five years and according to the 2013 Independent Taskforce on Health and Safety, the annual death toll is around four in every 100,000 workers. Between 500 and 800 more people die every year from chronic diseases

“New Zealanders are twice as likely to die at work as Australians and three times more likely than workers in the UK,” says Green Party spokesperson for Industrial Relations Denise Roche

Continued on page 26

www.isn.co.nz

FOCUS >> Health and Safety at Work Act Continued from page 25

improvements (extending responsicaused by workplace conditions bility to PCBUs, higher penalties for and ACC receives about 200,000 breaches, etc) the third essential claims annually for work accidents. element – worker participation – is New Zealanders are twice as likely compromised in the law. Where to die at work as Australians and worker participation is outlined in three times more likely than work- this legislation, it is essentially parers in the UK. The stark truth is that ticipation on the bosses’ terms. citizens in those countries are safer at work than in our own. Sadly, I predict that this Bill, watered down by the National Party, will not deliver the desperately needed change in culture required. It won’t change the culture in many Employers are essentially able to workplaces from a ‘she’ll be right’ at- determine the work groups that titude to one where employees and Health and Safety Representatives employers keep health and safety will cover, and for workers in busion the job front foremost on their nesses deemed to be ‘low risk’ with minds. fewer than 20 employees the right The Resource ManageIt won’t because, as the Transport to request a Health and Safety Repment Act (RMA) the Na-This and Industrial Relations committee resentative has and been removed. heard from various expertstional during barrier to Environmental employee representation the hearings process, there are sends a signal that the concerns of Standards for Assessing three essentials necessary to create the staff can only be raised with the Contama workplace culture of safety:and Managing approval of the employer. • businesses need to show inants inTheSoilgovernment’s to ProtectdeterminaHuman leadership tion to ensure there is a loophole Health for (NES) the key pieces • we need a strong regulator small are and medium-sized busi• and, crucially, we need aof system nesses saw the Minister to Michael legislation applicable Air, where workers are able to par- Woodhouse release a ludicrous set Land and Water manageticipate in their own health and of criteria to determine ‘high risk’ ment inand ‘low risk’New Zealand. safety systems in the workplace. industries. It excluded occupations and activCrucial compromise ities like tree pruning, demolition, GSL works within the farming rules from of And while this Bill does make some beef, sheep and dairy

being ‘high risk’. However, it deemed worm farming, installing curtains and breeding cats as ‘high risk.’ The dairy farming sector alone employs around 28,000 staff, and many, if not most, would have fewer than 20 workmates. And over the last five years there have been 104 deaths in

“Sadly, I predict that this Bill, watered down by the National Party, will not deliver the desperately needed change in culture required” the agriculture sector, so it’s hardly a low-risk sector. As if to sheet home the dangers, the day after the Bill was passed another farm worker was killed on a quad bike. According to the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, 97 percent of New Zealand businesses are small businesses and small businesses are 35 percent more likely to have accidents than larger businesses. Yet the workers in small businesses are not entitled to elect a workmate delegated to look out for their health and safety. Many of the men who died in the Pike River tragedy worked for small businesses. Certainly, businesses can and should lead health and safety improvements, but I remain sceptical that that will happen voluntarily on

the scale needed if small to medium-sized businesses are excluded from some of the provisions in the Bill. I acknowledge that many industries have been working really hard to reduce accidents. It has been heartening to see the reduction in fatalities in the forestry sector over the last two years – but this follows on from a very public campaign led by the NZCTU and a subsequent independent health and safety inquiry and several high-profile court cases. As an aside, I guess we have to wonder about how effective Worksafe NZ is in its compliance role, given that there have now been two successful private prosecutions where the regulator declined to take the cases. The Health and Safety Reform legislation was a once-in-a-generation opportunity to radically improve our effective health and safety laws. The Greens are disappointed that the National government wasted that opportunity, and that more workers will continue to be killed or injured at work than if National had supported best practice legislation. Denise Roche is Green Party spokesperson for Industrial Relations

the above pieces of legisla-

info@geosciences.co.nz www.geosciences.co.nz +64 (0)9 476 0454 26

September/October – 2015

ENVIRONMENT

Air Springs eliminate noise,

harshness and vibration

ne of the most direct ways to cure noise, vibration and harshness (NVH) issues in commercial and industrial buildings is to cut the problem off at its source. Factory and processing plant owners and facility owners and managers can now install relatively inexpensive simple inflatable or solid rubber mounts to isolate the source of the trouble before investing in extensive sound-deadening materials or requiring staff to wear personal protection equipment in affected areas. Inflatable Airmount Air Springs and complementary solid-engineered fabric and rubber Marsh Mellow springs are already proven globally in applications, ranging from extreme isolation of operating tables in hospitals and computer and electronics installations through to effective dampening of the din and shaking created by

huge and heavy shakers, crushers, metal stamping, compressors and generators in Industrial plant. Isolation efficiencies of up to 99 percent have also been attained beneath common sources of NVH in buildings, ranging from emergency electricity generators and HVAC plants in high-rise buildings through to a swimming pool in an exclusive hotel that was mounted on air springs to ensure its glassy surface was isolated from disruptive trains in nearby tunnels and other heavy vehicle traffic. The NVH problem is almost universal throughout the design, engineering and construction of industrial and commercial buildings – it’s a workplace hazard to the human occupants of buildings, disrupting employee comfort and safety. Airmounts are available in an expanded range of sizes which can individually support weights ex-

A broad variety of commercial and industrial plant can be mounted on Firestone Airmount isolators, ranging from vibrating HVAC units and generators through to motors, shakers, crushers, compressors and computerised and telecommunications technology

tending from under 100kg up to more than 40,000kg. Models range from palm-sized to nearly a metre across, which have been used as actuators to lift mining draglines for maintenance. Airmounts contain no internal moving parts to wear, or metal

springs or surfaces to corrode or break, says James Maslin, National Marketing Manager for isolation and actuation specialist Air Springs Supply Pty Ltd, the Australian distributor of Firestone industrial products. “They are extraordinarily tough, being manufactured by Firestone in exactly the same way as the Air Springs used in the suspensions of luxury coaches, heavy trucks, and express trains such as NSW’s XPTs and France’s TGVs.” In essence, Airmounts are highly engineered balloons which are carefully constructed and permanently installed to deliver a range of performance demanded across a very broad spectrum of needs ranging from suspension of a 30kg computerised control panel to total suspension of the entire 100-tonne bulk of a huge motor, crusher, press or production line or entire generators and HVAC plants.

www.isn.co.nz

ENVIRONMENT

Combining control and safety to minimise

production downtime

One of the world’s leading single-site producers of medium density fibreboard found a state-of-the art solution that emphasised control and safety when it updated its aging plant

elson Pine Industries Ltd faced an intriguing dilemma when it came to updating an aging plant that operated 24/7, processing the radiata pine grown in the Nelson region’s plantation forests. One of the world’s largest single site producers of medium density fibreboard (MDF), the company was determined to keep pace with industry-wide improvements in quality, recovery rates and safety. Control and safety were of paramount importance in a plant that never stops, according to Nelson Pine Industries Automation Engineer Ian Craw. “To upgrade the chip mill we decided to start at the whole backbone of control to take advantage of advancing technologies and meet current safety standards.” The chip mill is a large part of the site where logs are unloaded from trucks for processing, its two pivot cranes and drum debarker handling 300 tonnes of logs per hour. Control and safety are critically important in the chip mill so the

September/October – 2015

first stage of the upgrade involved replacing the existing PLC-5 hardware platform with a GuardLogix Integrated Safety System. GuardLogix offers integrated safety, discrete motion, drive and process control in the same controller, explains Rockwell Automation Account Manager Sean Doherty. “Nelson Pine was particularly innovative in their approach,” he

large drum debarker, which rotates the logs, removing bark before they enter the chipper. Out-dated variable speed drives were replaced with eight, 90kW PowerFlex 753 drives in a master/ slave configuration, receiving their speed/torque reference via the DLR and achieving a Stop Category 0, (via safe torque off ) to Cat3/PLd. “The integrated safety provided

adds. “We often see safety systems bolted on to the control systems that may meet safety requirements but impact other business objectives, such as production rates and downtime.” This type of solution was discounted early in discussions with Nelson Pine and the chip mill building was split into two geographical safety zones, using some of the latest safety guard locking switches with RFID technology for controlling and monitoring zones. The first safety zone incorporates a

by zone control allows the plant to shut down one zone while the other is still operating as usual, delivering improved production rates,” Mr Doherty says. “The goal is zero harm but we also wanted to minimise impact to production schedules so we suggested a solution that helps achieve this.” The second safety zone incorporates safe speed monitoring of the main 1.8MW chipper motor and safe position monitoring of the 11kV motor breaker to confirm lockout/ tagout (LOTO) has been performed

“When upgrading equipment it was a priority to meet current safety standards”

before access is granted into the hazard zone. “When upgrading equipment it was a priority to meet current safety standards,” Mr Craw emphasises. “We are well on the way to complying with the Machine Safety Standard EN ISO 13849, with the goal to achieve PLd across most of the site in the coming years.” The site contains many hundreds of metres so an Ethernet/IP network was used to reduce both the amount of cabling required and the installation times, with fibre running the longest legs. Utilising Device Level Rings (DLRs) achieved complete integration of the control and safety system, the ring topology providing high availability of the safety network with high resiliency. Various DLRs were run to different parts of the site connecting with field safety devices, bringing the information back to one centralised safety processor that monitors the various processes. One of the huge benefits of the solution is being able to have visi-

The safety zone control provides integrated safety that allows plant to be shut down in one zone while the other is in operation bility remotely, Mr Craw adds. “We use PanelView Plus as the operator interface for fault-finding and monitoring equipment out in the field,” he notes. “We had to use multiple software systems to try to diagnose an issue in our previous system, but now both the control and safety code are easily accessed and visible through ControlLogix.”

ControlLogix systems use a common control engine with a common development environment to provide high performance in an easy-to-use environment. Tight integration between the programming software, controller, and I/O modules reduces development time and cost, both at commissioning and during normal operation, while providing standard and safety

control in the same chassis. In addition to the PowerFlex 753 drives used on site, Nelson Pine is also using PowerFlex 525 drives with safe torque off and ethernet capabilities, reducing both commissioning and fault-finding time. The advantage of using GuardLogix is the ability to edit and modify code on the run, Mr Craw says. “Trying to reduce production downtime during commissioning was a key outcome from my point of view because there are several aspects of the plant that run 24 hours a day, seven days a week almost every day of the year,” he explains. “Machinery in the chip mill operates 24 hours a day, so once we had GuardLogix up and running, we were able to add hardware and edit safety code on the fly, which gave us significant production advantages.” Nelson Pine also used the Safety Automation Builder tool to facilitate the planning of safety systems to achieve the required safety performance level. This tool leverages the industry’s most complete offering of safety

Setting the standard for Quality and Reliability. We have been designing and manufacturing high quality safety and medical equipment for over 40 years, so you can trust QSI to deliver you the right product and the right advice to keep you and your workers safe.

products, utilising widely accepted best practices to help companies build a complete safety solution. “For years everyone has been saying that system control and integration is going to become more plug and play but now ControlLogix is really bringing it to that level,” Mr Craw adds. The new control and safety solution in the chip mill has proved so successful that Nelson Pine is planning to roll-out the solution across the entire plant. “Ultimately I have used other safety hardware previously and because they only focus on safety it makes it difficult when you are looking at the bigger picture,” Mr Craw admits. The Nelson Industries plant involves a multitude of safety inputs/ outputs and a lot of other systems aren’t built to that type of scale, he notes. “We have not only achieved a suitable performance level relatively easily, but also minimised production downtime, which is of paramount importance to our plant,” Mr Craw says.

Height Safety Equipment:

First Aid & Medical Supplies:

We love to work alongside our customers, developing tailor-made products that meet your requirements and are standards-compliant. We are here to listen, collaborate, offer advice and find solutions. In today’s work environment we understand the need to ensure your safety systems are robust and compliant. Talk to us for the right advice and the best equipment for the job.

Spill Solutions:

www.qsisafety.com

www.isn.co.nz

MANAGEMENT

Adopting a safety app-titude Health and safety is going viral as more and more organisations develop apps designed to take advantage of the seemingly endless advances in mobile technology day,” Mr McMullan insists. “Reporting of health and safety incidents is a key pillar to helping us understand the areas we can improve – it provides greater visibility of what is happening on the transport network, in our offices and on our projects at any given time.” Through proactive benchmarking of health and safety performance, the reporting tool helps to paint a true picture of health and safety trends over time, Mr McMullan says. Dashboards are available showing lead and lagreporting helps Organisations have access to an information portal “The consistent indicators identify and address the root cause of incidents and then assess the effectiveness of corrective actions – a first for the New Zealand roading industry,” he explains. “The data provides non-identifying industry trends that demonstrate where we are performing well, those areas we need to improve.” A simple-to-use reporting app that allows for real-time reporting of incidents that occur in the office or on a project site regardless of employer, the tool is cloud-based so it Uses geo-location functionality to provide mapped Dashboards are conﬁgurable to individual users to can be accessed through a range of incident information down to street view level produce bespoke information mobile and tablet devices. The app was launched in January he Ministry of Business, In- concept and present their tech- achieving a good health and safety 2015 and was an immediate success, novation and Employment nical prototype and proposal for reporting culture and then devel- with more than 5,674 downloads to (MBIE) is the latest organisa- evaluation, with each shortlisted re- oped the app in collaboration with date and the subsequent develoption to enter the app race, having spondent receiving a $75,000 grant the Transport Agency’s Zero Harm ment of an additional reporting app issued a request for proposals (RFP) from MBIE to undertake this work. Industry Group, ensuring it met the for Civil Contractors New Zealand in June for the development of a MBIE will then select its preferred needs of industry during the various (CCNZ). mobile app and web service that partner and, if an agreement is development, testing and review Launched to industry during will allow emergency services in reached, that partner will develop phases. the CCNZ Conference in August, New Zealand to better respond to its solution – if agreement cannot be The NZTA needed a solution that: the CCNZ reporting app allows those in need of urgent help. reached with the preferred partner, • allowed one way for all NZTA small-to-medium businesses direct The RFP differs from traditional MBIE may negotiate an agreement staff to report incidents as well access to an award-winning health Users can access all reports relevant to their interests Comparisons can be made for effective benchmarking requests for proposals because two with the other partner. as those from the organisation’s and safety reporting tool at no cost or three respondents will be selectMBIE’s initiative follows the supply chain and has already been downloaded ed, based on their qualifications, to NZ Transport Agency’s (NZTA) • was available to all for free more than 528 times. participate in a proof-of-concept award-winning development of its • provided actionable intelligence It’s therefore not surprising that process. Zero Harm Reporting App to help for the Transport Agency to ef- the Zero Harm Reporting Tool app The RFP did not specify the re- with the reporting of health and fectively carry out its statutory won the Impac Best Significant quirements for the service or focus safety incidents. responsibilities Health and Safety Initiative by a on price – selected respondents will Developed together with an in- • would let the NZTA test how the large organisation at the New Zeawork alongside emergency service dustry working group, the app organisation’s risk assessments land Workplace Health and Safety provider subject matter experts to allows for real-time reporting of were performing. Awards recently held at Auckland’s develop the services’ requirements incidents that happen in the office, “The NZ Transport Agency is Sky City. “We are delighted that and to create a technical prototype on the network, or on a project site, committed to leading the industry our focus on improving health and and service proposal. regardless of employer. towards zero harm in the workplace safety for all our people has been The respondents will then indeNZTA Manager Zero Harm Martin so that all employees and contrac- given national recognition,” Mr Mcpendently develop their proof of McMullan identified the barriers to tors go home safe and healthy every Mullan says.

September/October – 2015

ENVIRONMENT

Flashing blue lights saving

lives in icy conditions Award-winning New Zealand company Solar Bright is lighting the way in providing health and safety markers to help reduce the winter road toll

olar Bright has come up with groundbreaking icy-road warning technology with solar-powered blue road markers that flash blue when conditions are icy to warn motorists and prevent crashes, replacing old 20th century static signage which many motorists don’t take any notice of. The flashing blue markers are a world-leading development that is helping prevent crashes and they are attracting interest from all over the world. Solar Bright, a 2015 Champion Canterbury Business Award finalist, holds patents and

the road markers in Dunedin and Central Otago 82 percent of traffic slowed down when the markers were activated. Questionnaire respondents support the markers and want to see more blue markers in ice-prone areas, Ms Martin maintains. “We have had a lot of serious interest from other New Zealand cities and regions, insurance companies, St John, police, shopping malls, airports, councils, companies, blue chip companies, hospitals, fire departments and companies around New Zealand,” she says.

read traffic, monitor carbon dioxide emissions and light levels, which will become invaluable for roading maintenance, police, government and transport statisticians.” She believes Solar Bright’s blue markers can help the New Zealand economy and reduce government spend relating to hospital bills. “Road accidents in New Zealand are enormously costly and we are sure we have reduced the accident rate as we have overwhelming evidence that the markers slowed drivers down in black ice conditions and we have no doubt saved lives.”

trademarks for the blue markers in 96 countries. At least 800 blue road markers are already installed on state highway one around Dunedin, on state highway eight and in Central Otago. Solar Bright Managing Director Nicola Martin says after installing

Ms Martin adds that the company is trialling with the Tasmanian government on their roads and also talking to people in the UK, the US, Canada, Russia, Europe and Japan. “We soon hope to introduce a smart intelligent marker with telemetry capabilities, able to count,

Solar Bright’s Pat Martin invented the technology in response to a request for a sustainable device to warn motorists of road ice. National data shows about 84 percent of motorists exceeded speed limits in general, and about 79 percent do so in icy conditions.

E b N’t

Do sEr lO

Solar Bright’s shining stars Nicola and Pat Martin have developed revolutionary solar-powered blue markers that warn drivers of icy road conditions Transport figures show that loss of control is a factor in about 40 percent of road deaths and almost 40 percent of serious injuries. The Solar Bright illuminated blue markers significantly helps raise driver awareness of the dangers of upcoming black ice. The Solar Bright blue markers could go viral globally as nearly 1.3 million people are killed on the world’s roads each year, up to 50 million people are injured and many remain disabled for life, costing developing countries at least $100 billion a year.

• Dyneema® fibre offers unprecedented performance in protecting the hand from lacerations. • Dyneema® fibre is fifteen times stronger than steel on a weight-forweight basis. • Thermal conductivity keeps hand cool by expelling heat. • Ultra-fine, flexible filaments provide excellent dexterity for delicate tasks. • Excellent durability provides cost effective hand protection solutions.

a E b ePeR kE

CUT 5 LINER

CUT 5 DIPPED

CUT 3 DIPPED

64019

NFT 64027 PU 64028

NFT 64007 PU 64008

For more information contact your safety reseller or Lynn River on 0800 104 568

www.isn.co.nz

MANAGEMENT

Children’s worker safety

checks introduced

The Vulnerable Children Act 2014 requires organisations that provide services to children to conduct safety checks on staff

Those who work with children now have to undergo safety checks

he safety check provisions came into force on 1 July 2015 at the same time as the Regulations that set out the safety check requirements. All State services and all organisations that they fund to provide ‘regulated services’ (including those that only receive partial or indirect funding) now have to: • carry out safety checks on all new ‘children’s workers’ that they employ or otherwise engage (A ‘children’s worker’ is defined in section 23 of the Act; essentially, a children’s worker is a person whose work involves regular or overnight contact with children without parents or guardians being present) • carry out safety checks on existing children’s workers • continue to carry out periodic safety checks every three years. The list of regulated services set out in Schedule 1 of the Act is very broad, encompassing welfare, support, justice, health, education, transport and policing services. Timing The requirements to safety check new and existing children’s workers are being phased in over time: • from 1 July 2015 all new ‘core workers’ must be safety checked before their employment or engagement commences (A ‘core worker’ is a children’s worker who, in the course of their work, will be

September/October – 2015

•

• •

•

alone with children or has prima-

identity documents do not contain a

ry responsibility for, or authority over, children) from 1 July 2016 all new children’s workers (i.e. core and non-core) must be safety checked before their employment or engagement commences by 1 July 2018 all existing core workers must be safety checked by 1 July 2019 all existing children’s workers (i.e. core and non-core) must be safety checked Organisations must also ensure that children’s workers are rechecked every three years.

photograph of the individual, the individual must provide further proof that the documents relate to them. If the individual’s name is different from that on an identity document, name change documentation is also required. The list of acceptable identity documents is set out in the Schedule to the Regulations. The organisation must also search its personnel records to ensure no other person connected to the organisation uses that identity.

Safety check requirements The safety check requirements set out in the new Vulnerable Children (Requirements for Safety Checks of Children’s Workers) Regulations 2015 require organisations to confirm the identity of children’s workers and whether they have any criminal convictions. They will also have to collect and consider other specified information including referee checks. Identity confirmation An effective safety check depends on individuals being who they say they are. Organisations must confirm an individual’s identity either through an electronic identity credential, or through original identity documents (the individual must provide both a primary and secondary identity document). If the

Previous convictions A Police vet of a children’s worker from the New Zealand Police Vetting Service is required unless: • the organisation has obtained a Police vet for that individual in the past three years • the individual belongs to a professional organisation that conducts Police vets of all its new members and of existing members at intervals of not more than three years, or • the individual is currently licensed or registered by a licensing or registration authority that is obliged to obtain a Police vet for the people it licenses or registers as well as for those holding a licence or registration at intervals of not more than three years. Other specified information Organisations that seek to employ or otherwise engage new children’s

workers must conduct interviews with candidates (this can be face to face, by telephone, or by using other communication technologies). They must consider the work history of candidates and must require candidates to provide a summary of their previous five years of employment (if any). Organisations must also require at least one referee that is not related to the individual or part of their extended family, and must contact at least one of the referees provided. For both new and existing children’s workers, the organisation must establish whether the individual has obtained a relevant licence, registration or practising certificate from a licensing or registration authority or is otherwise a member of any relevant professional organisation. The organisation must seek information relevant to the assessment of that individual from at least one of these bodies. Once the details above have been checked, organisations must use this information and any applicable risk assessment guidelines to assess whether the individual poses any risk to the safety of children (and, if so, the extent of that risk). Organisations who do not meet these requirements will commit an offence and will be liable for fines up to $10,000 (for each offence). Organisations will need to carefully consider who at their organisation is a children’s worker and build the safety check requirements into their recruitment and HR processes. Useful guidance material, including a copy of Safer recruitment, safer children, is available from the Children’s Action Plan website. This is the latest in a series of topical legal updates produced by Buddle Findlay, one of New Zealand’s leading commercial law and public law firms with offices in Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch This is the latest in a series of topical legal updates produced by Buddle Findlay, one of New Zealand’s leading commercial law and public law firms with offices in Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch

ACCESS

Perfect prusik for haul or climb Capital Safety has launched the DBI-SALA Rope-Mate Mechanical Prusik, which has been designed and certified to meet an array of local and international standards

he Rollgliss Rope-Mate provides a safe and reliable tamper-proof mechanical prusik that eliminates the use of knots or hitches that could be tied incorrectly. Manufactured from a single self-contained unit without pins or components to lose or work their way loose, its compact and lightweight design ensures excellent handling and performance with no protruding bolts or pins that get in the way. Part of the Rollgliss Technical Rescue range of products, the RopeMate mechanical prusik is load rated for up to 250 kg on a variety of kernmantle ropes. The non-invasive cam locks down onto the rope when required and ensures no rope damage while

maintaining maximum hold. If overloaded, the Rope-Mate is engineered to slip to avoid damage. Constructed from anodised aluminium with a stainless steel axle, the device meets the toughest of conditions and demands providing superior corrosion resistance, strength and durability. “The Rollgliss Rope-Mate provides a simple to rig mechanical prusik that is strong, convenient and ready for use when and where a rope connection is required,” says Oscar Ratalino, Research and Development Manager for Capital Safety Australia & New Zealand. “Its slim profile ensures there are no annoying catch points that can get in the way.” The Rope-Mate mechanical prusik is safe and easy to use. Simply de-

press the locking button, swivel open the cover, insert the rope and slide the cover down till it locks into place. The Rope-Mate can easily and safely be removed or installed at any

point on the rope without the need to remove the device from the karabiner connected to its attachment point, therefore reducing the risk of an accidental drop.

For the latest on health and safety in the workplace, visit

www.isn.co.nz

MANAGEMENT

International experience

provides local lessons

Six decades of servicing business and industry over five continents has taught a major multinational numerous client lessons applicable to New Zealand

hese lessons could be particularly useful in the sectors of business and industry that are undeniably underperforming. Underperformance is often clearly illustrated through occurrence of serious accidents and lack of management control from an occupational health, safety and environment (HSE) risk perspective. It is most often also found that in such underperforming companies employees have a tendency to ignore the HSE rules that are intended to protect them in the workplace. The history or the origins and developmental stages of safety management over the years is well documented. Stage one was when companies reacted to accidents as and when they occurred in a purely reactive manner. By stage two, legislation was created to prescribe minimum legal requirements and related penalties for non-compliance. By stage three, formal HSE management systems were developed to incorporate legal requirements, worldwide HSE practices and principles as well as company or site specific standards. However, businesses soon realised that even with all of the above in place accidents still occurred. Legislators even tweaked the legislation further to incorporate further requirements such as for formal hazard and risk identification – also further risk management requirements. To complement this, further training was prescribed to increase awareness of occupational hazards and risks and control measures that needed to be taken before, during and after the activity. This simultaneously culminated in behaviour-based safety initiatives and drive. NOSA client-user forums globally and companies that were earnestly serious about environmental responsibility and the occupational health and safety of their employ-

September/October – 2015

ees reported that these needs were often not met by international occupational health and safety (OHS) management systems alone. The companies that were really serious about HSE reported that their principle objective was to create a workplace that is healthy and safe to work in. All first-world countries have comprehensive OHS legislation in place. These regulations are periodically revised and updated, as is presently happening across New Zealand with the Health & Safety Reform Bill. However, such revision of law alone cannot make a workplace any safer unless employers identi-

differently from the lawmakers intentions when writing that piece of legislation. After correctly interpreting the requirements, convert the laws into actions and system requirements where necessary. In a formal HSE management system this would be done by creating related objectives and targets. The required corrective action on the objectives and targets may include procedures, work instructions, designation of responsibility or training. All relevant and affected current and new employees need to be aware and informed of the changes. Underpinning principles of

“Although the identification of hazards and risks forms the foundation of a HSE management programme, the true value is derived when determining the necessary control measures, some of which may already be in place, to mitigate each identified risk effectively” fy all the changes, then adopt and implement the changes and new requirements into their OHS management systems as a starting point. Legislation provides positive guidance to some employers whilst for others it may act as a deterrent. In its written form alone, it has no positive impact at all on the workforce. The New Zealand Health & Safety Reform Bill squarely places the main duty of care and legal responsibility liability for the health and safety of workers on the Person Conducting a Business or Undertaking (PCBU). A similar amendment has been in several other countries’ OHS legislation for years. It is absolutely imperative and critical that the revised and/or new legal requirements and OHS clauses are interpreted accurately and correctly. Unfortunately, employers sometimes read it and interpret it

modern OHS laws globally include health and safety leadership, worker engagement and a partnership approach to build safer workplaces. Further failure A further failure identified by clients that have certified systems such as OHSAS18001 and ISO14001 is that these systems are assessed and audited with limited outcomes. They are either told that they are certified because they meet the requirements sufficiently or that there were findings made, and once evidence is presented that the major findings are closed out they will retain their certification for another year. The feedback received by the NOSA global client network feedback indicates that clients would prefer far more detailed specific feedback on the real status and

“Revision of law alone cannot make a workplace any safer unless employers identify all the changes, then adopt and implement the changes and new requirements into their OHS management systems,” says NOSA Vice President, AsiaPacific Region Lance Hiscoe

maturity of their HSE systems and compliance to the related system requirements, such as provided by NOSA star grading audits. Simply put the four key areas are: • completion and incorporation of company-specific risk register • a management system incorporating minimum legal requirements • compliance by company staff – and contractors – to the OHS system requirements • the effectiveness of the overall OHS management system. The trends in first-world companies are that they already have well-documented and developed management systems, and their risk registers are regularly being reviewed and updated when there are either changes in legislation or through operational changes in the company. It is important to acknowledge that a risk register on its own has little value to a company. Although the identification of hazards and risks forms the foundation of a HSE management programme, the true value is derived when determining the necessary control measures, some of which may already be in place, to mitigate each identified risk effectively. Further control measures may

need to be implemented to eliminate and manage the risks more effectively. Provision of these additional measures should be managed through the system of HSE objectives and targets. The NOSA HSE management system has comprehensive guidelines to assist in providing and managing effective measures of control. Thereafter, the client’s main concern is consistent compliance on a day-to-day basis, relating the workplace hazards to the risk control measures that have been put in place. The strength of the system ultimately rests with all those who apply and comply with the standards and procedures which need to be followed when conducting hazardous activities. Thereafter, the common thread among those companies that achieve an excellent level of safety performance each year is effective communication by management across the business. This is further broken down to two-way communication, firstly from those with the most experi-

ence of a particular task or job – for example the employee/operator. He/she should be consulted on what their thoughts and opinions are when a new or a revised standard or procedure is written or applied to the activity, process or machine. Secondly, employees have a wealth of knowledge and experience and it is often very surprising how helpful they can be when their opinion or advice is requested. The influence of the safety culture in a company should never be underestimated. Safety culture is the way in which safety is managed in the workplace, and often reflects the attitudes, beliefs, perceptions and values that employees share in relation to safety. In other words it can be stated as “the way we do safety around here”. It’s a change in Attitudes and Values that will help change the Culture required for real sustainable impact. Changing attitudes and values is not easy, especially when people do not see the need, but changing behaviour is the starting point to achieve this.

In summary, to achieve a safe and healthy work environment, management of the business need to accept and create an awareness that safety is the responsibility of everybody in the workplace and not only the safety manager. Safe practices should never be compromised – not ever! Unsafe practices should not be tolerated irrespective who the transgressor may be. There is no magic pill or quick fix to safety management. It is something that needs to be continuously worked at, after all our businesses are run by people. Safety management is not an “add on”. In fact safety should be treated as an integral part of everything that the business does. Many surveys conducted across a diverse range of industries highlight the fact that effective safety leadership and specifically the role of the individual leader as an area needing improvement. The remedy is to work on building a safety leadership model that focuses on person’s attitudes, behaviour and workplace conditions;

all relating back to the leader/managers and how they influence safety. Risk assessments are helpful, but the most effective risk management system will be the ones where everyone within the organisation understands the risks in their operation, and what needs to be done to report and control them. Through their honest and meaningful involvement and commitment, owners of any business can add value and demonstrate true respect for their most important assets, their people. Lance Hiscoe is Vice President, AsiaPacific Region of NOSA, one of the world’s leading brands in safety, health, environmental and quality (SHEQ) risk management that specialises in creating a healthy and safe environment for the workforce in enterprises ranging from small businesses to large corporations

The revolutionary one system solution providing roof edge protection and a working platform which adapts to suit the job requirement.

2014 Safeguard Winner Silver at NZ Design awards Site Safe awards 2014 finalist 100% NZ Made

Available for purchase and hire.

07 577 6469

info@intaks.co.nz

www.intaks.co.nz www.isn.co.nz

SITE SAFE AWARDS

Small companies,

big achievements

The initiative shown by two small companies in winning awards last year clearly demonstrates that site safety is a major priority in organisations of all shapes and sizes Judges’ Special Award for Safety Leadership Two individuals emerged as keen and avid advocates for excellence in health and safety at Sky Mason Developments, an innovative small company of less than 20 employees in Tairua that operates in many fields including building, sub development and construction. Andre Caleb, Francis Te Manu Wright and Tony Paraire Cameron of Thames Coast Contractors Ltd were contracted to supervise and complete the felling of more than 200 fully grown pines on a steep hillside that Sky Mason Developments purchased to sub-develop and build houses. “We take health and safety very seriously, which in turn has con-

Safe Health and Safety Policy adopted by our company and applied all standards and policies with diligence and enthusiasm,” Mr Mason explains. “Not only did they embrace the company principles, but they implemented and supervised other health and safety standards as the need arose.” Their expertise from the arboriculture industry ensured Sky Mason Developments also benefited from their knowledge. “They were able to share and implement the safety standards required to successfully and safely fell a magnitude of pines in what is commonly recognised as a dangerous trade.” More than 200 fully grown pines were dropped in hazardous terrain where it is steep and slippery

tributed to our excellent minimal incident rate,” company owner Sky Mason says. “We foster a healthy safety environment in which every member of staff takes ownership of health and safety in the work place.” The company incorporates Site Safe polices in all its work places and many members of staff have completed their courses, he adds. “Tony and Manu fully embraced the Site

in places, but there was only one recorded minor injury during the entire tree-felling operation. “An incident report was raised and resulted in Tony and Manu accessing the risk analysis for the tasking and incorporating new procedures to ensure all additional workers were fully trained and competent for the roles they held,” Mr Mason recalls. Tony and Manu regularly updat-

ed their task analysis and called toolbox meetings frequently where workers could discuss potential hazards and safety for the area. “They both worked well with all employees who at times assisted them with tree extraction and chain sawing,” Mr Mason explains. They also ensured everyone signed the Hazard Register daily and were fully aware of any potential hazards and the safety requirements, ensuring all potential hazards were clearly defined and displayed for fellow workers and any visitors. “Within our company they were leaders in developing safety culture,

Sky Mason (centre) celebrates Sky Mason Developments winning the Judges Special Award for Safety Leadership with team members Manu Wright and Tony Cameron

Salute this year’s winners!

his year’s Site Safe Construction Health and Safety Award winners will be announced at Site Safe’s Evening of Celebration at Alexandra Park in Auckland on 11 November. A great way to achieve national recognition for health and safety innovation and leadership, the Site Safe Construction Health and Safety Awards acknowledge people, sites or companies/organisations who have demonstrated innovation and leadership in helping to improve health and safety in the construction industry and related trades and sectors.

September/October – 2015

Various awards will be presented at the Evening of Celebration, along with graduates in the Certificate in Construction Site Safety: 1) The Unitec Safety Innovation Award Small to Medium Business (Small to medium organisation up to 20 employees) This award is for a site or company demonstrating the best new idea or initiative to drive improvements in health and safety systems or behaviours, address or manage a specific hazard, create a design solution to address a problem, or to improve productivity. 2) The AWF Group Safety Innova-

systems and behaviours and their willingness to help other workers to achieve the same standards is to be commended,” Mr Mason says. Their hard work and dedication to health and safety within Sky Mason Developments saw the company sponsor Manu to attend a Site Safe Gold Card Course in September. “Regardless of being contractors to Sky Mason Developments, Tony and Manu shared industry and passion for safety in the work place and have made our company as a whole really step up and drive improvements in all areas of our operations,” Mr Mason maintains. “They were role

tion Award Large Business (Large organisations over 20 employees) This award is for a site or company demonstrating the best new idea or initiative to drive improvements in health and safety systems or behaviours, address or manage a specific hazard, create a design solution to address a problem, or to improve productivity. 3) The Safety Leadership Award (Small, medium or large business) This award is for a site or company where an initiative has been implemented that involves organisational leaders in developing safety culture, making safety positive, encouraging

engagement in health and safety and demonstrating leadership at the highest level. This award is open to organisations of all sizes. Organisational leaders can be from the CEO and senior managers through to site managers, supervisors and foreman. 4) The WorkSafe NZ Safety Contribution Award (Individual or small team) This award is for an individual or small team who has demonstrated an outstanding contribution to health and safety in construction. This award acknowledges those people (or teams) who light the spark in other people’s minds and inspire positive change and action.

models for our other site managers with regards to implementing and adhering to site safety and embracing its culture.” The Unitec Institute of Technology Safety Innovation Award – Small to Medium Business Rupp Consulting Ltd used existing affordable technology to solve access challenges underfloor, within walls, and at height; allowing structural assessment without putting the engineer at risk. Managing Director and Principal Engineer Marc Rupp had undertaken many structural building inspections since starting out on his own nearly three years before the 2014 awards, mostly in relation to earthquake damage and assessment. “Whilst undertaking these I found many incidences where I would have to climb up a ladder or need to view under floors or within roof spaces,” he explains. “I also needed to access areas where a ladder was too small and in order to get to these areas I would have to arrange

Rupp Consulting Ltd Managing Director and Principal Engineer Marc Rupp with his innovative solution to access challenges underfloor, within walls, and at height

access via a cherry picker or similar device, which is time-consuming and expensive for the client.” Mr Rupp therefore decided to find something that would help him undertake surveys, reduce falling and confined space risk, without costing the client significant sums. “I researched available technology and found that a GoPro action sport recording camera could record video

and photographs, was small and lightweight and could be controlled wirelessly by a smart phone or smart device,” he recalls. Inexpensive, they can be attached to the end of a GRP extendable painter’s pole with a mountain bike LED lamp which can also be remotely controlled, providing access ceilings, roofs, subfloor and other normally difficult-to-access places

without having to leave the ground. “I hope from showing my experience of applying new and emerging but existing technology for a different purpose, that others can use this already available technology and benefit like I have from a safer working environment, which also benefits the client in time and cost,” Mr Rupp concludes.

Don’t leave personal protection Certif ication T H IN to chance, we don’t. YOUR K OF IT AS

IN POLICYSURANCE O Read on N PPE for mor e

L E SS

Scan your SmartPhone here to see the entire Prochoice Personal Protection range of products.

IED CERTFIFE SA CT PRODU

E RIA

Standards are set to maintain a quality benchmark, but Standards Certification takes products to the highest level of quality assurance through independent auditing.

TLY AUDITE NEN D PE

R IT

Can you afford not to have Standards Certified Safety products on your work site?

IND IS PRICE

IND E

P E AC E O F M

AFETY STANDA

AS/NZS 1337 ID No 3090 Australian/ New Zealand Standards

Tel 649 622 2361 • Fax 649 523 9773 • nz@paramountsafety.co.nz www.isn.co.nz

LAST WORD >> Management

Why the psychological contract is important to safety A strong safety climate is usually associated with a safer workplace, and a safety climate is hard to achieve without strong employee safety attitudes and overtly safe behaviour

ut what underpins safety attitudes and behaviour? What can organisations do to drive safer attitudes and behaviours, not only in ensuring employee safety but also meeting their increasing responsibilities under the reformed health and safety legislation? Recent research has investigated the influences on the formation of safer attitudes and workplace behaviours. One of the most interesting findings is a link between the psychological contract for safety and safer workplaces. The employment relationship consists of two contracts – the formal employment contract and the psychological contract. The psychological contract refers to the unwritten set of expectations and obligations shared between the employee and the employer. Basically it is the expectations an employee has about the employment relationship that makes them think certain actions will be matched by the employer. The psychological contract has long

terms of a commitment to safety and the establishment of safety systems and practices, and the employee is required to minimise risk and uphold the organisational safety standards. However, research demonstrates the presence of a psychological contract of safety in the thinking of employees and that these underpin the development of safety attitudes and behaviour. This contract refers to often deeply held ideas about the safety obligations and responsibilities that can be inferred from implicit or explicit promises between the two parties. For example, research found there was an unwritten expectation that employees should report safety incidents, and that employers should manage them calmly and non-punitively. This was based on findings that employees might be more willing to report incidents if management did not overreact to them. Another interesting finding is that sometimes management would fail to investigate the haz-

been seen as an important component in deterring employee attitudes and behaviours. Furthermore, research has shown that employers and employees think about the psychological contract in similar ways and that when they do it benefits the organisation. For example, when employees and supervisors agree on how supportive and caring the supervisor is, their expectations are in alignment, and employees perform better. The same principles apply when it comes to safety.

ards and risks reported by employees who in return do not feel an obligation to do so. The inference is that if an employee reports a risk or hazard, the employer should follow it up. In addition, it found that if employers do not treat injured staff well, then employees will reciprocate by taking more time off work than required. A mutual obligation emerged that employers should treat injured employees with compassion, and employees should not take advantage of sick leave. It is clear that there is an unwritten expectation about obligations that determine safer attitudes and behaviours.

How does the psychological contract apply to safety? Safety is often seen as a reciprocal relationship between the employer and employee – the employer has a role in providing a safe workplace in

What should organisations do? What organisations can do is note that a common understanding of the psychological

contract of safety between employees and employers makes a difference to safety behaviours. Consequently, organisations need to invest time and effort into creating an open work environment where dialogue around safety expectations can take place. This discussion around the elements of the psychological contract needs to begin when the relationship is first formed, when the employee is hired, or first partnered with their direct manager or supervisor. Although people do not talk about the “psychological contract” per se, they do discuss issues around safety and what is expected. Line managers and supervisors need to be aware that employees perceive them to embody the employer’s policies and procedures about health and safety in terms of acting through on obligations. If line managers and supervisors have a central role in the development of safety practices and the health and safety induction of the employee it helps build the mutual trust and sense of obligation. Supervisors are then more able to live up to the expectations of the employee and have their expectations returned. Employee expectations of employer obligations do not just come from the policy manual and procedures but from a deeply held understanding of the obligations between the two, and that these ideas contribute to a safer workplace. Moira Howson is a Senior Consultant at PeopleCentric, a team of industrial and organisational psychologists who work with a variety of organisations to maximise employee potential and promote the value of psychology in driving business performance

“The psychological contract refers to the unwritten set of expectations and obligations shared between the employee and the employer”

September/October – 2015

CO M P L I A N C E > > Te l a rc

Are you and your business at risk?

ecently the news media communicated, somewhat inaccurately the notion that the soon to be amended Health and Safety legislation was con-

designed to catch senior business leaders attention. Directors and companies are liable for fines up to $600,000 if it is proved they could have or should have

templating the incorporation of Manslaughter charges in cases where employees had died in or around a company’s environment. This communication was very quickly rebuffed, but what became abundantly clear is that the new Health and Safety legislation is

done more to prevent serious injury. In addition if a company, and or its leader/s, are found to be negligent in their duties and an employee was critically injured then a jail term of up to 5 years may be incurred. Recent well-publicised events where loss of life, or serious injury

evaluate and audit New Zealand businesses against an internationally recognised Health and Safety standard such as AS/NZS 4801. The belief in the market is that because of the new Health and Safety legislation organisations need to have in place a management system with international recognition to minimise the potential for transgressions and or subsequent legal action. As organisations look at ways to mitigate risks and protect themselves and staff, it makes sense that preventing injury or death is smarter than possibly facing a time consuming, expensive and potentially crippling legal action. More and more New Zealand organisations are looking closely at their social and corporate responsibilities to not only protect workers but to identify and actively manage and minimise risk. It is a fact that certification reduces risk considerably and provides comfort and peace of mind at all levels that the organisation is doing everything in its power to protect their employees and business.

Are you and your business at risk? • Are you fully compliant? • Could you be fined up to $600,000? • Hidden dangers that could jeopardise the future of your business? • Lengthy and expensive legal bills? Mitigate your risk and get certified to an internationally recognised standard to help protect you, your business and employees. Telarc certification provides clear evidence of a commitment to sound health and safety practices. We audit across a wide range of health and safety criteria and cater for every type and size of business. You need to call us today to reduce your risk.

TEL5070_ISN

Health & Safety.

eventuated, has resulted in some stiff penalties being enacted under the new legislation. For senior leaders having verbal or written assurances that their organisation is complying with the requisite Health and Safety standard is not going to be enough. It is imperative that organisations have visible proof that their Health and Safety policy is alive and well in the organisation, but more importantly is being adopted, embraced and managed by all levels of the organisation, not just the shop floor. Being independently certified to a standard that is globally recognised is a solution that many companies are moving towards. It provides business leaders with an independent verification that the company is on top of it its game and is putting its best foot forward to minimise or mitigate risks that might result in a serious or fatal injury being sustained. New Zealand’s leading Management System Certification body, Telarc, has recently noticed a significant increase in enquiries to

info@telarc.co.nz 0800 004 004 telarc.co.nz www.isn.co.nz