Lessons From
History
Summary of
interesting OHS cases
Penalty for no consultation
Mishap at farm uncoverers a lack of consultation
NSW OHS Act 2000- s8(1) and
S13
Section 13
of the NSW OHS Act 2000 tells you to consult and if you do not, expect to be penalised if ever anything goes
wrong.
In the case of Workcover Authority Of New South Wales (Inspector Karen Simpson) Defendant:
Paul Mclaughlin Group Limited (ACN 069 148 107) the defendant was a watermelon farmer in Country NSW. The
business was a family business with only four full time employees but during harvest time, the number of
employees increases to between 35 and 40. These employees were distributed across a number of areas on the property i.e. picking, storage, packing, planting
etc.
Under section 8(1) of the OHS Act 2000, the defendant was charged that he had 1) failed to
provide and maintain a system of work that was safe; 2) failed to assess the risks associated with transporting
and moving watermelon seedlings and 3) failed to provide any or any adequate instruction or information
concerning the risks associated with transporting and moving watermelon seedlings.
The defendant was also charged under Sec 13(a) in that the defendant failed to have a process
of consultation, such as a safety committee or safety representative; b) failed to consult with its employees in
relation to the risks; and c) failed to provide its employees with the opportunity of expressing their views and
contributing in a timely fashion to the resolution of occupational health, safety and welfare
issues.
An employee, BS, was injured by a forklift/tractor while in the course of his duties. While
investigating the accident the Inspector observed that employees may be exposed to risks of injury from unsafe
systems of work.
Five days later the inspector issued an Improvement Notice requiring the defendant to identify
any hazards associated with the use of the forklift/tractor, to assess the risk and eliminate the risks or if
not reasonably practicable to do so to control the risks. The Defendant's was directed to the Regulations, the
Act and the Fork Lift Truck Drivers Guide 1998.
A second Improvement Notice required improvements for providing and establishing occupational
health and safety consultative processes as prescribed by the Regulation including safety committees, safety
representatives and other agreed arrangements with employees. The Defendant's attention was drawn to the Code of
Practice concerning consultation, the Regulation and the Act.
The court heard that Improvement Notices had been acted on, that hazard identification had
been conducted and that all new employees were receiving inductions. The lack of documented safe work method
procedures was also highlighted by the court.
The defendant was found guilty and the fine imposed was discounted for a number of reasons.
"….A fine of $16,500 be imposed for the s8 (1) breach and a fine of $8,250 be imposed for the s13 breach. The
offences containing common elements and to avoid double jeopardy I will apply the principle of totality and
further reduce the penalties to $10,725 and $5,362 respectively." The defendant was also ordered to pay costs of
a further $3,635.58
Full details at:-
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWCIMC/2006/80.html
|