Lessons From History

Summary of interesting OHS cases

Dangerous Data Entry
No risk assessment for data entry staff
NSW OHS Act 2000 - s8 (1); s86 (1); Regulations Cl (10)

In the case of Workcover Authority of New South Wales (Insepctor De Leon-Stacey) -V- Sydney Diagnostic Services (NSW) Pty Ltd [2005] NSWCIMC 179 (14 December 2005) We read about a contravention of Clause 10 of the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation 2001 as well as sec 8(1) and sec 86(1) of the NSW OHS Act 2000.

The charge was that the defendant, being an employer in 2002/2003, did not ensure the health, safety and welfare at work of its employees. One such worker sustained repetitive strain injuries in carrying out the work of data processing in the defendant's data entry and required fourteen days off work. A second employee was off work for twelve days and two other employees reported strain but did not require time off work.

The claim was that the employer:-

1)  Failed to ensure that systems of work and the working environment of its employees was safe and without risk to health and that:-

 a) the work was conducted without any proper risk assessment being conducted.

 b) There was no safe work method statement provided to the worker in relation to the work and

 c) The work was conducted when the employer had not taken appropriate measures to control risks associated with repetitive key board data entry work including;

 i) Failed to ensure that regular rest breaks at regular intervals were taken;

 ii) Failed to ensure the worker performed appropriate exercises at regular intervals;

iii) Failed to ensure proper task rotation in respect to the duties performed by the worker and;

iv) Failed to ensure that work station layouts and the workstation equipment provided for the worker to perform such work was as safe as reasonably practicable for the conduct for such repetitive manual work.

 (d) The performance of the work was in an atmosphere of fluctuating temperatures which further aggravating the extend of the worker's injuries.

(2)  The defendant failed to ensure that plant provided for use by the worker was safe and without risk to health when properly used in that it failed to comply with the relevant Australian Standard AS3590.2 and the surface area of the workstation was restricted and that foot rests, although provided, were not properly adjusted.

(3)  The defendant failed to provide such information, instruction, training and supervision as was necessary, in relation to effecting appropriate work methods for the safe performance of such data entry work as involved highly repetitive manual movements, so as to ensure the workers health and safety at work."

For full details of the case and the reasoning behind the assessment of penalties, the full case should be read. In summary, in terms of the contravention under Sec 8(1) the defendant was fined $12,750.00. For two contraventions under Sec 86, the defendant was fined a total of $5,950,00 and for the contravention under Cl 10 of the OHS Regulation, a fine of $2,337.50 was imposed.

Full details at:- http: //www. austlii.edu. au/au/cases/nsw/NSWCIMC/2005/179.html