1. Please check the files I attached. 2.Answer the following questions, and add the answers to the file:M2 EAW1 _WHS Case Study Report V1 - Annotated .docx. (1) Stakeholders’ Duty of Care: The...

1 answer below »
1. Please check the files I attached.
2.Answer the following questions, and add the answers to the file:M2 EAW1 _WHS Case Study Report V1 - Annotated .docx.
(1)Stakeholders’ Duty of Care:The reviewer clearly identifies the main elements of the Duty of Care under the WHS Act, as well as the responsibilities of a PCBU (Person Conducting a Business or Undertaking).(2)Impact of SWMS on WHS: The reviewer describes the function of SWMS (Safe Work Methods Statement) in maintaining WHS on the work site.(e.g. could the deaths have been prevented with effective SWMS?),explain how it is used and evaluated if you believe it would have been useful in the present case.(3)Likely effect of Changes(measures) made on WHS in future:The reviewer also predicts which changes will have the greatest impact (most effective) on Workplace Health & Safety.


Thank you very much.


TAFE Brisbane, Australia Case Study 1: When WHS training, supervision and communication fail Extract from Workplace OHS (based on NSW IRC File 1446 of 2008) A State Government Public Works Department worked closely with an external company to design and construct an on-site water storage facility. As workers began concreting the roof of a tower at the site, the underlying structure failed and collapsed, and the working deck fell into the reservoir. It was found that the department’s safety management systems were comprehensive "on paper" but had not been adequately implemented which resulted in the death of two contractors. Background During a visit to the site two months prior to the incident, the department's project manager, who was both trained and authorised to direct work being performed on the site by the external companies employees, directed one minor change to the structures support, but failed to identify other obvious high risk safety issues. It was later noted that even a cursory examination of the site by an adequately trained officer should have been sufficient to halt work on the site long before this incident occurred. The government department admitted to awarding the contract to the external company on the basis of price alone. It also confessed to a "widespread failure" to supervise the site, but said it was not responsible for the creation, provision or maintenance of the external companies system of work. A construction worker and the external company’s director were killed. Three other workers standing on the deck suffered serious injuries. The department was charged with, and pleaded guilty to, breaching their duty of care obligations. In an Industrial Relations Court decision, the presiding Justice found that the government department had failed to: · undertake adequate safety inspections and safety audits (State requirement); · ensure the scaffolding access tower and formwork were safe; · ensure the formwork was properly certified before the concrete pour; and · properly supervise, train and instruct its project manager/superintendent's representative. The department's response In an immediate response to the incident, the Department issued a circular introducing a new requirement to strengthen the safety management procedure. That circular drew attention to the high risk of the erection of concrete suspended slabs and that risk required a standard approach to be introduced for all project management group contacts. Following a review of the effectiveness of measures introduced in response to this incident, the Department held a full day workshop with its senior managers to discuss safety management and identify areas for improvement. System changes – A new program introduced In response the outcomes of the investigation and court proceedings, a new comprehensive programme was developed known as the ‘Construction Safety Improvement Programme’. This Programme included changes in procedures, contract clauses and training for all Departmental staff. It also included a review of management responsibilities, reporting responsibilities and standard contract safety provisions and procedures to ensure they were appropriate and if necessary, improved Construction Safety Co-ordinators were appointed to all regions and branches where they had not already been appointed and specialists were to undertake audits, inspections and provide training and support to project managers Safety networks and regular review meetings introduced A Construction Safety Network was established to meet monthly to allow sharing of information and enable staff to learn from the experiences of others Communication strategies The Department introduced an intranet based project management programme entitled "The Roadmap", the Roadmap is able to be utilised by staff every day to effectively manage projects. Staff were provided with training in the use of the Roadmap and became an integral part of their induction process. The Roadmap was available at every site in state and enabled easy access by project managers to a wide range of safety information, including the project details. The Roadmap operated to required regular reviews during its four phases and, at particular stages, the project manager referred to documents and information that may be needed to manage the project. Management review A strengthening of the Department's management review (including the introduction of the Deputy Director-General Safety Forum) and commitment to safety leadership. A substantial increase in the number of Project Safety Advisors employed by the Department. The employment of additional Project Safety Advisors was an outcome of the Construction Safety Improvement Program. The increase in the number of Project Safety Advisors means that at least one Project Safety Advisor is based in each office or branch. Module 2 EAW1 – Assessment Case Study V4.0 Page | 2 WHS Case Study Report Scenario A State Government Public Works Department worked closely with an external company to design and construct an on-site water storage facility. As workers began concreting the roof of a tower at the site, the underlying structure failed and collapsed, and the working deck fell into the reservoir. It was found that the department’s safety management systems were comprehensive "on paper" but had not been adequately implemented which resulted in the death of two contractors. Organizational Responsibilities Under Workplace Health and Safety (WHS) legislations, if a person or an organisation conducting a business or undertaking has a duty or obligation, the due diligence ensuring that the person or the organisation conducting the business or undertaking complies with that duty or obligation must be exercised by an officer of the person or the organisation conducting the business or undertaking. Legislative and regulatory obligations: WHS ACT 2011 must be followed by everyone in the company and workplace. Hazard identification: According to the current legislations, the possible hazards and risks associated with those operations are supposed to be generally identified by the person or the organisation conducting the business or undertaking. If the hazards were identified and the unstable minor structure support was repaired or replaced, the incident could have been prevented by the project manager, but he failed to do so. Risk assessment and controlling: 2 people died, and 3 people was seriously injured because of the lack of attention on risk assessment and controlling at the site. The supervision must be provided by the project manager to eliminate or minimize the risks by using appropriate resources and procedures. If the following procedures was followed, the accident could have been prevented. Adequate safety inspections and audits must be undertaken: Make sure the structure is stable and safe before pouring concrete. Make sure the scaffolding access tower and formwork are stable and safe The project manager and superintendent’s representative must be properly trained, instructed and supervised. Safety training: To manage the work being performed for the state government, the company’s project manager must be trained and authorised. But the manager did not identify the major hazardous factors. At all times, up-to-date Workplace Health and Safety knowledge should be acquired and kept by the everyone in the company. Stakeholder’s duty of careComment by Anyes Marsault: HOngyu in this section you need to provide a definition of the PCBU and explain more clearly the 3 types of duties the PCBU has Under Workplace Health and Safety (WHS) legislations, if a person or an organisation conducting a business or undertaking has a duty or obligation, the due diligence ensuring that the person or the organisation conducting the business or undertaking complies with that duty or obligation must be exercised by an officer of the person or the organisation conducting the business or undertaking. By following WHS ACT 2011 and comply with the other legislative requirements, communicating effectively and monitoring the processes, this accident could have been avoided. However, the stakeholders did not put safety in the first priority but price when they were choosing the construction company, and they did not hire a project manager which is qualified enough and did not train their project manager enough to protect everyone’s work health and safety to avoid the hazards. Impact of SWMS and Toolbox talks on WHS A Toolbox Talk is an informal daily or weekly chat, usually done in the workplace, about the work that will be done that week. work team can raise any concerns they have, as well as discuss incidents that have happened since the last talk. However, there were no Toolbox Talk and SWMS meetings on the site that could have informed about the hazards and they could have to prevent possible hazards. Any simple talk about the WHS every day and what were the hazards that they were going through every day could have possibly avoid the future hazards but Due to the negligence of Stakeholders, Department Project Manager as well as lack of communications this incident occurred.Comment by Anyes Marsault: I think that meetings apply to toolbox talks but not SWMS. SWMS is a different type of tool. You need to provide a definition of SWMS and explain how it is used and evaluate if you believe it would have been useful in the present caseComment by Anyes Marsault: Changes implemented following the critical incidentComment by Anyes Marsault: You need to also add what are the measures you believe would be most effective For the safety measure they have introduced a "Construction safety improvement program”. It includes Procedures, Contract clauses, and training for all Department Staff. Besides, a review of management responsibilities, reporting responsibilities and standard contract safety provisions and procedures. And also construction safety network was established to meet monthly to allow sharing of information and enable staff to learn from the experiences of others As well as the introduction of Deputy Director-General Safety Forum this also includes the substantial increase in the number of Project Safety Advisors. According to my analysis, this safety measures were not good enough because the workers are the main part of the construction so they need to be trained well as well as there should every week meeting rather than a monthly meeting of WHS so that everyone can share the information of the possible hazards and how to prevent them. Following the legislative and regulatory requirements to prevent accidents. The keeping and availability of records of health and safety representatives and deputy health and safety representatives. The keeping of records in relation to incidents. The keeping of records of specified activities, matters or things to be kept by specified persons. The giving of notice of or information about specified activities, matters or things to the regulator, an inspector or another specified person.
Answered Same DayNov 26, 2021

Answer To: 1. Please check the files I attached. 2.Answer the following questions, and add the answers to the...

Sudipta answered on Nov 26 2021
159 Votes
2
Stakeholder’s duty of care
PCBU or “Person conducting a business or undertaking” is a term mostl
y used in the area of “work health and safety legislation” (Tooma, 2013). Three major duties of a PCBU is ensuring hath and safety of worker while they are going through work. PCBU must ensure that the work which is being carried out does not include health risk. PCBU's other duty is to monitoring worker's health condition.
Impact of SWMS on WHS
SWMS or Safe Work Methods statement is a document which is...
SOLUTION.PDF

Answer To This Question Is Available To Download

Related Questions & Answers

More Questions »

Submit New Assignment

Copy and Paste Your Assignment Here