“The contention that a Principal Contractor is responsible for the methods of work employed by an independent contractor, including their management of safety in respect of that work is one of the greatest health and safety myths of all time. Sue Bottrell Lawyer/ Chartered OHS Professional
I was recently asked to comment on the proposed regulation of the management of psychological harm in HROnline. See the article below. Enjoy! Worker’s comp claim could open the floodgates for remote staff to claim psychological injury – HRM online
Please see my comments regarding the tragedy that is MT Sheds, following the sentencing of the owner and Director yesterday. Employer receives jail time for workplace death – HRM online
In sentencing a company that caused the death of a worker when a precast panel fell on him, the Judge was particularly scathing of the failure of the Principal Contractor to prepare and implement an adequate SWMS. The Judge observed that “A safe work method statement had been compiled, but it was not taken to
In a fantastic workshop yesterday in Melbourne, there was a great discussion about contractor safety at hazardous worksites. In line with case law, Principal Contractors at hazardous work sites are entitled to rely upon contractors to manage risks arising from their work, BUT must take greater care to confirm that contractors are aware of site
Now that we are all in agreement that contractors are responsible for managing their own safety, and Principle Contractors are not responsible for directing and supervising contractors work, and in fact doing so may increase the liability of a PC in the event of an incident, I am being asked: “If I see a contractor
o many times we see “safety” activity done in the name of maintaining accreditation to a safety management system. The “System” is the end not the tool anymore. Clients tell me “but we need to do it for our auditor”. The tail wagging the dog I think. Ask yourself how much of your “system” ends
I am very very very concerned at the false advertising of events being held by so called safety and risk management specialists. I recently looked at a session being held by an online safety management company. The speaker is a “risk management specialist”. When I looked at his qualifications and experience, his entire career was
I am just preparing a workshop looking at the preparation of Safe Work Method Statements and have come across a template from SafeWork NSW and it is very nice. It directs the focus to high risk construction work, identifying the risks arising from the HRCW, and succinctly recording what you intend to do about it.
Uber has announced changes to its contract with Food Delivery Riders (FDR), to ensure that FDR’s are clearly independent contractors, and responsible for managing their own health and safety. While we might be concerned at exploitation of FDR’s (yes we have all seen them puffing away in the pouring rain), the law supports Uber’s position.
At the end of a complex year take sometime. we are fortunate to have full professional lives with many challenges which is why we love it but stop, simplify and breathe. I plan to rock on my cabin verandah with my dog and not think about contractors for at least an hour.. See you in
NSW District Court Judge Russell has held that 1 – a Principal Contractor does not owe an obligation to direct a contractor in how it is to undertake its work, where it does not have the requisite skills or knowledge but 2 – it does have such a duty where it has knowledge of the
The Model Code of Practice: Construction Work. Monitoring Contractor SWMS. What Does It Really Mean?
The Model CoP states that a Principal Contractor must “monitor” a contractors SWMS. When considered in the context of the legal position adopted over the last 100 years by the High Court and all Australian superior Courts it cannot mean that a PC is responsible for monitoring implementation or compliance of contractors with their own
SafeWork NSW v J & CG Constructions Pty Limited –  NSWDC 614 A Good Clarification of PC Duties for Site Risks but Not Quite Right on SWMS.
A Judge has confirmed that a Principle Contractor has obligations to manage the risk of falls from heights when a formworker fell 6 metres from a second floor, due to a void in scaffolding. The Judge observed that it is often the case that a sub-contractor is found to be more culpable than a principal
A security firm engaged as part of the hotel quarantine program was prequalified by CM3, an extensive and complex online contractor prequalification program which requests extensive evidence of safety management, usually through supply of documentation in an attempt to confirm on the ground safety management. The quarantine outbreak calls into question the benefit of putting
Following my post about a possible incorrect conviction under s 23 of the OHS Act I have been referred to Muscat v Magistrates Court VSC 2018 and a decision by the Victorian Supreme Court that s 23 does in fact apply to contractors. However on reading that case, which turns on complex interpretation of the
Recently it was reported that a Principal Contractor, Seascape Constructions, was convicted and fine $850K for 1 – failing to ensure the safety of persons other than it’s employee’s from risks arising from its undertaking when a contractor fell from a second floor and was killed and 2 – failing to issue SWMS to contractors
In amongst the calls for rolling of heads and that Dan should have been standing at doors himself, it is critical to understand, at law, what Dan’s responsibilities really were. The case law is clear a Principal Contractor (aka Dan) is entitled to rely upon the expertise of contractors it engages to undertake specialist work.
To clarify the manager at Connect Logistics who has been charged with manslaughter has been charged under the Crimes Act by the Police. The charges are not in relation industrial manslaughter, which was not in place at the time of the incident and which are not retrospective. In addition any charges of industrial manslaughter must