31 October 2008

Building Collapse and OH&S in the ACT

| Sarah Schoonwater
Join the conversation
68

Firstly, can I thank all of you who have posted to Riot Act over the past few days on the collapse of formwork at the Leighton’s job in civic on Monday. It is important that the issues surrounding occupational health and safety on construction are discussed in all social and political forums, and prevention of such ‘accidents’ is quite simply what is needed to bring down the fatality and injury toll on Austalian work sites. It must be remembered that on average one construction worker in Australia is killed every single week at work. This fatality rate is higher than the national road toll, and the injury at work rate is much, much higher than this.

The facts are simple when it comes to accidents in the construction industry. Workers lives are put at risk when there are shortcuts taken by contractors and principle contractors, when excessive hours are worked, and when current laws prevent trained Cert 4 OH&S union officials access to construction sites. Safety is union business, because it is the primary concern of our members and every other construction worker when they roll up for work every day. Union sites are safer sites, speak to any construction worker and they will tell you the same thing.

The CFMEU’s first priority always has been and always will be safety, and we believe that it is the fundamental right of every worker to be able to return home to their family and friends at the end of a working day. Having spoken to many of the workers who were on site this week, they have spoken of how their first thoughts were that they were about to die. At least three of the men on site, had concrete and formwork and metal collapse within metres of where there were standing. One man told me that all he could think of was that his family needed him, his son, his daughter and his girlfriend needed him. I know when I got the phonecall about the collapse, my first question was “who has been killed?”.

The CFMEU is not about heavy handed tactics, or bullying or indeed ‘thuggery’. As the first female Secretary of a Building and Construction Industry, I assure you the ‘thug’ label certainly does not apply to me or any of the officials and staff I choose to employ.

But one thing must be said; when workers lives are put at risk, when there are practices which are used on construction sites to save money, and create time efficiencies, I will not stand down from fighting against these practices. I will not back away from the workers rights for Authorised Safety Representatives – which include many trained union officials – to stop trying to gain access to work sites. And I certainly will not be backing away from ensuring that all construction workers are provided with the same rights as all other workers in Australia, and to achieve that the abolition of the Australian Builiding and Construction Commission (ABCC). It must be remembered that most of the ‘complaints’ investigated by the ABCC involved workers, delegates and union officials who stopped work because of safety breaches.

My goal every day when I come to work is to ensure that every single one of my members and their collegues go home to their families at night. If that means that I am labelled a ‘thug’ or if it means I face interrogation or a goal sentence because of the current IR laws and the existence of the ABCC, then so be it.

Join the conversation

68
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

Mr Evil, I saw it too, but I didn’t think it relevant to this thread.
(And there’s a lot better stories out there if you search well)

I haven’t heard anything else about it.

Given the story was posted over 2 years ago, and has never been heard of since, it is seems like it was just a rumour started by a political opponent?

I think the CFMEU elections are on at the moment, and I don’t think anyone is running against the current people running the ACT Branch – which seems unlikely if they had been doing this sort of thing.

Amazing what Google comes up with sometimes –

“Union officials’ club deal revealed
PAUL MALONE
3/11/2006 9:19:05 AM.

Two directors of the Canberra Tradesmen’s Union Club and the Woden Tradesmen’s Union Club each stand to earn commissions of hundreds of thousands of dollars if investments they have recommended pay off.

The directors, George Wason and Sarah Schoonwater, are also senior officials of the Construction Forestry Mining and Energy Union which set up the Canberra Tradesmen’s Union Club in Dickson and its sister club in Woden……….”

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/local/news/general/union-officials-club-deal-revealed/438006.aspx

Does anyone know what the outcome of this was?

I don’t have a lot of love personally for unions given that I was a single parent with three small children living below the poverty line in the 80s when there was a lot of industrial unrest.

I found that most Canberrans could circumvent garbage strikes by driving their garbage to the tip, and bus strikes by getting in their car or taking a taxi. At the end of the week, I needed the bus just to get into an ATM to get my food money out for the coming week. In all these things, I found it was the poorest who were hit hardest and hurt most from the many strikes.

I didn’t mind it when the bus drivers took industrial action in the form of not collecting fares and letting the passengers on for free, though, but that sort of thing was rare.

Historically, though, I have a lot of admiration for the unions and I believe that they do provide important safeguards within our system. I also feel that there are many good-hearted union people in there batting for their people against injustices and abuses that we tend not to see or hear about at all. I am also a huge fan of the greenbans.

My feeling is that, generally, as with gender issues, it should not be about a battle but everybody acknowledging their interdependence and working together for a mutual good.

I’s not a friggin english lesson.

All you need to do is get your message across as you see fit

The fact that you both mention its a rant indicates to me that you both understood it – not everyone has 100% grammar accuracy – deal with it….

Be fair nomnomnom, The Truth [@62] provided an equally turgid [albeit mercifully briefer] rant.

The grammar and spelling was better, but the 8 question marks, the stream of consciousness and the way the post just trails off more than makes up for that.

canberra towie said :

Vic Bitterman said :

Unions are nothing but sheltered workshops for bludgers and underachievers.

Today, they serve no other purpose.

To right Unions are full of dead beat bogan whingers and cause nothing but problems!

They occasionally stick there heads into something where they not welcome anyhow and try to convince there members “where here for you ”
But unless your a friggen idiot you know there only interested in lining there pockets with money from workers !!!
There is no place for unions in this day and age

If you do your job properly you wont have a problem hence have no need to waist your money on a friggen union !!!

Wow man, seriously not even spell check can handle this kind of turgid rant.

It amazes me that the young libs in Canberra have slipped so far in their spelling and grammar. The really worrying thing is that you will probably complain that your lecturer is a trot, whale hugging hippy when he fails your essay.

Passy said :

As to all the snide references to “socialist” countries – which ones? Again I think those who say this confuse stalinism with socialism.

quote]

Because socialism has never extisted – those who are socialist become drunk with power.

An fear is not a good organising tool ???? what the… ???? The whole union campaign in the last election was based on creating fear. Its the ONLY tool of the unions … still no admission that there has EVER been a death caused by the incompetence of a union member (its always the bosses fault

Thanks dexi.

I look forward to the results of the investigation into the collapse and its causes.

It would have helped if Martin Kingham, the Australia wide recognised CFMEU safety expert, had been allowed on site.

Methinks those crowing about the death of unions are a little premature. Twenty percent of workers are still in unions; they are still to more or less degree democratic and they (or at least the stronger ones) could impose real safety standards on business if they were so inclined and prepared.

I think the global recession will impact on unions by weakening their bargaining power. Fear is not an organising tool. But on building sites the CFMEU is strong and can still resist to some extent the power of big capital. And one of the most important parts of that is making workplaces safe. It’s as important as winning real wage increases and defending jobs.

As to all the snide references to “socialist” countries – which ones? Again I think those who say this confuse stalinism with socialism.

But let’s stick to the main point – the CFMEU has as one of its major functions the protection of workers on site. Rudd’s Workchoices Lite, which keeps about 95% of Howard’s IR laws, nobbles the ability of unions to protect the safety of workers. It should be abolished to enable unions to defend their members from building collapses, and attacks on their wages, conditions and jobs.

I worked in a non Union work place for a major construction company. It was all contract labour. There was lots of talk and paper work involving safety. In reality there where systemic breaches of OHS. When these came up, the Manager (Full time, bonuses) had one thing to say. “That’s the way it is”. I left because I couldn’t support the way it was. At least the unions give you the opportunity to negotiate rather than unemployment. I could of stayed, but the workmanship was shoddy, the billing fraudulent and crap job satisfaction. I loved my work, now I’m so bitter and angry that Ive made myself sick. Unions do more then OHS in the work place.

canberra towie10:58 am 01 Nov 08

Vic Bitterman said :

Unions are nothing but sheltered workshops for bludgers and underachievers.

Today, they serve no other purpose.

To right Unions are full of dead beat bogan whingers and cause nothing but problems!

They occasionally stick there heads into something where they not welcome anyhow and try to convince there members “where here for you ”
But unless your a friggen idiot you know there only interested in lining there pockets with money from workers !!!
There is no place for unions in this day and age If you do your job properly you wont have a problem hence have no need to waist your money on a friggen union !!!

The ABCC *is* dead, it will be finished being wound up in 2011.

I would love to stop the stupid class distinction stuff – us v them is the oldest political trick in the book.

I hate seeing ads that show the “heroic worker” and the unscrupulous “bosses” – remember the union ads duing the November 07 poll – next item ….. executive bonuses har har har.

Like there is something inherently honest, noble and fair about a “working class man” (just look at the words of that song!!!! “he’s a simple man with a heart of gold….NEVER ….well he beats his little woman, to the inch of her life… spending all his overtime on a bundy with ice…. There are good and bad people everywhere, noble and honest everywhere, fair-minded everywhere, drug addicts everywhere, alcoholics everywhere and arrogant people everywhere.

thetruth said :

oh no not the mediorchre class rising up now

LOL. Visions of Dame Edna Everage. 🙂

Middle class does not mean mediocre.

Socialism, capitalism.. two heads of the same coin. Both are based on the love of money. One says “fight to acquire as much as you can” the other says “fight to distribute it as evenly as possible”. Either way, it’s all about money rather than morality. Safety, is simply a political football between unions and the big corporates. There are few industries and their trade unions that really have a good handle on safety. The ones that do, have established genuine cooperative, open relationships between employers, unions, workers and contractors. The ones that don’t (like the building industry and its unions), continue to point fingers at each other, so the best thing for it is to put them both in the dock.

radonezh said :

Goanna: I ain’t saying the Corporates are any better than the Socialists. They are all the same because they all seek to destroy the middle classes.

oh no not the mediorchre class rising up now

Goanna: I ain’t saying the Corporates are any better than the Socialists. They are all the same because they all seek to destroy the middle classes.

The socialist workers’ paradise must have bad things happening. That’s rule number 1 of socialism. If you don’t have bad things happening, how can you maintain the rage to keep the revolution going?? If nothing bad happens of its own accord, then the wise socialist has to make it happen through intervention. Then, when it does happen, he/she blames the bourgois middle class for whatever bad thing has occurred.

Goanna said :

…and the bitter RA spazzo-cons hijack and destroy yet another promising thread.

Why was it “promising”?

…and the bitter RA spazzo-cons hijack and destroy yet another promising thread.

btw nothing bad happens in socialist countries – hospitals are great, all kids are educated, there are no poor people, the environment is safe, the media fiercely pursues the truth uninfluenced by dirty money and workers do not die on the job.

Passy said :

Skidbladnir, my socialist vision includes having safe workplaces. If that conflicts with societal norms (which I doubt)then society needs changing.

I don’t think anyone is saying they don’t want safe workplaces – but unions are as guilty as anyone when it comes to covering up for their members mistakes, judgement etc. So quick to blame the employer and NEVER (EVER) blame the workers.

It was the same a few years ago when Telstra was part Government owned – if something bad happened it was ALWAYS because of the 49% private ownership and NEVER the 51% public ownership. Hospitals poor performance is ALWAYS because of underfunding , NEVER because of public ownership.

Unions will be taken seriously when they cease to use safety as the arguement for lowering productivity OR entrenching power. Basically, they have lost the moral high ground – they are the boy who cried wolf.

madocci: you are spot on the money.

Passy:

Passy said :

If the boss says to do something, given the power imbalance and the Howard push to destroy unions, you do it.

Geez mate, haven’t you heard? Howard hasn’t been around for a year now.. and guess what else? He had nothing to do with the ACT safety regulator – ever. But just keep pumping out the propagandistic jingoism mate.. it’s all you guys know how to do. You’re just as bad as the big corporates with their massive advertising campaigns and airy-fairy “mission statements”. It’s all opportunistic garbage designed to recruit new members.

Power imbalance? The only power imbalance is that sub contractors are the meat in the sandwich between unions and the big corporates. Thats why you both are culpable in my view.

Passy said :

Skidbladnir, my socialist vision includes having safe workplaces. If that conflicts with societal norms (which I doubt)then society needs changing.

Radonezh, the thing about commonsense and mowing the lawns is that you do it as part of your own activity, not to make a profit for a boss. So the pressure to cut corners is not there, and you can take your time and implement your own sensible safety standards. You self-regulate.

You are quoting the wrong person. I quoted cranky when he mentioned lawns. I responded to him saying that the big equipment is much more dangerous than lawnmowers.

Passy said :

Finally radonzeh, you end up blaming the workers for the problem. The same workers who can’t get their union onto site; the same workers who complain about safety; the same workers who are dependent on the boss for a job and a wage to feed their kids, pay the mortgage etc? If the boss says to do something, given the power imbalance and the Howard push to destroy unions, you do it.

No mate, I don’t blame the workers, I blame the UNIONS, as WELL as the greed bosses.

As the first female Secretary of a Building and Construction Industry, I assure you the ‘thug’ label certainly does not apply to me or any of the officials and staff I choose to employ.
LOL! Having experienced the kind of individuals that I have within the CFMEU and other unions, I can certainly vouch for this not being the case. Maybe thuggery is so common that it becomes invisible to the untrained eye?…

I would ask: is it the employer (i.e. developer’s) responsibility if a worker goes against saftey precautions and this causes an accident that results in harm? I mean you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink…

From my experience a lot of the problem could be solved if the bravado mentality (that is common within the building culture) was removed.

Having said all that, someone needs to look out for safety in the workplace, especially the more dangerous ones. Maybe it belongs best with a group that has that as their main and only concern. Unions have so much else on their plates, maybe they are a little overloaded?

Skidbladnir, my socialist vision includes having safe workplaces. If that conflicts with societal norms (which I doubt)then society needs changing.

Radonezh, the thing about commonsense and mowing the lawns is that you do it as part of your own activity, not to make a profit for a boss. So the pressure to cut corners is not there, and you can take your time and implement your own sensible safety standards. You self-regulate.

You don’t have that luxury in the workplace where the dollar, not safety, is the boss’s bottom line. Besides which, working on a building site is inherently more dangerous than mowing the lawn.

Finally radonzeh, you end up blaming the workers for the problem. The same workers who can’t get their union onto site; the same workers who complain about safety; the same workers who are dependent on the boss for a job and a wage to feed their kids, pay the mortgage etc? If the boss says to do something, given the power imbalance and the Howard push to destroy unions, you do it.

Don’t forget the ACT has industrial manslaughter laws – which manager is going to say “Hey I know its unsafe and I might go to jail but I need to keep to budget”. Sorry guys it just doesn’t happen like that….

Accidents happen because of errors of judgement or poor concentration – we wish it wouldn’t happen, we all feel for the victims – but it happens.

People drive too far, too drunk (btw I walked past a pub a few weeks ago in Brissie and there were hundred of workman having a BIG liquid lunch before going back to the building site, cut corners to get home earlier etc etc and it will happen with or without unions. I would love a union to own up when the accident happen because a member was drunk or lazy or incompetent – in 40 years on this planet I have NEVER heard that – but it must have happened more than once.

Time for honesty

cranky said :

Buggered if I know how we all get through the weekend without OH&S assistance.

All those motormowers, whippersnippers, chainsaws, hedgetrimmers, ladders, etc. It’s a wonder Monday’s CT isn’t full of death notices from misadventure from these demonic implements!

Perhaps it’s a case of self preservation and common sense that means we are able to get to work Monday. Apparently this same common sense goes out the window when passing through the gates of a construction site.

That right – they are so good (currently) at chucking a prohib notice on a hammer drill, but they do nothing about the big picture. When the big equipment goes bung, it usually goes bung in a big way, and when that happens, there is usually catastrophic human cost, societal and business cost. The whole focus of OHS regulators is all over the place. This is why there needs to be one, and only one.

Passy said :

Unfortunately some on this site will attack unions, the CFMEU etc with the usual unsubstantiated allegations. Safety is the paramount issue, one a union must involve itself in and one in which it is legitimately involved.

What are the next steps? Is Martin going to be allowed in? Are the workers going to be paid? Will similar formwork be examined elsewhere in Australia?

Keep up the good work CFMEU.

The reason people think so lowly of unions is because you guys are all care and no responsibility.

Speaking of responsibility, whose responsibility was it to check and certify that the scaffolding was up to the task? I can tell you it certainly isn’t the legal responsibility of the civil engineer involved. Which of you building union reps who claim to be so safety-oriented actually bother to use their “right of entry” to check scaffolding (or other equipment) on a regular basis, and if you find it’s wrong, which of you actually do something positive about it other than stop work or blame the principle contractor?? Which of you union guys driving around in your shiny new CFMEU company cars actually thinks “hey, we could help the company save some lives here if we find a way to replace this scaffolding without cutting profits or making the workplace inefficient”? You all think that all you have to do is point the finger at the company, but actually the unions are just as much to blame. You have an opportunity to do something really positive for your members, but you’re all just too busy playing your left-wing politics. Every incident that occurs is just another opportunity for the unions to point the finger AT SOMEONE ELSE. Yet you keep taking union dues from the working man. You have enough money to afford some pretty flash offices around the country – every bit as flash as the corporate offices. Why don’t you invest some in paying for better equipment? Do you think the subbies can afford it? They’re busting their backsides against rising interest rates and corporate greed. The last thing they need is the union shutting down their operation without providing a positive solution.

Buggered if I know how we all get through the weekend without OH&S assistance.

All those motormowers, whippersnippers, chainsaws, hedgetrimmers, ladders, etc. It’s a wonder Monday’s CT isn’t full of death notices from misadventure from these demonic implements!

Perhaps it’s a case of self preservation and common sense that means we are able to get to work Monday. Apparently this same common sense goes out the window when passing through the gates of a construction site.

Passy, you’re a committed Socialist, with a personal version of reality which doesn’t really match the societal consensus, but it might be worth leaving the financial behavioural questions to other people.
From experience in several different varieties of businesses, and making deals with enough developers to know they’re just businesspeople too, but people will cut corners wherever they think the can, or know they can get away with it.

The major factor for most people is ‘is it worth the risk exposure’?
Be it getting your own staff to help out beyond their job description, having them work extra hours beyond their agreed time without penalties, or working them beyond normal ‘safe’ limits. I imagine construction has a great many such sitatgnms. The only time it actually becomes a problem is when an incident needs to be dealt with to prevent the risk you took coming back to haunt you in all its costly glory, or someone starts asking the right kind of questions to force a reaction.

Sarah Schoonwater said :

Thanks for the question radonezh (and WIC).

The CFMEU supports nationally consistent OH&S rules and regulations and we have been campaigning hard here in the ACT to ensure that WorkCover inspectors have the training and resources they need to be pro-active and effective at ensuring that we have safe sites in the Construction Industry.

At the moment, the Federal Government is developing a national set of harmonised OH&S Standards. The CFMEU is developing its own best practice standards for OH&S and have submitted these to the

Like you both point out, a worker in Queanbeyan and a worker in Belconnen both have families and both deserve to know that every effort is being made to make sure that they can return safe every night. The safety of our members is our number 1 priority, so we want the harmonisation process to enshrine best practice from one jurisdiction across the whole country, rather than become a race to the bottom where workers safety is sacrificed to make a quick buck.

I’m not talking about harmonization (that implies that the jurisdictions are all still running separate regulators and laws). I am talking about a single national regulator, and one set of laws for the entire country. Harmonization is an absolute cop-out, which will do nothing but entrench the existing, wasteful multi-jurisdicational bureaucracy.

The regulator must have power both over employers and over unions. Both of you are responsible DIRECTLY for safety (and, actually, the profitability and effectiveness of the industry you are in). It’s not just the employers who are directly responsible. Prohibition notices and fines should be issued both against the employer, and against the union involved. Unions are responsible because you influence the behaviour of your members. It’s not good enough for unions to just blame the employer. You are both to blame, and you both should be in the dock when there is a prosecution.

Vic Bitterman9:29 pm 31 Oct 08

Unions are nothing but sheltered workshops for bludgers and underachievers.

Today, they serve no other purpose.

Passy, the only way Leightons would be able to cut safety corners to save money is if the employees go along with it. Someone actually has to cut the safety corner. If this is a union workforce then its union workers that are doing it.

Thanks Sarah. A good post.

Unfortunately some on this site will attack unions, the CFMEU etc with the usual unsubstantiated allegations. Safety is the paramount issue, one a union must involve itself in and one in which it is legitimately involved.

It seems to be a case of blame the messenger; ignore the message.

As far as I am concerned, from what I have read so far Leightons deserves condemnation.

None of the anti-union posters have questioned the seeming push by some employers to cut safety corners to save money. This is exacerbated when unions are denied entry to union sites for the most basic of functions – to ensure the safety of their members.

One minor point. I thought it was actually that more people were killed or injured at work than die or are injured on our roads. (I’d have to check the figures, but suggest you clarify this.)

In other words we have had all these road safety public campaigns over many years but when it comes to a real campaign for work safety Governments won’t touch it because it might impose costs on the bosses.

This means it is up to the unions to make sure the workplace is safe.

Bill Tully asked me a question today on Behind the News on 2XX FM about what further actions the CFMEU was going to take about the collapse? I didn’t have an answer since I am not in the building industry. Sarah?

What are the next steps? Is Martin going to be allowed in? Are the workers going to be paid? Will similar formwork be examined elsewhere in Australia?

Keep up the good work CFMEU.

pure_blonde said :

all this discussion on the same day a wall falls down on two men at a Belconnen Construction site and leaves them with serious injuries in Calvary Hospital.

Interesting… and its all blamed on a freak gust of wind.

How many of these accidents are the fault of poor workmanship or shoddy work practices on the part of union members themselves?

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy said :

As a former union delegate I have nothing but disgust and disdain for organised unions. Once I saw what really goes on, and the way unions think thay can control organisations to forward their own agendas (ie increasing their power base), I quit the role.

I am all for worker safety, but from the sound of this story you’d think OH&S were what the unions were about. Bullcrap. The fact that the story contains unsubstantiated and incorrect figures illustrates this point.

When unions are about negotiating a fair deal and physically protecting their members I’ll support them. Until then, forget it. I’ve seen first hand what happens on the front line of union activity, and it is a bloody disgrace.

Your experience is why I left the union too – on the whole (with some exceptions on the part of some very dedicated, caring and committed individuals)it wasn’t about a “fair go” it was about power.

Right of reply maybe, but nobody actually mentioned Ms Schoonwater by name, reputation, or position, only her organisation.
I don’t refer every complaint about my Department(or previous Organisations) to my Secretary, even for the times things have hit the media. There are people who would ordinarily deal with these things, even if I couldn’t.

Her interest in this may be workplace safety, but she did erect strawmen.
And she has a vested interest in using this to build her profile, and that of her organisation.
And her arguments are at least worthy of questioning, as they’re open to an interpretation that she’s actually implying more than she’s saying.
I’d still be interested in seeing what conclusions either side come to on this one, as people I have worked alongside would eventually be stored in the building.

CFMEU members are all very OH&S orientated – just look at footage of those CFMEU members who went nuts up at Parliament Hse a few years back, and were trying to smash the main doors in with chairs, lengths of pipe and even a sackbarrow – each and everyone of them was wearing a flouro safety vest or shirt!

all this discussion on the same day a wall falls down on two men at a Belconnen Construction site and leaves them with serious injuries in Calvary Hospital.

Interesting… and its all blamed on a freak gust of wind.

Sarah Schoonwater4:47 pm 31 Oct 08

Thanks for the question radonezh (and WIC).

The CFMEU supports nationally consistent OH&S rules and regulations and we have been campaigning hard here in the ACT to ensure that WorkCover inspectors have the training and resources they need to be pro-active and effective at ensuring that we have safe sites in the Construction Industry.

At the moment, the Federal Government is developing a national set of harmonised OH&S Standards. The CFMEU is developing its own best practice standards for OH&S and have submitted these to the

Like you both point out, a worker in Queanbeyan and a worker in Belconnen both have families and both deserve to know that every effort is being made to make sure that they can return safe every night. The safety of our members is our number 1 priority, so we want the harmonisation process to enshrine best practice from one jurisdiction across the whole country, rather than become a race to the bottom where workers safety is sacrificed to make a quick buck.

Do you reckon an engineer is required to sign off on the formwork’s ability to withstand the pour, or rather on whether the reo and layout are correct. My recollection of this process is that the engineer is only interested in whether the steel reinforcing is done according to the drawings, that the cover distances are correct, and general shape is right. I’ve never seen an engineer certify the bracing and propping. All they usually say on the drawings is “All work to be carried out in accordance with relevant WHS legislation/regulations by qualified people etc” or something along those lines.

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy said :

I’d be more inclined to put human safety into the hands on a qualified engineer, rather than someone with a Cert IV.

wow, really?

The same engineer who signed off on the Leightons Formwork before it collapsed?

Thanks for this post. I think many people in many other workplaces should be asking if their union is as responsive to OH&S as is the CFMEU and, if not, why not. And those who are in workplaces that make it easy to join unions, find a way to change the culture or your job. People should not die from workplace accidents, and a union that works against accidents is one to be applauded.

I am, for the record, a CPSU member.

Even if the CFMEU push really hard for it, if the States can’t agree on how to save the Murray-Darling, what hope have we got on them agreeing to the creation of a nationwide OH&S body.

To the CFMEU: Why isn’t the union calling for a single national OHS regulator?

totally agree safety should be nation wide

Grail said :

noone can ever be “independent” when employed by the same agency that issues the building permits and deals exclusively with the developers.

Since when did ACT workcover start issuing building permits and dealing exclusively with developers? You’re not thinking of ACTPLA are you?

The statement that 52 people die in construction sites every year is false and missleading. All deaths on construction sites are included in that figure, so if I was to walk on a construction site tomorrow and have a fatal heart attack that would be considered as another death in the workplace.

So please let’s not inflate the numbers to suit our causes.

The accident is a blow to the construction industry. Maybe Leightons could do more than lip service to their safety concerns and put their money were their mouth is by employing subcontractors that comply with OH&S regulations.

Safty costs money and you won’t get the safest project by employing the cheapest subcontractor.

There is a related issue that has a subtle, but fundamental and insidious influence on the effectiveness of the OHS regulation: i.e. the fact that each state or territory regulates safety (whether it be OHS, Rail Safety or Road Safety) separately. There should be one set of legislation and one regulator across the country, and it should be well resourced.

Instead, we have a patchwork of half-baked “regulators”, some of which are over resourced and don’t know what to do with themselves, while others have a skeleton crew and can’t even set up a reasonable audit schedule that actually matches the amount of industrial activity going on in a region.

Why should a subtly different set of safety rules (and a vastly different set of interpretations of those rules) apply from one location to the other? Why is it that 12 klms down the road in QBN, it’s NSW Workcover who would investigate and report such an incident, or perform inspections/audits according to a completely different schedule to the ACT Workcover?

To the CFMEU: Why isn’t the union calling for a single national OHS regulator?

Grail said :

.. Hopefully it will turn out to be the result of a breach of safety standards, rather than some new failure which needs more standards developed to address it.

why would you be hoping a company has breached safety standards?

Skidbladnir: I think it is quite clear that the post is to exercise “right of reply”. And you don’t know what a strawman argument is.

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy3:22 pm 31 Oct 08

I’d be more inclined to put human safety into the hands on a qualified engineer, rather than someone with a Cert IV.

Jazz – noone can ever be “independent” when employed by the same agency that issues the building permits and deals exclusively with the developers. The ACT Government does not deal directly with the employees, they deal directly with the developers, through building applications, licences, policing of environmental standards.

ACT Workcover is there to ensure that certain minimal levels of safety are adhered to as a matter of law. When it comes to political pressure, I would expect that ACT Workcover will be under extreme pressure for the work to go ahead, with a commitment from the work site to remedy any identified flaws as soon as practicable after staff return to work.

The union OH&S will be present to make complaints based on the union’s idea of what is a “safe” workplace. They would be pressuring the developer to remedy any safety risks before staff return to work.

If someone from ACT Workcover can correct me, I welcome it.

In the meantime, I’ll be eagerly anticipating the report on this incident. Hopefully it will turn out to be the result of a breach of safety standards, rather than some new failure which needs more standards developed to address it.

Sarah Schoonwater3:15 pm 31 Oct 08

Jazz said :

Thanks for the post Sarah. Can you explain to me why a union OH&S official is needed in addition to the one provided by an independent body in the shape of ACT Workcover in order to ratify safe working conditions before the site is reopened?

Thanks for your question Jazz.

The CFMEU employs OH&S experts who have Cert IV qualifications. Employees who choose to join the CFMEU want us to represent their safety on construction sites, so we believe that is democracy.

It is important to remember that I did complain to WorkCover regarding the demolition worker in Belconnen earlier this year and they declared the site safe 15 minutes before 3 tonnes of cement crashed onto the pavement and crushed a (fortunately empty) car.

Another accident has happened in the last 3 hours where a wall has collapsed; thankfully no one has been killed. The company involved in the collapse today have contacted the CFMEU requesting our assistance in improving their safe method statements for the future to prevent things like this happening again.

Surely, the more well trained and experienced experts that we have out on the job ensuring safe working environments, from WorkCover or the Union, the better.

Oh, and I hope you’ll stick around and read how this thread develops, Ms Schoonwater.

Yes, we can be very critical, but occasionally we’re also supportive.
I, for one, enjoy a good debate, and thanks for writing in.

VY Berlina V8 and Jazz

totally agree with both comments

Okay, before the thread gets derailed, can I ask what prompted Ms Schoonwater to write up a piece for the Riot about the CMFEU and her experiences?

Can she also provide a verifiable citation or source for both her “1 fatality a week” statistic, and her “higher than the road toll” comparison?

Strawman, Misrepresentation, or Informal Stuctural Fallacy alert:
The CFMEU’s first priority always has been and always will be safety, and… fundamental right of every worker to be able to return home…
No person can argue against this point without being labelled as condoning unsafe work practices.
Very few employment situations outside being a military combat engineer actually demands personnel risk death everyday for their pay.
However, she could possibly be more correct and appear slightly more rational if she suggested an audience that in US studies, factory work, mining, and construction have consistently scored amongst the lowest in workplace safety assessments.
For workplace homicide, apparently taxi drivers and retail staff are the worst affected.
For Australian data, simple links like this one to Google, or this on to Safety Australia could also be useful in an online forum.

For her ‘three workers’ can she provide clarification of her ‘within meters’? I live ‘within meters’ of I work, or ‘within meters’ of where people die everyday, but it is _several thousand_ meters.

While certainly, as Secretary of ACT CFMEU, she can claim that none of those you _employ_ resort to thuggery, or can be labelled thugs, the CFMEU’s staff and leadership are technically the organisation’s service and advocacy personnel, not the membership.

But she cannot speak of the actions of members as to wether or not they are thuggish, because 1) they pay her fees, and 2) she is the ACT Secretary of the organisation, and 3) she works in an office in Dickson and had to be notified by telephone.
I imagine any emotionally-charged behaviour of members, thuggish or otherwise, was over by the time she arrived onsite.

She then starts her final paragraph with another strawman, uses an “If” statement, and then issues an ultimatum.

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy2:57 pm 31 Oct 08

The point I am making is that the (large and well-known) union I was affiliated with was vastly more interested in increasing its power base and protecting members (from situations that were clearly their fault) in order to preserve the perception of control, than with genuinely protecting its members.

As I said, I value worker safety (in fact I think it should be priority number 1), but I saw no real evidence of this when performing the union delegate role.

Now, I should probably admit that is was some years ago that I was a union delegate, but the taste it left in my mouth has lingered, and I am very distrustful of unions’ seeming altruism.

http://www.ascc.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/656E6571-D7B3-4DD6-846B-78C161CA0F4D/0/Compendium_of_Workers_Compensation_Statistics_200506_Full_version.pdf

According to the OASCC the average deaths in the construction industry is actually a little less – 43 per year – over the last decade, and really, that isnt too far from 52, especially when you’re talking about people being killed at work.

Perhaps the 14,000 serious injuries (needing more than a week off work and with some perminent damage having been done) in the Construction Industry per year, might have been a better statistic to use?

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy said :

As a former union delegate I have nothing but disgust and disdain for organised unions. Once I saw what really goes on, and the way unions think thay can control organisations to forward their own agendas (ie increasing their power base), I quit the role.

I am all for worker safety, but from the sound of this story you’d think OH&S were what the unions were about. Bullcrap. The fact that the story contains unsubstantiated and incorrect figures illustrates this point.

When unions are about negotiating a fair deal and physically protecting their members I’ll support them. Until then, forget it. I’ve seen first hand what happens on the front line of union activity, and it is a bloody disgrace.

Those are pretty serious accusations to throw around without any specific examples. I have had many dealings with numerous unions and, having seen first hand the incredible amount of effort they put into worker safety would describe your post as ‘bullcrap’.

Thanks for the post Sarah. Can you explain to me why a union OH&S official is needed in addition to the one provided by an independent body in the shape of ACT Workcover in order to ratify safe working conditions before the site is reopened?

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy2:37 pm 31 Oct 08

As a former union delegate I have nothing but disgust and disdain for organised unions. Once I saw what really goes on, and the way unions think thay can control organisations to forward their own agendas (ie increasing their power base), I quit the role.

I am all for worker safety, but from the sound of this story you’d think OH&S were what the unions were about. Bullcrap. The fact that the story contains unsubstantiated and incorrect figures illustrates this point.

When unions are about negotiating a fair deal and physically protecting their members I’ll support them. Until then, forget it. I’ve seen first hand what happens on the front line of union activity, and it is a bloody disgrace.

MrIncredible2:33 pm 31 Oct 08

caf said :

I am supportive of unions, and highly supportive of campaigning to improve safety at construction sites. However, if one contruction worker is indeed killed each week at work (in itself this is unacceptably high), that is 52 deaths a year, which is nowhere near the national road toll (1616 in 2007). Even one worker killed a day wouldn’t come close to the road toll.

Heresy! Uncle Joe MacDonald is on his way to your place for a little ‘chat’.

I am supportive of unions, and highly supportive of campaigning to improve safety at construction sites. However, if one contruction worker is indeed killed each week at work (in itself this is unacceptably high), that is 52 deaths a year, which is nowhere near the national road toll (1616 in 2007). Even one worker killed a day wouldn’t come close to the road toll.

The ABCC is a bloody disgrace. And why the heck hasn’t Kevin Howrudd killed it yet?

Perhaps he’s waiting for a committee to release it’s findings on whether to set up a board of review to commission an enquiry into the suitability of establishing a committee to look into the possibility of setting up a independent auditor to review a start date for an ABCC enquiry?

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.