Suchergebnisse

ResumenLas métricas de la seguridad laboral basadas en la accidentabilidad, como la tasa total de frecuencia de accidentes registrables, presentan deficiencias bien documentadas. Un bajo nivel de siniestralidad no exime de responsabilidades jurídicas. La seguridad, entendida como presencia de capacidades para que las cosas salgan bien, concuerda con el concepto jurisprudencial de diligencia debida del empleador. Los autores de este artículo proponen un índice que engloba ambos elementos, midiendo las capacidades de adquirir y mantener conocimientos sobre seguridad, comprender la naturaleza de las operaciones, destinar recursos para la seguridad, responder a los riesgos, demostrar la colaboración y la conformidad, y ofrecer garantías.

RésuméFace aux limites, bien documentées, des indices de sécurité au travail habituels, axés sur la fréquence des incidents, et alors que la jurisprudence a fait valoir une obligation de diligence raisonnable de l'employeur, de nombreux chercheurs préconisent de mesurer, plutôt que les échecs, les ressources – ou capacités – qui font que tout se déroule de façon harmonieuse en temps ordinaire. Les auteurs proposent dans cet esprit un indice des capacités qui englobe six dimensions: la connaissance des enjeux de sécurité, celle des processus opérationnels, les moyens alloués, le suivi des risques, la mise en conformité et les garanties de sécurité.

AbstractThe shortcomings of incident‐based metrics for worker safety such as total recordable incident frequency rate (TRIFR) are well documented. In particular, a low TRIFR is no assurance against legal liability. There is considerable overlap between the literature on safety as the presence of capacities to make things go well, and jurisprudence in labour and workplace safety law on employer due diligence. In this article, the authors propose an index that merges the two, measuring the capacities to acquire and maintain safety knowledge, to understand the nature of operations, to resource for safety, to respond to risks, to demonstrate engagement and compliance, and for assurance.

COVID-19 represents unprecedented challenges for the entire community. Much of Australia's commercial sector has voluntarily deployed strategies to support social distancing ahead of any lock downs. Businesses are working to safely maintain operations and a productive workforce throughout social isolation/distancing for an unknown duration. Yet uncertainty, ambiguity and radical change are breeding grounds for anxiety, stress and helplessness. Conditions that contradict safe mental health practices for work. The Australian perspective includes the cumulative stressors of the bushfires, torrential rains and floods. Each of these stressors was an environmental stressor. But people and businesses knew what to do. The newest cumulative stressor is remote work becoming the norm. Workplaces have often had a mediating effect as a point of social interaction. Legally mandated safe spaces that people could connect and be productive within. There is much research on the connection between social isolation and loneliness. Organisations need to support workers in maintaining social connections, team cohesion and productivity throughout these times. This paper will explore the health and safety legal obligations that apply in this context and outline a practical framework for organisations to contribute to and reinforce a positive state of mental health during the mass remote work experiment.