Food for thought:
1. If you are mounting first aid kits/fire extinguishers on machinery don't compromise the ROPS (#OwnGoal).
2. From an emergency response perspective my favourite first aid kits are the ones that fold out where you can see what is in all the sections. They can be stored in a waterproof box and pulled out when needed.
3. Like Matt, I'm a big fan of CAT's and decent-sized trauma bandages, but you need to do the risk assessment first to justify the purchase and people need to be trained in how to use them. I'm also a fan of having a decent pair of medical scissors (they have a bend in them and blunt ends) I carry a pair of Leatherman Raptors in my grab-and-go bag, They fold up small and apart from being medical scissors they have a strap cutter, ring cutter, ruler, Oxygen Tank Wrench and carbide glass breaker….although to be fair, I’m a magpie who’s attracted to shiny things that are well designed!!

We live in an area that gets ice/snow in weather so my recommendations to clients are:
1. At the very least have a photocopy of the driver's licence on file and a signed copy of the driver's policy. Which makes it clear that they need to tell us if their licence conditions change.
2. Winter driving course at Highlands for general drivers and 4WD course through DriveTech if their vehicles are driving off-road.
3. Like Kate Thompson, I agree that DT Driver Training is great and they have a programme for people from overseas who are new to our roads.
4. Anything that is Class 2 or above, or some form of plant requires a vehicle famil/ driver assessment with a supervisor.
5. Two things to watch out for (learnt the hard way). If you have apprentices who are on their restricted they CANNOT drink any alcohol and drive. Also, if you have someone on a pink licence for an alcohol infringement that occurred outside of work and they have an interlocked breath testing device installed in their work truck they can ONLY drive THAT vehicle and nothing else.

Hi Chris,

I've sent this out to all my clients and have already had positive feedback and some good conversations about it.

Big thanks to the team that took the time to put it together.

SB

I keep it simple and go for:

1. Reflect:

TPIE... did we have the time, people, information and equipment to get the job done? Were there any surprises?

2. Project:

TPIE do we have the time, people, information and equipment to keep the job going? Is anything broken? Do people need training? What's dumb, dangerous or different? (3D) what is S.T.I.C.K.Y (sh*t that it could kill us?)

3. Open Mic:
A.W.E (and what else?), tell me more? Can you tell me what this looks like to you?

I think this question comes down to whether you are being proactive or reactive.

In an ideal world there world be a symbiotic relationship between HR and HSE, after all, both focus on people.

On the proactive side of things, HR and Organisational development teams can lead well-being programs. HSE, Occ Health Nurses and even hygienists can be woven into a combined approach. However, the ability of these programmes to drive long term change in physical and mental well-being has been widely debated

Also, smaller organisations don't have the inhouse resources to develop and deploy this kind of programme. Workers are lucky of they have access to an employee assistance programme, workplace medicals and maybe a smoking cessation program and/or paid entry to a fun run.

In the reactive world both HR and HSE are all to often woefully under prepared to deal with burnout, bullying and memtal health issuses for both individuals and the team they work in.

Trying to treat peope with dignity, get them the support they need and support them when they return to work looks simple enough on paper. However, from my experience it's an emotional minefield in real life.

Identifying the complex web of causation and how the workplace contributed to the outcome, identifying how the workplace 'ecosystem' needs to change if it was causativre and ensure that those 'changes' stick is in my opinion a Herculanian task.

Also, if the event goes legal, it will all depend on whetther an employment lawyer chose to challenge the workplace circumstances under the ERA, HSAW or Hunan Rights Act. The retribution factor will enevitably determine which team is required to 'jump' into action after the damage has been done.

Happy to be proven wrong, or questioned on anything I've said.

Interesting: when I'm coaching people that are new to HSE, we have a discussion about discretion and the ability to sleep at night.

If you are 'in house' to avoid insanity, a safety person constantly has to ask 'is this 'issue' life threatening? Then, is this the ditch I want to die in, or can I triage it for a later date? If you are clear about what your key projects are and the HSE vision that the organisation is moving towards will this add value?

It takes time and experience to trust your own intuition and you WILL make mistakes. That's why having a close group of 'ride or die' colleagues that you can talk to 'unedited' is mission critical.

Secondly, when it comes to being able to 'sleep at night', Spend time trying to stay up to date with everything from PPE innovation to case law. If you give the best technical advice/guideance you can, it's then up to your stakeholders to take it on board. If they choose not to follow the advice that's on them.

Finally, when it comes to life changing injuries, or fatalities, from my personal experience you WILL go through a grieving procrss and part of that process will likely be working through feelings of being 'responsible'. This is part of being human. This is where having a sound After Action Review process and Employee Assistance Programmes for HSE people AND everyone else is ideal.

I found EAP Services and Habit group great all round.

I found the Worksafe BC useful OHS Guidelines Part 4: General Conditions WORKING ALONE OR IN ISOLATION[/b] useful.

On a different note. It's interesting how we are now been asked to scan for Covid 19 at the petrol pump on a forecourt when a few years ago this was a no mobile phones allowed area.

Most of my clients are small businesses in the Construction space. Their principals/clients require them to be part of the pre-qual system that is not part of Totika.

From an HSE professional perspective I 100% support Totika and see that it could be of huge value to the construction industry. They have similar systems in the UK and various provinces/territories in Canada.

I feel that for whatever reason this initiative has been "cock blocked" (for want of a better word) by a major industry stakeholder, to the detriment of the industry as a whole.

Thank you to everyone that has put thought into their response on this thread.

To be honest, when I posted this I'd had a head wrecking day with a client 'discussing' mobile scaffolds and JCB/forklift safety.... come home exhausted, turned on the TV (to relax) and had 2 x WTF moments in quick succession. I seriously thought that shat on my star sign!

I'm crazy busy at the moment and don't have time to write complaints to the broadcasting authority. However, what I needed was my professional 'tribe' to make me feel like I wasn't going nuts and the topic was worth discussing. Your posts all support this.

Stay safe everyone.

SB

@MattD2 yup, agree with it all.

@MattD2 @Andrew @KeithH @EBaxter you are all right and thanks for taking the time to comment.

All legislation and approved code of practices aside, I guess it would make great TV if a contestant took a winger of a 2m scaffold in the middle of the night and took out a camera operator. Nothing like backboards and stiff necks on set for a bit of drama.

Also, Interesting to see the articles about the safety deficiencies on set at the new 'Lord of the Rings' TV series.

The Block contestants stand to earn a lot of money and the show owners are raking in the marketing/product placement dollars. To me this moves the show beyond the realms of home DIY. People are being put at risk due to poor working at heights practice and fatigue issues. Apparently, all in the name of 'good tv' this is ok in NZ.

To be fair, Wolfie did go on the rampage last night because someone hadn't signed in, which lead to a nice hazard app product placement shot.

Interestingly, the Australian Block has much higher HSE standards and a dedicated HSE person on site.

@Garth re your 'hoist' comment take a look at today's Stuff article
When pronunciation matters - and when it really doesn't By Julia de Bres.

"Are these really their motivations? Or are they just consumed by an urge to point out that their own way of speaking is better? At best, this is obnoxious. At worst, it reflects linguistic prejudice."

When I'm working with teams I meet them as is/where is. I'll listen carefully and then deliberately use their language. This works well if you really want to understand what is happening and make incrimental change.

Hi Steve,

Please keep posting. I really appreciate your updates and insights.

Congratulations Peter and Team Safeguard. It's not a small thing to curate a high-quality forum!

Hi All,

Queenstown's Mayor wants to insist that the rental car companies 'should take responsibility for road deaths' by training "tourists" (nebulous term that basically means someone with a foreign drivers licence) on how to drive, AND not hiring cars to people that they think are jet-lagged or incapable of driving on NZ's road (subjective criteria imposed by people who have no training in how to make that judgement).

Below is a summary of my response I wrote based on my experience of being both an HSE consultant for transport companies and having spent time as a volunteer ambulance officer dealing with MVA's (it didn't go down well).

1. There is no point in demanding that rental car companies stop hiring cars to tourists based on subjective criteria. It's up to the NZTA to determine 'Who" can go on our roads and the NZPolice to enforce that decision.
2. Kiwi's crash just as much as tourists and the stats for the Southern South island show that three key causes of serious trauma for drivers with a NZ Licence are impairment (drugs or alcohol), speed (not driving to the conditions) and poor road design. See "Statistical analysis of tourist crashes in southern New Zealand."
3. Rhys Gardner: Chief executive officer at Codriver Group Limited has developed virtual reality driver training that is currently been tested in rental car companies around New Zealand. However, this doesn't affect "tourists" who buy their own vehicle and then crash.


What does all this mean?

I'm a Safety II fangirl, so I'm going to be on the side of better-designed roads and 'space-aged' technology in cars that would prevent drivers from driving impaired and cause the vehicle to pull over or slow down if the driver is driving inappropriately according to the weather and road conditions.

I'm sure I'm going to be dodging tomatoes over this view and accused by liberals of imposing 'Nanny State' technology on their right to drive their vehicle the way they want to....and die a predictable death.

I usually get my clients to use a combination of the 'Get Home Safe' App and Garmin 'In Reach Explorer'. This is a GPS with an SOS tracking function that's not far off military-grade and is surprisingly cost-effective. It also has messaging to email and mobile phone through satellite capability so you can Bluetooth the device to mobile if you need to.

This is not the perfect solution for everyone; however, and based on a presenter that I heard speak at the Southern Safety Show (Invercargill) and my own experience I think you need to consider the following:

1. What is the risk category that your worker is in?
An accountant doing a site visit will not face the same STICKY (Stuff That Can Kill You) that a transmission line worker will. The line worker may require an on body product that can tell if the person has collapsed or taken a fall.

2. The availability of mobile and other communication networks
Understand the coverage available and how reliable it is

3. Response time required. Do you need 24-hour monitoring from a call centre such as St John to ensure there is a prompt response?
What is the typical work schedule? Is it 24/7 or emergency response only?

I ask my client's to use the term target (or alleged target). It's more neutral, tries to stay out of the victim/persecutor model, attempts to focus on the behaviour rather than labelling the individual and I've found it a better term to use when working with the person who has been accused of doing the behaviour.

I think the concept of Zero Harm is redundant and I cringe every time our 'Business Leaders' throw the phrase out there.

I've seen this mindset drive event reporting underground, especially when contractual penalties are tied to the 'zeroness'.

The phrase also leads to assumptions that humans can 'control' their environment and only bad/stupid get themselves hurt. This inevitably ties people into a vicious cycle of victim/ persecutor/ enabler or the great name - blame - shame game.

Work is complex, human's are complex and trying to prevent events with aspirational slogans like 'zero harm' doesn't seem to help much.