Researching cultures
Asking for advice
Listening without interruption
Talking openly and clearly
Listening with respect
Speaking honestly
Building trust
Treating with equality
Eating humble pie
Acknowledging wrongs
Accepting other authority figures
Treating with respect
Gifting without expectations

I like your joke @Trudy Downes

@Andrew
While I am aware of the educational outcomes faced by Maori and Pasifika males, this thread relates to women of any ethnicity.

@Andrew
I believe you may be confusing individual success with applying for a position (in a more senior role).

The factors I mentioned have, in New Zealand and IMHO, origins in education legislation following the signing on the Treaty of Waitangi. A brief overview is here - Who achieves what in secondary schooling? A conceptual and empirical analysis in Appendix 1 p78.
These have impacted women - regardless of race - since their introduction.

And personally, I accept I am a privileged New Zealander descended from racist British colonialists.

Looking at the picture since 1840.

Premiers or PMs since 1856 (no Premier in 1854)
41 in total, 3 women and 38 men
Women 7.32%

Chief Justices since 1841
13 in total, 2 women and 11 men
Women 15.88%

Governors, Governors-General or Governor-Generals since 1841
38 in total, 4 women and 34 men
Women 10.53%

MPs since 1854
5347 in total, 494 women and 4853 men
Women 9.24%

Just looking at the bigger picture

Hi @Stuart Oakey,
Just food for thought.

What are the outcomes for management? And what are they for workers?
What has been put in place to measure the effectiveness of the allowance?
Where will the measurement data be sourced from?
How will results be presented so outcomes can be measured?
What will the results be compared against?
How will the accuracy of comparative results be determined?

My 2 cents worth.

A few more items.

Lack of role models
Limited access to support networks
Long term effects of rejection
Poor recognition of potential
Stereotyped work-life balance
Misogynistic attitudes


I personally believe it all began with the Greeks and Romans.

These are just a few references - Women in Ancient Greece and The Roman Empire - Women from about 80 - 100 generations ago.
Those customs persisted into the early 1800s when missionaries began arriving in NZ.
Maori Women: Caught in the Contradictions of a Colonised Reality. See section III. The Status of Women Under English Law
And this practice of reducing women has continued to the current generation - a married couple are usually referred to as 'man and wife' rather than as a 'woman and her husband'.

Let me see.
Gender bigotry
Social Darwinism
Educational stigma
Historical European culture
Social bias

No charge for my opinions

At the risk of offending, why is it necessary to drink alcohol in a workplace?
Interesting Google search

BTW - is the next step to permit selected drug use?

Just my 2 cents worth

Hi @rebecca telfer,
With all due respect, these are only $NZ300 each to purchase and download from here. The AS/NZS standards are slightly more expensive.
While giving away purchased items for free is commendable, asking for copies which are inexpensive to obtain is, IMHO, not so very creditable.

Just my 2 cents worth.

@Riki Brown
This may be of assistance also. OHS webinar - Facilities Safety: Managing Common Issues for Occupants and Visitors

Cheers

Hi @Riki Brown
Consider approaching the situation from a risk only perspective.

You may want to consider using PEST or PESTLE analysis. FEHM (Fire and Explosion Hazard Management) may also be of assistance.

Other items to consider. What does management say and why. Are the fireplaces connected to a supply. Are there existing safety measures or cutouts.

Cheers

Hi @Kathy Froy
I'm halfway through a qualification for adult teaching so I am intrigued. My next two papers relate to my questions below.

How does your organisation ensure training outcomes are achieved? How and when does your organisation measure success (or failure) of the training? When does your organisation engage each individual to measure success following workplace application? How is this measured?

Is your question related to organisational requirements or is it related to individual requirements? Is the desire a want or a need? How will repeating previous training enhance capability or competency? What is the opinion of the person involved?

My own observations are that refresher or update courses are only necessary when:

• a change to or alteration of the original information has occurred, or
• the knowledge or skills have not been regularly used, or
• a worker requests the training, or
• there is a legal requirement.

Just curious.

Such a negative view. But it can continue on a positive note.

Pessimism, an attitude of hopelessness toward life and toward existence, coupled with a vague general opinion that pain and evil predominate in the world. (Britannica)

Optimism, the theory, in philosophy, that the world is the best of all possible worlds or, in ethics, that life is worth living. (Britannica)

A few reasons for pessimism are businesses have approached H&S from the top down, see it as an expense, are keen to blame others for their own shortcomings, have locked themselves into a cottonwool approach and prefer ROI and lost productivity measurements.

Some reasons for optimism, IMHO, are that the door is still open for worker engagement, creativity boosts productivity (even in a recession), improvement definitely starts at home, vocational methods balance academic inputs and ROE is a two way street.

My 2 cents worth

At the risk of upsetting the apple cart, there are some good ideas here but I do believe the core issue is completely missed.

The code of practice says that you are suppose to have a management plan and renovation survey when doing renovations. The management plan needs to be kept on site. In my experience it is rare for a builder or trades to do this. Even if they know it is a requirement. Often they say my competitors don't why should I add on extra costs. — Stuart Keer-Keer

Your last sentence comes close to my view. Let me explain.

My opinion is that it is more to do with business costs and the ability to secure work more than any denial, lack of education, ACOP requirements and such like.

Small businesses in NZ (those that employ less than 20 people) makes up 97% of the total business in NZ (MBIE and StatsNZ), employ nearly 30% of the workforce (MBIE and StatsNZ) and generate just over 25% of GDP (MBIE and StatsNZ). Interestingly enough, these SMEs employ and average of one and a half people per business.
The annual surplus for SMEs after deducting average wages/salary but before taxes and expenses is about $42k per person or around $64k per business. Not a lot.

Comparatively, large businesses that employ more than 20 people have bigger annual surpluses. About $88k per employee and $10.4 mill per business.

That SMEs average 1.5 employees per business tends to indicate (for me) a lot of sole traders or two/three person bands whereas larger businesses average 119 employees each. And every employee usually has at least a couple of mouths to feed at home.

So IMHO, given there are so many small businesses (546,000 according to MBIE and StatsNZ), the competition for work is high therefore quotes need to be competitive (you could say cheap is the word). Shortcuts are normally taken to secure work.
The NZ construction industry framework has changed over the last 30-40 years with the advert of companies specialising in project management. This has created another level in how work is organised. Project managers take an initial cut of the cost. What's left is passed to the main contractor who take their margin, followed by lesser contractors to finally down to the SMEs and there is usually not much left in the pot.

The charge-out rate for an SME has to be similar or cheaper than their competitors otherwise a business will miss out on the work. And no work can mean no money which can lead to hungry mouths. Shortcuts get taken.

IMHO I don't believe SMEs are denying there is an issue with asbestos (or silica or asthma or noise or HAV) but are practically applying what they see as limits on what they need to quote for so they can secure work. These businesses may also be aware of the not insignificant costs involved with compliance.

So from my point of view, the main market H&S is aiming for is the biggest one numerically but the smallest one financially. Maybe it is time to work out how to entice the larger organisations to engage in ethical and moral obligations by investing in their SMEs.

Just my 2 cents worth.

@Claire you are welcome. :smile:

@Claire
Look up the NZ Building Code Clause D. This link is to external stairs.
There is no width dimension - minimum or maximum - in NZ. Usually that is dependent on construction methods and materials used. Use and maximum weight limits will also be a factor.

Alternatively, consider a design by a suitably qualified engineer.

No charge this time

@robyn moses
Talk with Brent Armitage (Auckland) or Sherry Peck (Christchurch) from WorkSafe. Either are good for practical advice. HSRsupportatworksafedotgovtdotnz

Cheers Steve.
Thank you for your kind words.

While I would like to think I came up with the above myself, I was fortunate to attend a Learning Teams presentation by Brent Sutton courtesy of NZISM so part of what I wrote is influenced by Brent.
I'm also doing an Adult and Tertiary Teaching qualification through SIT. That is definitely influencing and changing my approach to H&S at all levels. Would have been nice to have learned all this 20 years ago but better now than never.

At the risk of upsetting someone or someones, it sounds like many of these rules? guidelines? are decided or written by those who drive a desk rather than the people who drive forklifts.

Reaching a conclusion from a distance about how others will conduct activities without close observation or stakeholder input is IMHO an autocratic process most organisations are familiar with. Quick and easy decision. Implementation is usually not as quick and easy.

To reach a conclusion after conducting observation and stakeholder input is a process most organisations are usually uncomfortable with. The cause is usually within the structure and culture of the organisation.

To discover why people do what they do, observation and discussion usually provides clarity. A difficulty most organisations also have is allowing workers to have input and make decisions that involve production processes or procedures.

Perceived as a loss of power, it is however a step towards empowering workers. Should the process or procedure require modification, workers are usually the best at collectively finding solutions. And providing the reasons why modifications are needed.

So returning to the first original question, my thoughts on this are several. Have the workers been observed conducting activities? Have they been asked if the cap impedes vision? Why do they wear the cap. But more importantly, what do they need to do their job.
Then the desk driver can write guidelines that are both robust and also provide flexibility.

A thought to keep in mind is that workers are the ones doing the activities and they are very adaptable. If something is an impediment to doing their work, give them credit when they make changes so production can continue at the rate management is comfortable with.

Just my 2 cents worth.