And somebody saw the opportunity in the market to "take care of that" for PCBUs (for a small fee of course) - then more and more companies jumped on the pre-qualification bandwagon... which lead to the creation of Tōtika to solve the issue of "contractors requiring to retain multiple pre-qualification certificates".The PCBU simply has a duty of due diligence in selecting a competent contractor and applying the 3 C's on the job based on who is in the best position to manage which risks. — Tony Walton
Agree that the process for holding HSR elections should be straight forward, my comment was specifically regarding that since there was little interest from anyone taking on the role that there is a reasonable likelihood that there might be no one to vote for (or even to just assume the position).straight forward really. — KeithH
COVID-19 Mortality Risk Correlates Inversely with Vitamin D3 Status, a Mortality Rate Close to Zero Could Theoretically Be Achieved at 50 ng/mL 25(OH)D3 — robyn moses
To be honest very few organisations in NZ would have "true - HSWA defined" HSR - illustrated by Air NZ winning the top award at the 2019 Safeguard awards for essentially "holding HSR elections as per the legislation". And I would also bet that a lot current HSR / Committees in NZ businesses today don't actually fulfill the intended functions under the Act anyway, regardless if those HSRs were elected or not.Since the selection of workers was made by management, IMO the people are are not HSRs as described in the HSW Worker Engagement, Participation and Representation Regs. — KeithH
As Don Ramsey suggests, an option is to conduct an election process. This is a straight forward process - with potential outcomes that management may be unaware of. See Sections 21-26 inclusive of the Worker Engagement, Participation and Representation Regs. — KeithH
Doesn't sound like any actual employee consultation went on there - sounds like a decision has been made by management and now go tell the workers what they have to do...Vaccination Policy with full vaccination by x date or termination of employment now on my desk for worker consultation and engagement with HS committee etc. — robyn moses
Are we waiting for the case where an employee subject to a company deciding to go "no jab, no job" suffers negative effects on their mental health as a result of the stress, etc. and if that falls under the company's duty to manage risks to their workers?This is really important because the PCBU still has duties and responsibilities to ensure that there is to be no harm in the workplace that they are unaware of and no risk of harm that they are aware of that they haven’t taken measures to counteract. — robyn moses
One of the main parts of the Privacy Act is to have a clear purpose for the collection of private information, ensuring the people you are collecting the information from understand that purpose and how the information is to be used and then only using the information for that purpose.As to your query MattD2, whilst we may choose to release our info to our own paymasters, one might say we at least have a bit of an eye on one's own organisation so as to be comfortable. If however that info is being sought by customers of one's employer and is released then one might say the genie is out of the bottle and control of certain personal info lost forever. — Andy Bunyan
If they are working for the DHB would they not generally fall under "7.3 Workers who are employed or engaged by certified providers and carry out work at the premises at which health care services are provided"?We have had the same requests, however my workers are not coved by the COVID-19 Public Health Response (Vaccinations) Order 2021, as they do not fall into this category:
7.2... — Stephen Small
I agree with you on this - and as I mentioned it would seem reasonable for you to respond that as the Relevant PCBU of the Affected Person you have obtained and have record of the information required under clause 11A of the Vaccination Order, can confirm that the Affected Persons assigned to the work comply with clause 7 of the Order, and will updated the DHB if anything changes.My concern is the scattergun effect of health providers who are sending out blanket statements without looking at the coverage. — Stephen Small
That is likely because they are required by the Vaccination order to collect that information if the worker is covered under the order; 11A - COVID-19 Public Health Response (Vaccinations) Order 2021Some DHBs have been telling me that they need an assurance that only vaccinated contractors go to their site but are also reserving the right to request full name, date of birth, date and type of vaccination and other personal information for any staff that might be going to their site in the future. — Garth Forsberg
And yes I agree with you it is not about RA's etc. — Sandra Nieuwoudt
Agree with that Craig - it's not often you see good quality consultation even with employees, with contractors we seem to be even more engrained in the command and control mentality.Sadly consult and cooperate is rare — craig christie
It is an essential service so has operated through all levels of lockdowns — robyn moses