| A sparkling and poignant IFAP Breakfast Presentation | | | | okay for a manager/executive to go a different way |
| by Greg Smith, Freehills Consultant - Employee | | | | to that advised provided they can justify the decision. |
| Relations, stimulated those attending to nurture the four | | | | In this they demonstrate they both knew of and |
| management obligations of legal compliance and to | | | | considered carefully the issue(s) before them. |
| continually align aspirational ventures of safety | | | | 4. Independently verify from time to time - The higher |
| documentation with the foreseeable realities for where | | | | the risk in process, the more external verification is |
| they're to be applied, converting paper to practice. | | | | needed. There is often a noticeable disconnect |
| Mr. Smith, a lawyer, ex-army officer, and former | | | | between the aspirations and the follow-up relating to |
| Principal Advisor, Safety, for Woodside, has been | | | | the OS&H obligations of organisations. |
| party to various safety boards of enquiry, and spoke | | | | The temptation for many a safety practitioner is to |
| from the viewpoint of the prosecution cross-examining | | | | 'adopt' other companies' policies without factoring in the |
| managers and executives under trial at inquest or | | | | obligations they're implicitly placing upon their directing |
| inquiry. | | | | managers. |
| These are my learnings: | | | | The worst thing a safety manager/professional can do |
| - A "premise that workers will do the right thing is | | | | is develop safety documentation and policy that the |
| doomed to failure from a legal compliance viewpoint." | | | | organisation can't possibly implement; given that people |
| The legal compliance (safety) program's key premise | | | | implement safety, and they do so within a whole realm |
| must be that systems are inherently flawed and an | | | | of competing priorities, and other equally important |
| expectation of pockets of non-compliance (for a | | | | systems. Organisations must be careful not to engage |
| range of reasons) is a healthy assumption. | | | | in 'initiative overload.' |
| - Blockers to initiatives, policies and procedures always | | | | For programs to be successful they must be simple |
| sit around behaviour, be that direct employee | | | | and focus needs to be with the people who're |
| behaviour or the behaviour of the manager | | | | charged with implementing them. This is what the |
| management system interface to ineffectively design | | | | process at law focuses upon, in terms of an |
| or implement systems. | | | | OS&H case: |
| - The Four Management Obligations at Law for | | | | 1. What is it the organisation says it does/has done? |
| organisations are: | | | | 2. Show it: how can what the organisation says it does |
| | | | has done be shown? |
| 1. Know its obligations and risks. | | | | 3. What do others say about it? |
| 2. Have processes that bring its system failures to its | | | | 4. Comparing what the organisation does in managing |
| attention | | | | and meeting its safety obligations with what it does in |
| 3. Respond personally in a timely manner - At law, it is | | | | other areas e.g. the environment. |