PADI RTO First Aid Student Manual

• Responding to workplace incidents (even if they have caused no injury) • Responding to concerns raised by workers, health and safety representatives or others in the workplace; • Required by the WHS regulations for specific hazards It is also important to use the risk management approach when designing and planning products, processes or places used for work, because it is often easier and more effective to eliminate hazards before they are introduced into a workplace by incorporating safety features at the design stage. Subdivision 2 – What is reasonably practicable? Tooma, Michael, Tooma’s Annotated Work Health and Safety Act 2011, Thomson Reuters (Professional) Australia Limited, 2012, Pyrmont, Sydney, p36 Section 18 In his Act, reasonably practicable, in relation to a duty to ensure health and safety, means that which is, or was at a particular time, reasonably able to be done in relation to ensuring health and safety, taking into account and weighing up all relevant matters including: (a) The likelihood of the hazard or the risk concerned occurring, and, (b) The degree of harm that might result from the hazard or the risk, and, (c) What the person concerned knows, or ought reasonably to know, about: (i) The hazard or the risk, and (ii) Ways of eliminating or minimising the risk, and (d) The availability and suitability of ways to eliminate or minimise the risk, and (e) After assessing the extent of the risk and the available ways of eliminating or minimising the risk, the cost associated with available ways of eliminating or minimising the risk, including whether the cost is grossly disproportionate to the risk. “Reasonably practicable” is a key concept in the Act. It is a qualification to almost all duties and obligations under the Act, including the primary duty of care of a person conducting a business or undertaking (PCBU): s19. Section 18 codifies the definition of reasonably practicability in relation to the duties imposed by sections 19-26. However, the concept is almost as old as the law itself. Reasonable practicability does not go so far as to require that you have done everything physically possible. It was considered by the High Court (2001) that reasonably practicable requires consideration whether the time, trouble and expense of the precautions are disproportionate to the risk involved. Occupational Health, Safety and Welfare Act 1986 (SA) in Slivak v Lurgi (Australia) Pty Ltd [2001] HCA 6. In that case, Callinan, J cited with approval a passage from Lord Oaksey’s judgement in Marshall v Gotham Co Ltd [1954] AC 360. Reasonable practicability implies some element of reasonable foreseeability. However, caution should be exercised in importing such common law concepts as reasonable foreseeability in section 18. What is required, however, is the balancing of the nature, likelihood and gravity of the risk to safety constituting the offence (s 19(a)-(c)) with the costs, difficulty and trouble necessary to avert it (s 19(d)-(e)). In that context, it would not be reasonably practicable to take precautions against a danger which could not have been known to be in existence. Cost is the last step in the recoverable practicability assessment. The cost deliberations must include a consideration whether the cost is grossly disproportionate to the risk: s 19(e).

Analysing and assessing risks A risk assessment of the hazards identified in the first step should result in a list of potential injuries or harm and the likelihood of these occurring. The potential for fatal injury should be considered for each identified hazard. If hazards are listed, they should be in the order of the most to the least serious, e.g. from fatal to minor injury. In assessing risks, consideration should be given to the state of knowledge about the frequency of injury or disease, the duration of exposure to injury or disease sources and the likely severity of the outcomes. Knowledge gained from similar workplaces or similar processes may be relevant to this risk assessment. Matters to be considered include: • Frequency of injury - how often is the hazard likely to result in an injury or dis- ease? • Duration of exposure - how long is the employee likely to be exposed to the haz- ard? • Outcome - what are the consequences or potential severity of injury? Assessing these three factors will indicate the probability or likelihood of injury or harm occurring to workers involved in a particular work process. It will also indicate the likely severity of this harm. Risk assessment requires good judgement and awareness of the potential risks of a work process. A person undertaking a risk assessment must have knowledge and experience of the work process. Risk assessment will be more complicated or difficult if the data or information regarding hazards of a work process is incomplete. In some cases it may be necessary to break down the activity or process into a series of parts and assess each part separately. Risk assessment should include: • Assessing the adequacy of training or knowledge required to work safely; • Looking at the way the jobs are performed; • Looking at the way work is organised; • Determining the size and layout of the workplace; • Assessing the number and movement of all people on the site; • Determining the type of operation to be performed; • Determining the type of machinery and plant to be used; • Examining procedures for an emergency (e.g. accident, fire and rescue); and • Looking at the storage and handling of all materials and substances. This step should provide information where and which employees are likely to be at risk of incurring injury or disease, how often this is likely to occur, and the potential severity of that injury or disease risk. Identifying control measures The final step in risk assessment is to determine the control measures that need to be taken and the ongoing review of those measures. There is a hierarchy or preferred order of control measures ranging from the most effective to the least effective. The preferred order is outlined in the table below. The control of occupational injury and disease risks should preferably be dealt with by design, substitution, redesign, separation or administration. These controls generally eliminate, reduce or minimise risk in a more reliable manner than personal protective equipment. Controls involve implementing measures that reduce the hazard and risk in the workplace. Where regulations require specific methods to control the risk, these must be complied with.

HLTAID008 MANAGE FIRST AID SERVICES AND RESOURCES

HLTAID008 MANAGE FIRST AID SERVICES AND RESOURCES

VIII-13

VIII-12

PADI RTO

PADI RTO