In January 2010, a high-rise apartment complex was being constructed at a site in Dorcas Street, South Melbourne. Australian Aluminium Shopfitters Pty Ltd was engaged to undertake glazing works for the project. The company, in turn, engaged a third party to undertake the glazing at the Workplace. The third party's three employees worked exclusively for AAS and were "deemed as their employees".

On 15 January 2010, one of the deemed employees used a cantilevered mobile device with a raised platform ("the chariot"), to access high points of the building under construction. The chariot was the accused's plant. The deemed employee sustained fatal injuries when both he and the chariot fell seven storeys to the ground below. He was not using any fall protection.

For this case study you are required to identify and explain;

 

• Factors that contributed to the incident
• Relevant standards, codes, regulations and what the actual requirements of those documents were for the situation described by the case study
• The actions you would put in place in the organisation to prevent the same type of incident from occurring in the future and to meet compliance requirements

 

Factors that contributed to the incident

The factors that contributed to the incident were:

• Lack of safety standards and protection equipment required by law
• A defective "chariot"
• A risky method of implementing glazing.
• Employee was asked to do a job that was considered high-risk construction work under the Work Health and Safety Act of Australia.

Relevant standards, codes, regulations and what the actual requirements of those documents were for the situation described by the case study

The most relevant code is the Work Health and Safety (Construction) Code of Practice, along with WHS Regulation 291 which establishes high risk construction work, and WHS Regulations 32-38 which establishes how the duty holder must manage risks. When the employee is said to have suffered fatal injuries it is possible that he either died or that he was injured to a point where he became permanently or partially disabled. Therefore, other applicable legislation may include any relevant criminal or civil law if and when the victim or his family members determine to sue the company AAS for damages (whether compensatory, incidental, etc.).

The actions you would put in place in the organisation to prevent the same type of incident from occurring in the future and to meet compliance requirements

One of the first things would be to comply with WHS Act requirements, and have workers (either those outsourced or from a third-party) to always be provided and utilize adequate safety equipment, and follow safety procedure guidelines for the type of work that they are doing.

Secondly, AAS must also stop outsourcing its workforce to a third-party because this means that they are trying to avoid paying benefits required by law to its own workers. as well as other relevant perks or taxes that are applicable to full-time workers under long-term or permanent contracts.

In order to become an ethical company, AAS must also establish a code of ethics, an ESG (Environment, Social, and Governance) framework, and develop a further sense of accountability and responsibility not only to its clients but also to its workers, whether they're permanent full-time, part-time, temporary, or outsourced employees.