I guess people are aware that you cannot discriminate against a person because of a disability which includes physical illness.

If a person turns up with a "temperature" and you have no idea what has caused it what are you going to do?

Hi Nadine
I am not the best person to ask about compliance - because I believe we do things for the right reason and compliance follows.

I also hold the view meetings must have agenda items and every agenda item has an outcome assigned to a person with a deadline for getting something beneficial done.

Mix that with my view that most things we do must have a "proportional response". That is, if it is important we do it, do it straight away and get the right person to do it. If its a "nice to have" in today's situation it simply gets put aside.

And the next step from the proportional response is that managers MUST step up and make sure their critical safety responses are being followed. So no need for meetings about that.

As for compliance risk, I would say there is next to 0% chance of Worksafe investigating any complaint that an essential employer is not holding Safety meetings. They must have much, much more important things to do.

Much more important to set up a communication lines to quickly resolve risk management breaches that could lead to major harm. Which should, theoretically be business as usual

Nothing. Risk of transmission of the virus on mail items is extremely low.

Likely have a bigger risk of getting some human excreta transmitted disease from pooey (is that a word?) fingers.

Fun fact. Over 2.2m people die each year of diarrhoeal diseases

I would have thought an essential service would be far too busy providing essential services and simply would not have time for meetings. That is, meetings that don't have agenda items solely focused on addressing current operational risks.

There are only two types of acceptable project
- safety related projects that will increase the gross revenue of the business
- safety related projects that will reduce the operational costs of the business.

We have entered a new world where $$ will be the one and only focus. The old saying "cashflow is king" will never be truer. And Health and safety practitioners have to get their head around it.

We are facing unprecedented economic times, likely worse than after the Christchurch earthquakes and the GFC

Unemployment may well reach 15%. Maybe more. That means we will have significantly fewer workers to do health and safety stuff on.

GDP could contract by more than 8%. To put that number into perspective a recently published risk management exercise suggests that if the costs of containing Cornavirus exceed 6.4% of GDP more future lives will be lost than lives saved by our current management approach.

We need to be very conscious that anything we do today could well be creating a bigger problem for tomorrow.

We are going to enter a world where "safety" becomes a business "luxury".

If Health and safety practitioners cannot come up with economically viable project propositions their employer will reduce business costs by making these positions redundant.

As I take a breather, Earthquakes, shootings, deaths, same thing, just a different year.

I work in two spaces Head and Heart and mainly working in Head.

Change is moving into about 90% Heart.
4.00am yesterday modelling payroll to keep 100% people employed on 100% pay for four weeks. 10.30pm writing letters to banks to give comfort with mortgage payments.And a pile of stuff in the middle

Past few weeks no change in practice - other than really ramped up internal communications. Its all about giving comfort to known facts. Trying to quell rumors and the latest hot tip on facebook. Dealing with hypochondriacs who are now in over drive, especially as we have 12 people in self isolation and 1 infection. Includes ramping up visibility - eg more sanitiser (even though personal health has always been the message. Its about the Heart Message, not the Head Fact). Very pleased we now got cleaner toilets and much less "Farmer-Blows". Happy days for positives!

Testing of comms to make sure all details are up to date. So that's TXT messaging services and links to internal website. Excellent - got the tardy folk finally up to speed. But checking communication lines for the troglodytes with no phones or internet.

Mental health major focus calming and stress reduction - I don't want anyone topping themsleves in the next four weeks.

Usual safety practices apply. Got through the challenge of P2 masks that we actually need for fabrication PPE. Zero time spent on "Work From Home" bullshit policy.

Extremely pleased we arent be continually hounded by Climate Change risk.

I had to rescue my son who was plunging to the depths after stepping off a wharf.

I wouldn't think for a moment that the wharf people should be responsible. It was a place enjoyed by many.

Ok, I again invite you to check my math.

But based on Italy's infection rate which currently stands at 28,700 people

If I employ 2,850 people I should be able to expect one person absent for 14 days

If I employ 100 people then that is 0.035 of a person away.

This is a health and safety forum and our focus ought to be on managing health and safety risks to our workforce.

I can tell you as at today, for me, staff absenteeism is running at about usual rates but now having to deal with Self Isolation which is done through leave entitlements. So absences managed in exactly the same way as we would manage absenteeism. Customer pipe line is ok and supply chains (except for P2 masks) also Ok. Constraints there currently being worked through usual inventory management.

At the moment we are projecting a down turn in sales and some supply constraints. But this is a typical operational problem which is dealt with every month of every year. The only issue is the scale.

Can I try to provide some light relief.

Lets assume Italy is an absolute basket case. They have had 2,503 deaths.

So the usual measurement is 4.12 people per 100,000 population have died of Covid 19

Now I am going to reduce this population by 25% because I'm going to assume 25% of deaths are those aged under 16 and over 65. So, basically the 75 % of deaths are in our employment demographic

If I employ 32,500 people I should be able to plan for 1 death.

If I employ 100 people I am going to loose 0.003 of a person.

Or an Annual employment attrition of 0.006 of a person a year - assuming Covid last 6 months.

Blowed if I know what difference thermometers is going to make.

(Feel free to check my math - not one of my strong suits)

I am quite convinced the world has gone stark raving bonkers.

And this is right up there with corporate lunacy

I can have the "Govt is useless, WHO is incompetent and this virus was released by the One World Government" conversation with any one.

But the bottom line is we have to accept that our Ministry of Health (not the Minister) are the experts in such things. And no where in the NZ Pandemic Plan have I seen work based thermometers.

Where has the risk assessment gone? (20 confirmed case in NZ as I write, no one dead). No risk assessment = no management plan. How can you have a management plan without understanding the risk. (Last I looked we had 4 in 1 million person infection rate without delving into the sources of those infections.)

Since when are first aiders trained to make measurements and assessments in a pandemic.

My health information is my personal information and no one other than my Doctor is getting that. And absolutely not the First Aider.

Obviously if you take a temperature today what are you going to do tomorrow?

And if this is happening in the food industry I want to vomit. This is disgusting. Do they mean to say for all these years they have done nothing to protect me from exposure to other viruses and things that create a temperature. Uuurk!

Step back from the panic button. Wash your hands, use the cough etiquette and you will be 99.99999% right.

How would you know for sure the person caught it travelling for work.

The reason I ask is, if you know then the bigger question is why you send the person into a hazardous travelling environment which then caused them harm.

Health sector workers aside I'm not sure your scenario would meet a threshold. IE its not an infection that gets medical treatment within 48 hours of exposure. And its not a serious infection which the carrying out the travelling work is a significant contributing factor.

Hi Jane
Sorry - I was implying your post was scaremongering - more what the author of the articles is doing.

That said I don't think sharing the graph to staff is very useful

One our roles (from a health and safety perspective as opposed to an operational perspective which is a whole different conversation) is to to look at risk objectively and form views on that. From there business will make decisions. Just as employees will make their own decisions based on information they gather. That means we look at our own risk profile - which is currently a moving target. But we should be able to cope with a rate of change.

Personally I find a map of the UK unhelpful. May as well pull one of Itally, or China. Its not showing the underlying important data which is the demographics of those getting sick, those getting seriously ill and those that are dying.

If we want to share information with staff then I think it should be relevant to the current known risk within the business we operate in. So there fore if there is to be a graph it should be on NZ numbers.

Or perhaps we share information that its the elderly and infirm who are at risk (because that seems to be founded on statistical fact) and give staff comfort that children, for as yet some unknown reason seem broadly unaffected.

At the moment we are being swamped by the media and news. I don't believe that is helping. As a consequence we should tread responsibly and cautiously with any information we provide.

A lot of this isn't new. Already many of us have to deal with 10 -20% staff absenteeism during seasonal illnesses. We have to deal with parents who have to stay at home. And at the other extreme earthquakes where we shut down completely for months or shootings where we are locked down. We already do the "protect the vulnerable in the community" through flu vaccinations. We have to deal with people who don't wash their hands and think a "Farmers Blow" is just fine at work.

By far my biggest concern is keeping the country moving, keeping people in employment and being paid etc - but that is a different economic and operational conversation.

From the same "expert"
"It is clearly a serious infection for those who are elderly and have underlying illness, with many cases hospitalised with severe pneumonia." (my emphasis) and "The emerging coronavirus outbreak has tragic consequences for vulnerable populations"

And I'm calling bullshit on his "Did you know you can go to jail in the worst cases of failure to comply with the Health and Safety at Work Act?" Time to take the finger off the panic button.

I can't help but feel this is a disgraceful piece of media from Stuff. Talk about trying to amp up panic. Absolutely zero need to show government ministers all dressed up in hygiene gear. (And not very sensible of the minster to fall into that trap)

Sounds to me like the good old Hold Harmless clause.

You can put any clause you like into a contract. Whether it is enforceable or not is an entirely different matter.

I'd be looking twice at the party who is asking you to agree to such a clause - its not really within the spirit of our legislation (legal arguments aside).

I guess it depends on how desperate you are to swallow a dead rat.

I actually don't have much difficulty with steam being on the hazard list.

Provided that all other much more serious risks are being given their due, proportional attention.

I take a philosophical approach to audits. Just like a prostate exam.
- you know it has to be done
- the discomfort is more mental that actual
- and you remain grateful you arent the one doing the probing

No qualification.
But usual risk management approach, which according to Worksafe will include

"People using the completed scaffold should follow any special requirements outlined on the handover certificate or scaffold tag.

Common risks when working on the scaffold include:
- slips and trips on slippery surfaces, decking with trip hazards or obstructed working and access platforms
- falling through gaps in poorly constructed platforms or through unprotected openings
- using tools incorrectly, or defective or badly maintained tools
- carrying or transporting tools and materials
- hazardous substances such as asbestos and silica dust contaminating the scaffolding
- falling from the scaffold (eg due to inadequate edge protection or climbing the outside of the scaffold)
- failure of scaffold components
- scaffold collapses (eg due to overloading, unauthorised alterations, incorrect construction or design).


Standard requirements for work on a scaffold include:
- A safety helmet and appropriate safety footwear should be worn.
- Clear access of at least 450 mm should be maintained on all access and working platforms.
- The scaffold should be kept clear of rubbish and excess material. Harmful substances such as silica dust should be prevented from collecting on the scaffold.
- Inspections of the scaffold and associated equipment should be carried out regularly to ensure the scaffold is safe to use. Records of inspections should be kept.
- Tools and equipment should be in good working condition.
- Repairs and alterations should be carried out by a competent person. All scaffolds that have been repaired or altered should be inspected.
- Scaffolding that is no longer safe to use should be taken out of service immediately until repairs have been done. It should be tagged to warn people and access points should be closed off.

For a start, I don't have one.

When auditors ask I just point them to the law, and then to what we do better.

If they get toey ( gotta earn that audit fee somehow) I'll give them a copy of the employment agreement which provides for things like health insurance.

Always have to remember the more policies you have the more strands there are to the rope that will hang you. And as safety practitioners what do we do first - eliminate!