I would leave forklift training to an external accredited trainer for the basics. They will ensure the trainee gets the F endorsement on their licence and the forklift operator's certificate. There should then be a period of in-house evaluation to ensure that the staff member is both trained and competent to operate the forklift safely in the required environment. That part can be accommodated by your experienced forklift operator as long as the PCBU has satisfied itself that your experienced operator is competent to train. They are different skillsets.

Ah, be careful Gary, that might be considered misinformation by the Safeguard censors !

If you want to know what WorkSafe's strategic priorities are you could look at 'Maruiti 2027 Safe Haven' which states ‘WorkSafe will also contribute to the realisation of Maihi Karauna, the Government's Strategy for Māori Language Revitalisation. Through our own Te Reo Māori Strategy (July 2021) we will contribute to the audacious goal of one million New Zealanders (or more), by 2040, being able and confident to kōrero at least basic sayings in Māori.’ I'm not sure how that will 'drive the transformation of New Zealand’s health and safety performance' but WorkSafe are seemingly much more interested in effecting social change than improving worker safety. Audacious indeed.

Providing a work breathalyser is not a good idea. There is no guarantee that any reading obtained on a private device would be the same as on a police device even if regularly calibrated and the level of detectable alcohol peaks about an hour after the last drink. Having a device to test against before driving just creates a false sense of security.

If the company is supplying alcoholic drinks after work then there certainly should be guidelines around company expectations. There should be provisions in place to limit excessive drinking and stopping the supply of alcohol if necessary. Consumption should be limited if staff are driving so they stay below the legal limit, alcohol should not be the only option and consider making food available. Staff who have use of company vehicles should have policies in place around acceptable use and note that any accident where the driver is over the legal limit will invalidate insurance as well as have the potential for reputational damage. Consideration should also be given to provision to get staff home should that be required.

I'm not sure I would aspire to any position 'done in 60 seconds' but which could have enormous ramifications, particularly where the science is fairly tenuous and not exactly apolitical. Having been a front line police officer for 25 years dealing first hand with the devastation drugs cause (legal and illegal) it is not just a moral question. Thank goodness not all decisions are made on the back of social opinion which is often ill-informed and uneducated. I would also recommend caution and consider the impairment risk.

Have a look at BWARE (bware.co.nz) it is incredibly good value and feature rich. It has advantages over MANGO if you feel you will task or action different individuals for event investigations for example. MANGO limits it to one nominated person which I found infuriating. BWARE is fairly flexible so I have built audit and inspection tools into the product and it rapidly creates SSSPs, I have yet to find any other system with that capacity. but it does take time and effort to leverage the system to its full potential. It isn't as pretty as ecoportal but is a fraction of the cost.

Hi Michael,

Are you still at CablePrice? No I would not take it personally. If someone fails to follow a procedure or training I would want to review both the procedure and the training to ensure that there wasn't any misalignment of work as done and work as imagined. The training may cover the procedure, but was it delivered in a manner that the recipient understood? Is English the first language for example, are they able to read and understand, are they visual or kinesthetic learners?

Well done on the claims cost reductions. What do you put that down to? I.e. have you done anything to try and assess whether the claims costs reduction correlates to an increase in safety capacity over the period of your tenure - possibly through increased worker engagement?