Safety laws lined up across state lines, should Canada follow suit?
Health and safety in the land down under is getting easier to understand for businesses operating across state lines.
The country — which has nine jurisdictions to deal with — started the process of harmonizing its health and safety laws in 2008 when the New Labour government came to power.
“It’s part of a bigger process that’s going on to streamline the economy,” said Justine Ross, head of Harmonisation and the Legal Services branch at Safe Work Australia.
Harmonization officially came into force across Australia on January 2012. The change will allow businesses operating across state lines to more easily understand what health and safety duties they must comply with, she said.
“It makes it so much easier for them… although they’re not working to one law because each jurisdiction will maintain responsibility for its laws, they essentially will be working towards one set of rules, so they don’t need to change their systems to operate in the various states,” said Ross.
Over time, Safe Work is hopeful this will mean changes such as streamlined training for inspectors across the country, creating efficiencies for governments as well as businesses, said Peta Miller, national strategy director for Safe Work Australia.
“It’s not just about having the right laws, it’s also about having them… consistently enforced across Australia, so businesses know exactly… what they have to deliver,” said Miller.
The harmonization will also lead to consistent interpretation of OHS law by courts, said Ross.
The regulations are more than 500 pages long and are fairly all-encompassing. They deal with everything from dealing with hazards like manual handling and electrical safety to licensing for people who may carry out high risk work like asbestos removal.
“I guess they give more detail to the general duty,” said Ross. “In a sense they provide guidance on how to comply with the general duty that’s contained in the primary legislation.”
Despite the potential benefits highlighted by Safe Work Australia, the process hasn’t been without its hiccups. The nine jurisdictions affected by the changes are the eight Australian states and the Commonwealth itself (similar to how some workplaces in Canada are covered by the Canada Labour Code instead of provincial legislation).
Three states had not adopted the regulations by press time.
All governments have signed on to the intergovernmental agreement and have approved the model act. But the trouble started when governments started to introduce regulations.
The state of Victoria has said it doesn’t plan on adopting the model, said Ross.
“The situation is that a lot of the model has actually been based on the Victorian laws,” she said. “They’re saying that they already have best practice and what they’re adopting would be average, but we argue that we’ve already picked up the best from their laws, so our laws do represent best practice.”
West Australia is still committed to the harmonization process but the state is going through the process of consulting on the legislation. The government there hasn’t introduced the bill into parliament but plans to in the next few months Ross said.
South Australia has the bill in parliament but is having trouble getting the bill passed because its government is dominated by a few independent members, she said.
“So essentially the problem has become… that I guess it’s a political football in a way,” said Ross.
Would harmonization be beneficial to Canada?
“There’s no question that it would be,” said Maureen Shaw, former president of the now-defunct Industrial Accident Prevention Association (IAPA) in Ontario, who now works as a safety consultant in British Columbia.
“In your wildest dreams you would hope that everybody would sit down at the table and say this is the right thing to do for the people, it’s the right thing to do for the economy, it’s the right thing to do to place us in a good position for international development and trade. But the reality is a lot different than that.”
The legislation in Canada tends to be fairly complementary, but there are regional differences, she said.
In Canada the OHS responsibilities of the government of Canada is for the people who work for government (about 10 per cent of the workforce) and certain industries covered under the Canada Labour Code, including airlines and telecommunications, said Shaw.
“When I think about my international work, when people look at Canada they don’t know who to call because we’re 13 different jurisdictions,” she said. “So who really speaks on behalf of Canada? In other countries health and safety at least has a national presence.”
It would help if there was a national databank — a centralized registration where workers could at least have their training from one province recorded so it could be recognized elsewhere in the country, she said.
“There is no national presence for the health and safety of workers, so it would be really beneficial, I think for both companies that are working inter-provincially to have some harmonization of legislation and standards but also portability and recognition of training.”
But will it ever happen? That’s a tough one, said Shaw.
It would take a lot of work. The creation of the Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System (WHIMS) for example — one of the few national safety programs — took about 16 years to become recognized across the country, she said.
“It’s a lot of work to reach consensus,” said Shaw. “That shouldn’t stop us from thinking about, from talking about it and perhaps gaining some consensus across the country.”
The country — which has nine jurisdictions to deal with — started the process of harmonizing its health and safety laws in 2008 when the New Labour government came to power.
“It’s part of a bigger process that’s going on to streamline the economy,” said Justine Ross, head of Harmonisation and the Legal Services branch at Safe Work Australia.
Harmonization officially came into force across Australia on January 2012. The change will allow businesses operating across state lines to more easily understand what health and safety duties they must comply with, she said.
“It makes it so much easier for them… although they’re not working to one law because each jurisdiction will maintain responsibility for its laws, they essentially will be working towards one set of rules, so they don’t need to change their systems to operate in the various states,” said Ross.
Over time, Safe Work is hopeful this will mean changes such as streamlined training for inspectors across the country, creating efficiencies for governments as well as businesses, said Peta Miller, national strategy director for Safe Work Australia.
“It’s not just about having the right laws, it’s also about having them… consistently enforced across Australia, so businesses know exactly… what they have to deliver,” said Miller.
The harmonization will also lead to consistent interpretation of OHS law by courts, said Ross.
The regulations are more than 500 pages long and are fairly all-encompassing. They deal with everything from dealing with hazards like manual handling and electrical safety to licensing for people who may carry out high risk work like asbestos removal.
“I guess they give more detail to the general duty,” said Ross. “In a sense they provide guidance on how to comply with the general duty that’s contained in the primary legislation.”
Despite the potential benefits highlighted by Safe Work Australia, the process hasn’t been without its hiccups. The nine jurisdictions affected by the changes are the eight Australian states and the Commonwealth itself (similar to how some workplaces in Canada are covered by the Canada Labour Code instead of provincial legislation).
Three states had not adopted the regulations by press time.
All governments have signed on to the intergovernmental agreement and have approved the model act. But the trouble started when governments started to introduce regulations.
The state of Victoria has said it doesn’t plan on adopting the model, said Ross.
“The situation is that a lot of the model has actually been based on the Victorian laws,” she said. “They’re saying that they already have best practice and what they’re adopting would be average, but we argue that we’ve already picked up the best from their laws, so our laws do represent best practice.”
West Australia is still committed to the harmonization process but the state is going through the process of consulting on the legislation. The government there hasn’t introduced the bill into parliament but plans to in the next few months Ross said.
South Australia has the bill in parliament but is having trouble getting the bill passed because its government is dominated by a few independent members, she said.
“So essentially the problem has become… that I guess it’s a political football in a way,” said Ross.
Would harmonization be beneficial to Canada?
“There’s no question that it would be,” said Maureen Shaw, former president of the now-defunct Industrial Accident Prevention Association (IAPA) in Ontario, who now works as a safety consultant in British Columbia.
“In your wildest dreams you would hope that everybody would sit down at the table and say this is the right thing to do for the people, it’s the right thing to do for the economy, it’s the right thing to do to place us in a good position for international development and trade. But the reality is a lot different than that.”
The legislation in Canada tends to be fairly complementary, but there are regional differences, she said.
In Canada the OHS responsibilities of the government of Canada is for the people who work for government (about 10 per cent of the workforce) and certain industries covered under the Canada Labour Code, including airlines and telecommunications, said Shaw.
“When I think about my international work, when people look at Canada they don’t know who to call because we’re 13 different jurisdictions,” she said. “So who really speaks on behalf of Canada? In other countries health and safety at least has a national presence.”
It would help if there was a national databank — a centralized registration where workers could at least have their training from one province recorded so it could be recognized elsewhere in the country, she said.
“There is no national presence for the health and safety of workers, so it would be really beneficial, I think for both companies that are working inter-provincially to have some harmonization of legislation and standards but also portability and recognition of training.”
But will it ever happen? That’s a tough one, said Shaw.
It would take a lot of work. The creation of the Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System (WHIMS) for example — one of the few national safety programs — took about 16 years to become recognized across the country, she said.
“It’s a lot of work to reach consensus,” said Shaw. “That shouldn’t stop us from thinking about, from talking about it and perhaps gaining some consensus across the country.”
