NOHSAC Report

References

 

1. Alli B (2001) Fundamental principles of occupational health and safety, International Labour Organisation, Geneva.

2. Health and Safety Commission and the Health and Safety Executive (2000) Securing health together, HSE, London.

3. International Labour Office (2005) Promotional framework for occupational safety and health, ILO, Geneva.

4. Department of Labour (2005a) Briefing to the incoming Minister, Department of Labour, Wellington.

5. Driscoll T, Mannetje A, Dryson E, Feyer A, Gander P, McCracken S, Pearce N, Wagstaffe M (2004) The burden of occupational disease and injury in New Zealand: Technical Report, National Occupational Health and Safety Advisory Committee, Wellington.

6. Access Economics (2006) The social and economic costs of occupational disease and injury in New Zealand (Final).

7. National Occupational Health and Safety Advisory Committee (2004) The burden of occupational disease and injury in New Zealand, Report to the Associate Minister of Labour, NOHSAC, Wellington.

8. Wren J (1997) Understanding the process of change in occupational safety and health policy in advanced industrial democracies: an examination of the international literature and the experience in New Zealand between 1981 and 1992, Thesis for a Doctor of Philosophy Social Science, Massey University, Palmerston North.

9. Wren J (2002) ‘From the Balkanisation of control to employer management systems: OHS policy and politics in New Zealand 1981–1992’ in Occupational health and safety research in New Zealand, Ed. Lloyd, M (2002), Dunmore Press, Palmerston North.

10. Kennedy DP (1961) Occupational health developments, Department of Health, Wellington.

11. Department of Labour (1989) Occupational safety and health reform: report by the transition team, Department of Labour, Wellington.

12. Ministry for the Environment (1992) Hazardous substances and new organisms: proposals for law reform, Ministry for the Environment, Wellington.

13. Department of Labour (2001) International labour conventions ratified by New Zealand, Department of Labour, Wellington.

14. ERMA New Zealand (2001) Development and approval of HSNO codes of practice (information sheet 13), Environmental Risk Management Authority New Zealand, Wellington.

15. Department of Labour (2003a) Fact sheet: key changes to the Health and Safety in Employment Act, Department of Labour, Wellington.

16. Department of Labour (2006) Professional and Specialist Services Group: Proposed structure, Department of Labour, Wellington.

17. Department of Labour (2005d) Workplace Group: repositioning the group – phase II: feedback on consultation document, Department of Labour, Wellington.

18. Ministerial Panel on Business Compliance Costs (2005) Ministerial Panel on Business Compliance Costs final report back, Ministry of Economic Development, Wellington.

19. Department of Labour (2005b) Annual report, Department of Labour, Wellington.

20. Business New Zealand/KPMG (2005) Summary report of the annual BNZ-KPMG compliance cost survey September 2005, KPMG, Wellington.

21. Accident Compensation Corporation (2005b) Briefing to the incoming Minister, ACC, Wellington.

22. Gorman D (2005) Where to for occupational medicine? Unpublished.

23. New Zealand Health Information Service (2003) Selected health professional workforce in New Zealand, New Zealand Health Information Service, Wellington.

24. Dyson R Hon (2003) The New Zealand Injury Prevention Strategy, Department of Labour, Wellington.

25. Dyson R Hon (2005) The Workplace Health and Safety Strategy, Department of Labour, Wellington.

26. Department of Labour (2005c) Evaluation framework for the Workplace Health and Safety Strategy, Department of Labour, Wellington.

27. Department of Labour (2004) Workplace Health and Safety Strategy analysis of public submissions, Department of Labour, Wellington.

28. Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu (2003) Ministerial review of ACC’s Accredited Employer (Partnership) Programme final report, Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu, Wellington.

29. Legge J and Crichton S (2005) Workplace Safety Management Practice Programme: data analysis of outcomes 2000–2003, Department of Labour, Wellington.

30. National Occupational Health and Safety Advisory Committee (2005) Surveillance of occupational disease and injury, NOHSAC, Wellington.

31. Centre for Public Health Research (2004) Annual report, Massey University, Wellington.

32. Injury Prevention Research Unit (2004) Annual report, IPRU, Dunedin.

Other references

Footnotes

i. Information regarding the content of Convention 155 is included in section 3.2 of this report.

ii. Statistics New Zealand from the website: (www.stats.govt.nz). Accessed April 2006.

iii. Statistics New Zealand from the website: (www.stats.govt.nz). Accessed December 2005.

iv. The total does not add to 100, as people can identify with more than one ethnicity.

v. Statistics New Zealand from the website: (www.stats.govt.nz). Accessed December 2005.

vi. Ibid.

vii. Statistics New Zealand from the website: (www.stats.govt.nz). Accessed December 2005.

viii. Ibid.

ix. Ibid.

x. Information sourced from ACC covers the estimated annual incidence of work-related injury and illness (2004/05). The cost estimates do not include ACC claims from any previous period, although these cases may remain open and are, therefore, a cost to the system.

xi. These included the Petroleum Act 1937, Bush Workers Act 1945, Geothermal Energy Act 1953, Health Act 1956, Construction Act 1959, Shearers Act 1962, Mining Act 1971, Agricultural Workers Act 1977 and the Coal Mines Act 1979. Other pieces of legislation passed in the 1980s were the Factories and Commercial Premises Act 1981, the Quarries and Tunnels Act 1982 and the Transport Service Licensing Act 1989.

xii. It is unclear whether the Ministry of Transport’s jurisdiction extended to cover the safety of people working in port environments.

xiii. The Robens report on safety and health at work recommended a wide range of initiatives to ensure improved occupational health and safety outcomes in Great Britain. These included the introduction of a single piece of legislation that applied consistent policies and enforcement procedures across the range of industries, and tripartite governance for health and safety. The Robens approach was subsequently adopted by many nations (including New Zealand) as a model of best practice for delivering occupational health and safety services.

xiv. The Occupational Health and Safety Bill sought to:

xv. For example, Wren8 notes that there was significant debate regarding the level of liability held by employers, the role of private prosecutions, the risk versus hazard dichotomy, the definition of significant harm and the coverage of the Act.

xvi. A further number of regulations were not repealed, as these dealt with specific hazardous situations or materials that required special treatment to ensure health and safety. These remain in force today and include the Abrasive Blasting Regulations 1958, Amusement Devices Regulations 1978, Electroplating Regulations 1950, Lead Processing Regulations 1950, Factories and Commercial Premises (First Aid) Regulations 1985, Noxious Substances Regulations 1954 and the Spray Coating Regulations 1962. These regulations are discussed in further detail in section 3.3.4.

xvii. This funding was identified as occupational health and safety funding but was not transferred as the services were considered to be best delivered by ACC.

xviii. This included 25 FTE Health Protection Officers and 55 FTE in public health nurses and Medical Officers of Health.

xix. The resources identified by the Transition Team excluded $204,000 in capital.

xx. This figure includes $855,244 in occupational health nurse resource, $268,244 in Health Protection Officer resource, $102,285 in Medical Officer of Health resource, 19 cars, $268,540 in clerical and support resource, and $8,000 in overhead costs.

xxi. The principles identified by Alli1 include: ensuring that rights are protected, that all parties can have input into the health and safety system, that established policies to promote health and safety exist, that services can be delivered in a consistent manner, that the health and safety of people in workplaces is continuously improved, and that people are not harmed in the workplace, or if a person is harmed at a workplace, that fair compensation is available.

xxii. These are Convention 176: Health and Safety in Mines Convention 1995; Convention 174: Prevention of Major Industrial Accidents Convention 1993; Convention 170: Chemicals Convention 1990; Convention 167: Health and Safety in Construction Convention 1988; Convention 162: Asbestos Convention 1986; Convention 161: Occupational Health Services Convention 1985; Convention 152: Occupational Health and Safety (Dock Workers) Convention 1979; Convention 148: Work Environment (Air Pollution, Noise, and Vibration) Convention 1978; Convention 139: Occupational Cancer Convention 1974; Convention 136: Benzene Convention 1971; Convention 127: Maximum Weight Convention 1967; Convention 120: Hygiene (Commerce and Offices) Convention 1964; Convention 119: Guarding of Machinery Convention 1963; Convention 115: Radiation Protection Convention 1960; and Convention 13: White Lead (Painting) Convention 1921.

xxiii. ERMA New Zealand website: (www.ermanz.govt.nz). Accessed 24 January 2006.

xxiv. This issue was raised by three government stakeholders, one industry group and one safety professionals’ group.

xxv. This issue was raised by two government stakeholders, two health and safety professionals and one industry body.

xxvi. This issue was raised by one government stakeholder, one employee organisation, one industry body and one training provider.

xxvii. This issue was raised by one training provider and two heath professionals’ groups.

xxviii. Schedule One of the HSE Act defines serious harm as any of the following conditions that amounts to or results in permanent loss of bodily function, or temporary severe loss of bodily function: respiratory disease, noise-induced hearing loss, neurological disease, cancer, dermatological disease, communicable disease, musculoskeletal disease, illness caused by exposure to infected material, decompression sickness, poisoning, vision impairment, chemical or hot-metal burn of eye, penetrating wound of eye, bone fracture, laceration, crushing OR amputation of body part OR burns requiring referral to a specialist medical practitioner or specialist outpatient clinic OR loss of consciousness from lack of oxygen OR loss of consciousness, or acute illness requiring treatment by a medical practitioner, from absorption, inhalation, or ingestion, of any substance OR any harm that causes the person harmed to be hospitalised for a period of 48 hours or more within seven days of the harm’s occurrence.

xxiv. This issue was raised by three government stakeholders, one industry group and one safety professionals’ group.

xxv. This issue was raised by two government stakeholders, two health and safety professionals and one industry body.

xxvi. This issue was raised by one government stakeholder, one employee organisation, one industry body and one training provider.

xxvii. This issue was raised by one training provider and two heath professionals’ groups.

xxviii. Schedule One of the HSE Act defines serious harm as any of the following conditions that amounts to or results in permanent loss of bodily function, or temporary severe loss of bodily function: respiratory disease, noise-induced hearing loss, neurological disease, cancer, dermatological disease, communicable disease, musculoskeletal disease, illness caused by exposure to infected material, decompression sickness, poisoning, vision impairment, chemical or hot-metal burn of eye, penetrating wound of eye, bone fracture, laceration, crushing OR amputation of body part OR burns requiring referral to a specialist medical practitioner or specialist outpatient clinic OR loss of consciousness from lack of oxygen OR loss of consciousness, or acute illness requiring treatment by a medical practitioner, from absorption, inhalation, or ingestion, of any substance OR any harm that causes the person harmed to be hospitalised for a period of 48 hours or more within seven days of the harm’s occurrence.

xxix. This issue was raised by one health and safety professional.

xxx. This issue was raised by one government stakeholder and one industry body.

xxxi. This issue was raised by one employee organisation.

xxxii. This issue was raised by nine stakeholders.

xxxiii. This issue was raised by three government stakeholders, three health and safety professionals’ groups, one employer organisation and five industry bodies.

xxxiv. This issue was raised by four government stakeholders, one health and safety professional, four industry bodies and one training organisation.

xxxv. This issue was raised by one government stakeholder, one health professionals’ group and one industry body.

xxxvi. This issue was raised by two government stakeholders and two health and safety professionals.

xxxvii. The expenditure figures included in Table 7 have not been adjusted for claims liability. It is intended that these figures be indicative of the level of claims made only. Any surplus or deficit is used to calculate levies for the following year.

xxxviii. While the budgeted figure and the cost of work-related injury and disease cover different years, it is likely that the ratio would be similar if a cost estimate for work-related injury and disease was used for 2005/06 (see Graph 1).

xxix. This calculation adjusts an estimate of $30 million 1989 dollars (identified as resources to be transferred from various government agencies to the Department of Labour’s OSH Service) to 2005 dollars using the Consumer Price Index for the June quarter. There are limitations associated with using the Consumer Price Index as the adjustor for government services; however, there are limited index alternatives available.

xl. The funding for the enforcement of the HSNO Act has been excluded from this total on the grounds that funding for these services was not available until the enactment of the HSNO Act.

xli. Statutory powers include powers of entry and inspection, and powers to require the medical examination of an employee to determine exposure to a hazard and any health effects arising from this exposure, and to require the suspension of exposed employees from work.

xlii. This issue was raised by two government stakeholders, one employer organisation, three health professionals and two industry bodies.

xliii. This issue was raised by five government stakeholders, one research organisation, four health professionals and two training organisations.

xliv. This issue was raised by two government stakeholders, two safety professionals’ groups, one research organisation, one employee organisation and three health professionals.

xlv. This issue was raised by four government stakeholders, three industry bodies and one training organisation.

xlvi. These recommendations covered a range of areas including recommending that the Department provide clearer guidelines on complying with the HSE Act and introduce clearer guidelines to the Department of Labour inspectorate, improve the skills of the inspectorate, harmonise standard processes and improve interfaces across government agencies, introduce electronic databases and forms, and provide educational material.

xlvii. This issue was raised by one employee organisation.

xlviii. This issue was raised by one government stakeholder, one health professionals’ body and one industry body.

xlix. This issue was raised by one government stakeholder, one employer organisation and one industry body.

l. Employment Relations Service website (www.ers.dol.govt.nz). Accessed January 2006.

li. Ibid.

lii. This issue was raised by five government stakeholders, two health and safety organisations and one training provider.

liii. This issue was raised by five government stakeholders, two health and safety professionals’ bodies, two industry bodies and three training organisations.

liv. This issue was raised by two government stakeholders, one safety professionals’ organisation and two health professionals’ bodies.

lv. This issue was raised by one health professionals’ body.

lvi. This issue was raised by one government stakeholder.

lvii. This issue was raised by one industry body.

lviii. This issue was raised by two government stakeholders, one health and safety professionals’ organisation and one health professional.

lix. This issue was raised by two government stakeholders, two industry bodies and one training organisation.

lx. This issue was raised by two government stakeholders, one health and safety professionals’ body, one research organisation, one employer organisation, one employee organisation, two health professionals, one industry body and one training organisation.

lxi. This issue was raised by one government stakeholder and one health professional.

lxii. This issue was raised by two government stakeholders, one health and safety professionals’ group, one employee organisation and one health professional.

lxiii. This issue was raised by two government stakeholders, one health professional, one industry body and one training organisation.

lxiv. These figures are based on information sourced in August 2005. Section 3.4 discusses the current restructure of the Department of Labour’s health and safety inspectorate and head office. The changes undertaken as part of this review may affect the workforce resourcing of the inspectorate and head office.

lxv. The Medical Council of New Zealand’s online register: (www.mcnz.org.nz). Accessed November 2005. This data is drawn from the specialty fields registered by individuals with the Medical Council.

lxvi. Membership figures from the New Zealand Occupational Health Nurses Association.

lxvii. NZHIS23 notes that this figure is indicative only: it includes physiotherapists who work in occupational health as their main employment setting (approximately 3.4 percent of the total physiotherapy workforce in New Zealand) but data is missing for about 30 percent of the workforce.

lxviii. The New Zealand Occupational Hygienists Society website: (www.nzohs.org.nz). Accessed November 2005.

lxix. The Ergonomics Society website: (http://www.ergonomics.org.nz). Accessed November 2005.

lxx. This issue was raised by six government stakeholders, one health and safety professionals’ body, one research stakeholder and one health professional.

lxxi. The limited nature of training on occupational health issues provided for in the general medicine curriculum was raised as an issue by two government stakeholders, one safety group and two health professional groups.

lxxii. This issue was raised by three government stakeholders, one safety professionals’ group, two health professional groups, one industry body and one training organisation.

lxxiii. This issue was raised by two government stakeholders, one health and safety professionals’ group and one health professional.

lxxiv. This issue was raised by four government stakeholders, one health professionals’ group, two industry bodies and one training organisation.

lxxv. This issue was raised by two government stakeholders and three health professionals.

lxxvi. This issue was raised by three government stakeholders, one health and safety professional body, one research organisation, one employee organisation and two health professionals. This concern has recently been met with the appointment of a Chief Advisor – Occupational Health.

lxxvii. This issue was raised by two government stakeholders, one research organisation and one industry body.

lxxviii. There is currently one vacancy at the Department of Labour for this position.

lxxix. Some health and safety inspectors have qualifications in occupational health but the data does not enable a clear distinction of these inspectors from other safety-oriented inspectors.

lxxx. Action 3a(8) of the Workplace Health and Safety Strategy Action Plan.

lxxxi. This issue was raised by five government stakeholders and one employee organisation.

lxxxii. This issue was raised by three government stakeholders, one employee organisation and one training organisation.

lxxxiii. This issue was raised by two government stakeholders, one health professionals’ group and two industry bodies.

lxxxiv. Workplace Health and Safety Strategy website: (www.whss.govt.nz). Accessed January 2006.

lxxxv. This includes funding for the development of the audit standards, the FTE required to operate the programme, administration and the training of auditors.

lxxxvi. This issue was raised by one government stakeholder and one health and safety professionals’ group.

lxxxvii. This issue was raised by one employee organisation.

lxxxviii. This issue was raised by three government stakeholders, one health and safety professional group and one health professional.

lxxxix. This issue was raised by one health and safety professional and two industry bodies.

xc. There is considerable uncertainty regarding the validity of this figure as it is not clear whether the total number of people in the workforce as identified by Statistics New Zealand is a full FTE figure or the actual number of people who are in paid employment (some of whom may be part FTE). If the Statistics New Zealand data is for number of people, the percentage of employees covered by an ACC incentive programme is likely to be higher than the indicative 25 percent.

xci. This issue was raised by eight government stakeholders, one health and safety professionals’ group, one research organisation, one employee organisation, one health professional, two industry bodies and two training organisations.

xcii. Provision of funds is not split equally across the three organisations. ACC provided $1,200,000, while the respective funding amounts contributed by the Department of Labour and the HRC were not available.

xciii. IPRC website: (www.health.auckland.ac.nz/ipc/pdf/ar2003.pdf). Accessed January 2006.

xciv. COHFE website: (www.scionresearch.com/cohfe). Accessed January 2006.

xcv. This issue was raised by one health professional and one research organisation.

xcvi. This issue was raised by two government stakeholders, two research organisations, one industry body and one health professionals’ body.

xcvii. This issue was raised by six government stakeholders, one health professionals’ group and one industry body.

xcviii. This issue was raised by three government stakeholders, two research organisations, three health professionals and one industry body.

xcix. This issue was raised by one government stakeholder.

c. This issue was raised by one health professionals’ group.

ci. This issue was raised by two government stakeholders and three research organisations.

cii. Official documentation includes legislation, government reports, government strategy documents, and recommendations reports from advisory committees, specialist occupational safety and health organisations, and international institutions such as the International Labour Organization.

ciii. Information to be included in this category is limited to information on the identification of best practice indicators for monitoring occupational health systems.

civ. See Appendix 2 for a list of statistics to be included.

cv. Available at http://www.nzips.govt.nz/documents/safety_related_law.pdf