OHS Assessment And Evaluation Of BCEC Pty Ltd

Overview of the case scenario:

Discuss about the OHS Assessment And Evaluation of BCEC Pty Ltd.

The accident in the current context is reported at a construction site, where in two employees working at the site got injured. The two site workers impacted by the wall injury are Whelan and Twomey. The actual incident occurred at the site, is due to the collapse of the brick wall and subsequently the two members got impacted by the wall collapse. The labour got impacted during the process are employed by Byrne civil engineering construction Pty ltd (BCEC). Actual project work is that of Develco, who are into the construction of the residential buildings and the actual project work is assigned by Develco as part of the contract to CC and which in turn is assigned to BCEC as part of sub-contract work. BCEC is contracted for the site excavation and digging works for the sake of footings development at the site. However, the actual task of excavation of the pads, trims and other existing footings of the retaining walls at the site is not actually developed properly. There are lapses from the number of entities in the entire project progression and the cumulative impact of all these lapses has resulted in the inevitable collapse of the wall and hence resulted in injuries to the people. The following part of the discussion will focus on multiple causes responsible for the injury and the supports the proposed actions by Victorian OHS act 2004 and will provide with all the necessary corrective actions that can be done as well for the said project.

Entities responsible for the managing and controlling the specific situation and the reasons for this case:

• On the critical evaluation of the entire process happening in the flow stream, there are multiple stakeholders in the scenario and cumulative impact of several actions are mainly responsible for the accident occurred in the context. For example the design engineer responsible for the current situation has not actually executed his functions professionally, before assigning the task to the contractor as well before handing over the actual design task and the designs, there is need for him to evaluate the current situation at the site and there is need for comprehensive evaluation of the site conditions before taking up the actual excavation work at the site. The site survey and the prevailing conditions are not inspected properly and hence is mainly responsible for the mishap at the site. The site engineer appointed by CC has also not inspected the site conditions before delegating the task of excavation to the concerned people at the site. Apart from that, the CC site engineer Taylor does not possess the required skills and experience to take up the task, however still he is handed over the site supervisory tasks. He did not resist and has taken up the task without responsibility and without needed professional ethical commitment. This in fact has resulted in the cause of the actual mishap at the site.

The corporate entities and their order of responsibility to the cause of mishap -  the list of defendants responsible for the accident – indications from Victorian OHS act 2004.

• In accordance with the provisions of the Victorian OHS act 2004, both the organization management and the contractual employers are responsible for the implementation of all the safety precautions at the work site. Further, in accordance with the current scenario, employer's role is also very significant and there is a considerable lapse from their side in the current situation and this, in turn, has escalated the conditions miserably.
• Develco project is the developer and the key employees of the organization have not taken up sufficient care and precautions in making up the project to meet the guidelines of the safety and health requirements.
• CC the main project construction contractor has not actually delegated the contract to BCEC, however, the capabilities of the company and the adherence of the same to OHS is neither instructed nor monitored; hence CC is also responsible for the situation.
• BCEC is the third in the sequence of operations is responsible for the entire failure and accident of the project, however, still the organization has not shown any attention towards the occupational safety and health requirements as well it has not actually deputed right personnel for this task as well.

Defendants of the case are as follows,

• Develco – management board and the chairman for not taking up the responsibility to ensure the safety and well being of the employees working at the site. More specifically the contractual obligations are not actually inspected and the company has not actually monitored the precautions installed at the site. Develco’s safety manager will also be responsible for the accident for his failure in implementing the actual safe precautions and conditions of safety. Vander Morsen the designer failed in performing the site supervisory work and critical survey before actually delegating the task to the contracting company and hence is also responsible for the failure of the project.

(The actual OHS 2004 section responsible for prosecute the said defendant is section 21.1 and section 21.2, which emphasizes the duties of employer)

• BCEC site supervisor/Safety supervisor is next defendant in the case and in accordance with the legislation has not actually enforced the monitoring system for safety in the workplace. Also the delegation of the task for subcontracting company has happened without enforcing the proper guidelines of safety in the context.

(The actual guidelines responsible for the prosecution of the site supervisor and safety supervisor is section 21.3, a,b,c.

• For CC the immediate person defendant in accordance with the legislation is the CC site supervisory person Taylor. He has taken up the supervision of the work without having good knowledge of the safety aspects at the work place. CC management will be prosecuted for employing insufficient experience person for the project.

(The case prosecution will be in accordance with the section 32 of OHS 2004)

Not only the defendants claimed in the above statement, even the management of all the organizations will be responsible for the mishap and hence there is need to prosecute all of them in accordance with the OHS act 2004 principles. (Section 21 supports the fact that employer need to have the necessary responsibility in taking up the safety compliance of the people in the organization)

Reasons for respective usage of the sections and the underlying reasons for the same.

• Develco chairman and key personnel will be prosecuted as per section 20, as they all failed in ensuring the safety and health at the workplace.
• Develco employers will be prosecuted in accordance with the section 21,22 and 23, their duties towards employees are not actually fulfilled.
• Van Der Meer Bonser is eligible for prosecution under section 28, as he actually failed to ensure better design and without proper knowledge of the work site - Section 25 will actually be applicable in this case.
• Section 28 for failing to give robust and safe design and without a proper survey of the workplace and without giving proper information to the actual company performing the work. Section 25 is applicable as well.

• BCEC for failing to ensure safety conditions to the employees and also the mechanism employed is not right, section 21 and section 22 are applicable in this case for prosecuting the defendants claimed above.
• Section 32 is applicable to prosecute Taylor as he is totally reckless in making the work quite dangerous to the people at the site. Further, there is no assurance of safety provided by Taylor.

• Actions required to take up as corrective measures:

As part of Victorian OHS act 2004, there is a need for employees to ensure safety and operational health to the employees ((Austlii, n.d.). CC need to take up the following actions.

• They should ensure a safe working environment which can render safe health to all the employees working at the site.
• Training and knowledge be provided to all employees
• All employees need to be awarded with right qualifications for ensuring proper safety at the work site and work operations. This should indeed promote work safety at the site.
  • Possible practical preventive controls
• Develco project needs to formulate new guidelines of action for ensuring better project management.
• Entire project needs to be taken care for the betterment of Safety and health conditions at the site.
• Detailed study of lapses is needed.
• BECE need to take care that all employees are sufficiently qualified and are working with the necessary expertise.
• Safety training needs to be ensured and compliance is required to take up mandatorily.

Company control procedures and the possible corrective actions to be taken up

• Develco should take care of the implementation of the safety committee.
• BECE should be enforced to be compliant with its duties else should be removed from the contract.
• CC should prepare a list of guidelines for action.
• All employees should be ensured of their job and the work expectations need to be upto the mark ((Anon., n.d.).

References:

Anon., n.d. Legislation. [Online] Available at: https://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/Domino/Web_Notes/LDMS/LTObject_Store/LTObjSt3.ns/DDE300B846EED9C7CA257616000A3571/8E7BCBD15537D079CA257761002ABADD/$FILE/04-107a016.pdf [Accessed 1 April 2018].

Austlii, n.d. [Online]Available at: https://www7.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdb/au/legis/vic/consol_act/ohasa2004273/[Accessed 1 April 2018].