Page 2563 - Week 10 - Tuesday, 13 October 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Let us look at some of the other requirements that the working arrangements will include. There is the appointment of health and safety representatives; the procedure to issue provisional improvement notices; the setting up of emergency procedures; the setting up of a health and safety committee. These arrangements can also include heavy fines for contravention, involvement by involved unions in the workplace, additional involvement by the registrar, selection of health and safety representatives by employees, and the training commitments of health and safety representatives and health and safety committee members. The time and costs required for all these things will be borne by small business operators.
I read from the Housing Industry Association letter concerning this matter, dated 9 September 1992. It states:
At a time when the ACT is desperately seeking recovery and growth within the private sector, the proposal to vary the ACT Occupational Health and Safety Bill 1989 to cover 10 or more employees in Designated Work Groups will result in many small businesses in the ACT being pushed beyond their financial limits ...
Unless there is clear evidence that the current provisions for the formation of Designated Work Groups in the ACT is failing to adequately address the need to maintain safe working environments for ACT workers, no amendment to the current provision should be made.
The Canberra Business Council wrote this on 21 August:
The Canberra Business Council is amazed that you have not raised these issues with it prior to the tabling of both amendments to the Bills.
... In regard to the OH and S amendment, it is our contention that the Designated Work Group size need not be lowered from the present size of "more than 20".
... In the Council's opinion the proposed DWG structure and its resulting additional commitments by the employer will inhibit many firms expanding their workforce to 10 or above.
In this current situation of high unemployment, your Government's action will not be tackling the problem - it will be adding to it.
This letter from a small business operator says:
I already properly train/supervise my employees. Because we are small, I cannot afford the extra costs associated with this legislation.
The Motor Trades Association wrote:
No one wishes to see employees placed in any type of work place jeopardy. I believe existing laws covering the responsibility of employers are reasonable.
So does just about everybody in the entire ACT small business sector. What about the consultation with the people that this affects?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .