|No sugar coating this pill, the most costly pill we can swallow in safety.|
In line with my views that we have priced ourselves out of providing practicable safety in the workplace (I am not sure any organisation can provide such a high level of safety), it occurred to me that my argument is much bigger than first thought.
Based on this LinkedIn topic http://www.linkedin.com/grp/post/3776681-6040326129179443203, or for the original article http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/kenoss-contractors-fined-11-million-for-workplace-death-20150819-gj2fra.html I put forth this argument (based on criminally charging owners of risk comparable to other social laws);
--How will society handle such a massive cultural change/shift if we really started to charge those who caused harm in the workplace? (this being physical or mental harm) - maybe even we should include environment!
We have to acknowledge that the price of everything will at least have to double (I even estimate a much higher factor including higher taxes). Topics like training, insurance, legal funding, time, extra workforce, better plant and equipment, better maintenance just to name a few would all have to add expenditure that has to be paid...who is going to pay for it? YOU?
Someone needs to do a study on what the true cost of providing 'practicable safety' would be in reality and how this cost increases related to time, profit and sustainability. Keep in mind that the slowing of work to any lesser degree than current will inflict massive trade-offs in progress/development (that is already behind and has been for many years).
Now if you are thinking this is rubbish, then what officer (or owner of risk) is not going to provide this level of safety (there would be little choice). No-one would fill these roles (once the high numbers of legal cases and risk owners going to jail started filling the news) as it is in my view impossible to provide a level of safety that would deem it practicable.
This issue is bigger than what people think and I see huge ramifications if we are not well prepared for it.
So I suppose to sum up my argument; If industry cannot afford to practice reasonably “practicable safety” then neither can a society that supports it. If a organisation goes bust/broke practicing safety first, then all must, if all do, then so will society will go bust also, and its its own cause!.
Question; what do you think the percentage cost of safety increase would be if we had to practice safety as prescribed?
Fast, Cheap and Fragile HERE