Failing to revise workplace safety policies could have catastrophic results, as highlighted by a recent US example.

Two years after a devastating explosion at a BP Refinery in the USA that killed 15 employees and injured 170, the comprehensive 'Baker Report' has been published which contains important recommendations relating to workplace safety.  The 374 page report released in January of this year reviews the circumstances surrounding the 2005 explosion in Texas, drawing attention to key issues including deficiencies in process safety culture, management and corporate oversights.

This article examines the findings of the Baker Report in the context of Australian Workplace Health and Safety laws.

Background to the Report

In the aftermath of the disaster, the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board was formed to conduct an independent review of BP’s corporate safety culture, safety management systems and corporate safety oversights at its U.S. refineries.  The findings of the investigation were published in 'The Baker Report' ("the Report") which made specific and extensive recommendations to significantly improve BP’s safety performance.

Key findings of the Report

Most importantly, the Report drew attention to two main oversights of BP which were that:

• BP mistakenly interpreted improvements in personal injury rates as an indication its refineries were safe; and
• the company failed to adequately establish process safety as a core value across its five refineries in the US.

The cause of these oversights was attributed to a number of factors, which included relying too heavily on personal injury data and a lack of understanding about safety issues.  In addition to these conclusions, the Report made the following observations:

Process risk assessment and analysis. While all of BP’s U.S. refineries had active programs to analyse process hazards, the system as a whole did not ensure adequate identification and rigorous analysis of those hazards.

Compliance with internal process safety standards. BP did have internal standards and programs for managing process risks. However, the company's corporate safety management system did not ensure compliance with internal process safety standards and programs. This finding relates to several areas that  were addressed by internal standards such as equipment inspections, critical alarms, emergency shut-down devices and near miss investigations.

Process safety knowledge and competence.  Although many members of BP’s technical and process safety staff had the capabilities and expertise needed to support a sophisticated safety plan, the system was not effective as a whole.  The system was designed to ensure there was an appropriate level of process safety awareness, knowledge, and competence in the organisation, however it was lacking in a number of respects.  Firstly, BP had not effectively defined the level of process safety knowledge or competency required of the different levels of management.  Secondly, the company had not adequately ensured that refinery personnel and contractors were sufficiently trained in safety procedures. The Report indicated that process safety education and training needed to be more rigorous, comprehensive, and integrated.  BP had also placed too much reliance on computer-based safety training of employees.

Effective process safety management system.  The Report concluded that the corporate process safety management system had not effectively translated corporate expectations into measurable criteria for management of risk,  nor defined the appropriate role of qualitative and quantitative risk management criteria.

Safety Management in Australia

In Queensland, safety or "risk" management is governed by the Workplace Health and Safety Act 1995 ("the Act") and the Workplace Health and Safety Regulation 1997. The Act contains a positive obligation to ensure the workplace health and safety of each of the employer's workers in the conduct of the employer's business or undertaking.

Employers are required to comply with any regulation, Ministerial notice, advisory standard and industry code of practice or otherwise take reasonable precautions to ensure workplace health and safety.

The lesson from the Baker Report is that risk management cannot be taken for granted even with an improved safety record. Effective risk management should be an active and ongoing process which may also involve investigating incidents and near misses, auditing system performance, and ensuring sufficient management and board review. A commitment to safety is an ongoing process.

MacDonnells’ employment law & workplace relations team is widely recognised in Queensland as a leader in this complex and rapidly changing area of law. We have built our workplace relations practice on a comprehensive understanding of the issues facing employers and employees. We advise clients in all industries and sectors including private practice and local and State Government.

Specialist advice on employment law & workplace relations issues is available from our team.

Mark Peters - 4030 0512
Yvette McLaughlin - 3031 9749
Kevin Barratt - 3031 9727
Chris McMahon - 3031 9712
Julie Bosel - 4030 0600
Nicole Lythall - 3031 9734
Joanne Parisi - 4030 0502
Michelle Dawson - 4030 0689

Employment Law Solutions is a newsletter intended only to provide general information about current legal issues and does not constitute, nor should it be used or treated as, professional or legal advice.  Readers should make their own enquiries or seek legal advice before making any decisions concerning their own interests.