Study+guide+10

Discussion of Article copied from 'The Age' (p.73). List the risks and then indicate how each could have been minimised.

Risk of death or injury through accident or incident (eg trip or heart attack) in isolated high hazard area - employees movements monitored through swipe card system and/or live feed security cameras - policy of always two employees in area - call in to security when entering area alone

Risk of injury or death in airlock - audible and flashing alarm when oxygen levels too low - door locked and access denied (manually) when fault identified and not opened until rectified - all staff notified area out of bounds - always another staff member present outside airlock to monitor entry - training/procedures for emergency inside airlock eg. hit emergency button, fit breathing system then enter etc.

Risk of theft or mishandling of potentially dangerous diseases/viruses - higher security in area eg. swipe card locks on doors - area monitored by security cameras

Q7. What is 'duty of care'? What does an employer's duty of care involve?

Duty of care is a legal responsibility enforced by the "Occupational and Safety Act"(2000), that enforces an employer to ensure the health and safety of his employees and not to expose them to risks while at work. An employee has a 'duty of care' towards other employees to be responsible and not put their health and safety at risk by their own acts or omissions. Sandra Powell

That's right there is no other way to define duty of care. It basically is that employers is responsible for the health and safety of its employess and employees amongst themselves.

Yeneo

I would extend yeneo's comment - employees also have a duty of care to employers, you can't whizz around corners blind corners in a forklift just because you know only the employer is on the floor. Can you? Mary

Q8. What is the 'precautionary principle'? How is this applicable to risk management and decision making with respect to climate change?

The 'precautionary principle' is a rationale used by governments and legislators when making decisions about risks that might have severe consequences and/or affect a high proportion of the population eg. diseases like the avian or swine flu. The rule is if there is any chance of it occurring then you should take action to prevent it even if there is no scientific certainty involved. There is reverse onus on the burden of proof, meaning the onus is on someone to prove that it won't occur rather than that it will. Therefore if there is any risk that an event like an epidemic or a hurricane will hit the shores of a country the government should prepare for the worst case scenario and emply all measures to prevent or mitigate the consequences.

This should be most applicable with respect to climate change as the consequences of waiting for scientific certainty will be dire indeed. If we don't use the 'precautionary principle' and start taking real and positive action now the result will be globally catastrophic. It is now incumbent on governments to prescribe change that is swift and permanent.