OHS inspectors and psychosocial risk factors: Evidence from Australia

Johnstone, Richard; Quinlan, Michael; McNamara, Maria

doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2010.09.016

Cited by 75 publications

(85 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Inspectors managed this regulatory ambiguity, which was accompanied by a lack of related training about workplace mental health, by avoiding such claims. Johnstone et al's Australian study (34) similarly found that OHS inspectors evaded psychological harm cases. The Australian inspectors chose to focus on traditional prevention activity, such as machine guarding, despite an inspectorate prioritizing of bullying and harassment.…”

Section: Maceachen Et Almentioning

confidence: 96%

“…They proposed that lack of training about complex psychosocial hazards limited inspector enforcement activity. Both Quinlan (26) and Johnstone et al (34) described how Australian inspectors have traditionally had trade backgrounds but are now increasingly being recruited from a wider range of backgrounds in order to have the capacity to deal with complex hazards and investigations.…”

Section: Maceachen Et Almentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many articles raised the issue of OHS inspectorate under-resourcing and how this can lead to a focus on simple and quickly resolvable issues (23,26,28,(31)(32)(33)(34). Understaffing can prompt the creation of a priority system that leads inspectors to address the most noticeably risky firms and not engage in proactive inspection visits or consider firms that are lower risk.…”

Section: Maceachen Et Almentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Understaffing can prompt the creation of a priority system that leads inspectors to address the most noticeably risky firms and not engage in proactive inspection visits or consider firms that are lower risk. Further, complex situations, such as psychosocial complaints and risk audits, may be avoided because of the relatively extended time required to investigate and the limited outcomes achieved (23,32,34).…”

Section: Maceachen Et Almentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This review shows that inspectors are reluctant to apply enforcement when they see a low likelihood of conviction, as is the case with management standards approaches (28) and complex workplace psychosocial health issues where labor relations are entangled with occupational health (33,34). This raises the question for OHS policy-makers of whether changes are needed to make OHS law more precise or if inspectors with an enhanced ability to deal with complex hazards and investigations are needed.…”

Section: Inspectors and Policy Implementationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Systematic review of qualitative literature on occupational health and safety legislation and regulatory enforcement planning and implementation

MacEachen

Kosny

Ståhl

et al. 2015

Scand J Work Environ Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is the first systematic review of qualitative literature addressing political, economic and social processes and relationships that shape occupational health and safety (OHS) regulation. The meta-ethnography identifies calls for attention to challenges and opportunities for OHS regulation relating to non-standard work situations, grey zones of enforcement, politics of policy formation, and variation among employers and workers.

show abstract

Section: Maceachen Et Almentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Maceachen Et Almentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Maceachen Et Almentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Maceachen Et Almentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Inspectors and Policy Implementationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Systematic review of qualitative literature on occupational health and safety legislation and regulatory enforcement planning and implementation

MacEachen

Kosny

Ståhl

et al. 2015

Scand J Work Environ Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Implementing general environmental duties: Regulators' perceptions of complementary toolkits

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Statutory general duties prioritise the prevention of harm, placing the onus for compliance on individuals and businesses alike to take steps to manage risks posed by their activities. In the case of general environmental duties specifically, they mandate that all parts of the community minimise the risk of environmental harm from their activities. However, encouraging compliant behaviour across such a diverse cohort is a significant challenge. To assist in meeting this challenge, general duties are supported by a variety of complementary regulatory tools. However, little is known about which complementary tools are used by regulators to support general environmental duties, and which factors may influence their application. This article addresses this knowledge gap, with a focus on Anglosphere countries where the use of statutory general duties is becoming increasingly popular. Through semi‐structured interviews with staff from environmental and occupational health and safety regulators, we demonstrate that the existence of a complementary tool does not necessarily mean it will be selected, and that staff responsible for the implementation of general duties are influenced by seven factors. These factors impact not only the selection of complementary tools, but when and how they are applied. The article concludes by discussing implications for practise and future research.

show abstract

Countering online terrorist content: A social regulation approach

Watkin

2023

Policy & Internet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After a period of self‐regulation, countries around the world began to implement regulations for the removal of terrorist content from tech platforms. However, much of this regulation has been criticised for a variety of reasons, most prominently for concerns of infringing free speech and creating unfair burdens for smaller platforms. In addition to this, regulation is heavily centred around content moderation, however, fails to consider or address the psychosocial risks it poses to human content moderators. This paper argues that where regulation has been heavily criticised yet continues to inspire similar regulation a new regulatory approach is required. The aim of this paper is to undertake an introductory examination of the use of a social regulation approach in three other industries (environmental protection, consumer protection and occupational health and safety) to learn and investigate new regulatory avenues that could be applied to the development of new regulation that seeks to counter terrorist content on tech platforms and is concerned with the safety of content moderators.

show abstract

OHS inspectors and psychosocial risk factors: Evidence from Australia

Cited by 75 publications

References 34 publications

Systematic review of qualitative literature on occupational health and safety legislation and regulatory enforcement planning and implementation

Systematic review of qualitative literature on occupational health and safety legislation and regulatory enforcement planning and implementation

Implementing general environmental duties: Regulators' perceptions of complementary toolkits

Countering online terrorist content: A social regulation approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About