A small business initiative

Dalma Formwork (Australia) Pty Ltd is a small family owned company which has been carrying out formwork on large scale building and construction projects since 1988.

The Director, Rade Cikes, firmly believes in the importance of ‘raising the bar’ on safety, and in committing to this objective, he has established the following company philosophy: 

To constantly seek new ways of improving safety on our projects.

Traditional formwork methods

The traditional methods of forming suspended concrete slabs and beams requires formwork carpenters to work from the top of the deck, including the leading edge. 

Working from heights creates potential hazards for formwork carpenters.  In particular, a fall from height may result in an injury, which may permanently incapacitate an individual, or even result in death.

Striving to make formwork safer 

Through consultation with its employees, Dalma has been investigating ways to improve existing formwork methods in order to facilitate a safer deck environment. 

In 2006, through the support of the head contractor on a major construction site, Dalma trialled a new method they had developed to reduce the possibility of a worker falling while working from the top of the deck.   

As an initial step in the design of their method, Dalma adopted a new industry procedure wherein the beam soffit would be prefabricated from the slab below the deck and lifted into place with the use of a telescopic forklift.   

Despite the fact that prefabricating the beam from below meant a reduction in requirements to work on top of the beam, Dalma remained concerned that workers involved in completing the formwork once the beam had been lifted would still be exposed to the possibility of a fall.

To increase the level of fall protection for their workers, Dalma devised an innovative solution of removable handrails and posts to complement the procedure for prefabricating the beam from below.

Applying handrails and posts

In designing their system of removable handrails and posts, Dalma ensured that they could be quickly and easily attached to the beam soffit without impacting on the requirements to prefabricate the beam soffit from below.   

Once in place, the handrails and post ensure the worker is well protected from leading edges of the formwork, and can safely carry out activities to construct the beam sides and install the metal decking from the top of the formwork deck. 

The results

By developing and implementing a system of removable handrails and posts, together with prefabricated beam soffits, Dalma has dramatically increased the level of fall protection for their workers.  

Importantly, Dalma has eliminated the worker’s exposure to the leading edges of the formwork, and has gained success in overcoming one of the major hazards associated with formwork construction.

A commendation for innovation

In 2006, Dalma was awarded a commendation for their solution for increasing the level of fall protection in formwork construction at the ACT Occupational Health and Safety Awards. 

The commendation was announced by the ACT Minister for Industrial Relations, Andrew Barr MLA, at a function at the National Museum in Canberra. 

For further information on Dalma Formwork’s solution for increasing the level of fall protection in formwork construction contact:

Rade Cikes

Director

Dalma Formwork (Australia) Pty Ltd

Ph: 02 9498 2466

About these case studies

The Australian Government is committed to improving the WHS standards for all workers on building and construction projects. 

These case studies have been developed to share practical ideas that can be adopted by industry to assist in their own management of WHS issues.

The Federal Safety Commissioner consults widely with industry, WHS authorities and other relevant agencies to promote a cooperative approach to improving WHS performance.

The vision of the Federal Safety Commissioner is a building and construction industry where no one is harmed.

For further information:

• Contact the FSC Assist Line on 1800 652 500
• Contact the OFSC via email at ofsc@dewr.gov.au

Disclaimer

The Office of the Federal Safety Commissioner has prepared this case study to promote workplace health and safety (WHS) in the Building and Construction Industry. When developing WHS initiatives, businesses and individuals should consider the circumstances and requirements particular to them, and seek professional advice where required.

While the Commonwealth has exercised reasonable care in providing useful information, the Commonwealth makes no representations, express or implied, as to the accuracy of the information contained in this case study. The Commonwealth accepts no liability for any use of the information contained in this case study or any reliance placed on it.

This case study may list persons, organisations, products, or services, or may incorporate material sourced from third parties. Such lists or material are assembled in good faith. However, any such list or material does not necessarily constitute any form of endorsement by the Commonwealth of that person, organisation, product, service, or third party. The Commonwealth does not accept any responsibility for such lists or material.

Introduction

This report has been prepared to share the lessons learnt from a formwork failure incident. The incident involved the structural failure of temporary works during the placement of concrete to a section of the Ground Floor suspended slab. There were no injuries from this incident and the failure sequence of the collapse allowed time for a full evacuation of the site. Significant demolition and rectification work was required as a consequence of the formwork collapse.  

Background

Generally construction of multi-storey in-situ concrete framed buildings relies on the mass of wet concrete being temporarily supported and the resultant load shared by the floors below. These loads are distributed by formwork systems and backprops.

Construction status on the day of the incident

Figure 1 (below) shows a typical section showing the status of construction at the time of the incident when concrete was being placed to the Ground Floor slab. 

The suspended Basement 1 and Basement 2 floor slabs are designed as post tensioned banded slabs and both suspended slabs had been fully stressed and grouted. The sections of Basement 1 and Basement 2 slabs north of Grid H were detailed with a construction joint at approximately 2/3 span towards Grid G. The sections of slab between Grid G and Grid H were completed up to the construction joint only. They would remain in this condition until adjacent slabs, north of the construction joint were formed and cast. With limited capacity to act as a cantilever, these slab sections relied on formwork and backpropping for support.

Formwork and backprops on the day of the incident

Figure 1 shows areas that were fully formed and propped and those which had been stripped and backpropped.  In summary the installations were as follows:

• Between Basement 1 and Ground Floor the full formwork system was in place to support the wet concrete placement to the Ground Floor. 
• Between Basement 2 and Basement 1 the formwork had been stripped and replaced with a system of backprops.
• Between Basement 3 and Basement 2, south of Grid H, the formwork had been stripped and replaced with the system of backprops.

Between Basement 3 and Basement 2, north of Grid H, the formwork remained in preparation for casting Basement 2 north of the construction joint.

Collapse sequence

Figure 2 (below) highlights the sequence of the three failures that occurred, leading to the collapse of the formwork and wet concrete to the Ground Floor.

Failure 1 – Backpropping between Basement 2 and Basement 1

As the concrete was being placed to the Ground Floor, north of Grid H, the Basement 2 to Basement 1 backprops became overloaded and began to progressively fail across the entire width (east to west) of the Basement 1 slab, a distance of some 32 metres. The progressive failure of the backprops produced visible deflections in the Basement 1 slab, north of Grid H, alerting site staff and leading to the safe evacuation of all site personnel.

Failure 2 – Overloading of Basement 1 Slab, North of Grid H  

Failure 1 resulted in the full load of the Ground Floor wet concrete being carried by the now unsupported Basement 1 slab which in its temporary state, was now required to act as a cantilever. This load was in excess of the slabs structural capacity resulting in a progressive failure of the Basement 1 slab along the entire edge of the band beam (east to west) adjacent to Grid H. At Failure Point 2 a “hinge” was created at the band beam / slab junction at Grid H. As a result the northern most edge of the Basement 1 slab rotated downwards, coming to rest on the Basement 2 slab below.  

Failure 3 – Collapse of Ground Floor Formwork

Without any support from the Basement 1 slab the formwork supporting the wet concrete to the Ground Floor (highlighted yellow in Figure 2) slid down the inclined surface of the collapsed section of Basement 1 slab and came to rest on the Basement 2 slab and formwork. The Basement 2 slab, north of Grid H, remained intact throughout the incident.

The result of the three failure mechanisms outlined above is demonstrated in figure 3 (below).

Lessons learnt

Principal Contractors must ensure that formwork and backpropping design drawings are produced that are project and area specific. This is because design loadings for the permanent structure vary from floor to floor, particularly as the project progresses from basement levels, through the Ground Floor and into typical tower floors.

The design drawings should take account of project specific issues such as:

• pour sequence
• concrete placement sequence and rate of placing
• compaction methods
• The design should also be consistent with the project program.
• Design drawings must be certified by the formwork design engineer to demonstrate compliance with relevant  Codes of Practice and AS3610. 
• The Principal Contractor should verify the competency level and experience of the formwork and backpropping designer, including when the designer is appointed by the formworker under a subcontract arrangement. 
• The Principal Contractor should develop the form and content of the formwork design certificate and include this certificate in the Formwork Subcontrator Agreement. The design certificate must satisfy the requirements of AS3610. 
• The formworkers design engineer must ensure that the structural integrity of formwork systems and backpropping materials are verified before use. Materials inspection procedures from the subcontractor’s material suppliers should be provided that define the verification process.
• Principal Contractors must ensure that a review of the formwork and backpropping design is carried out by the Project Structural Engineer to verify that temporary imposed loads will not adversely affect the permanent structure.
• The Principal Contractor should verify the competency level and experience of the formwork and backpropping inspection engineer, including when the inspection engineer is appointed by the formworker under a subcontract arrangement.
• The Principal Contractor should develop the form and content of the installation certificate and include this certificate in the Formwork Subcontrator Agreement. This certificate must demonstrate compliance with relevant Codes of Practice and AS3610.
• Principal Contractors must maintain high levels of due diligence during formwork erection and accompany the Formwork Inspection Engineer on every inspection, and ensure they physically verify that corrective actions have been completed. Where possible minimise the time between inspection and concrete placement. 
• The Principal Contractor should ensure that clear lines of responsibility and accountability are established and communicated through the design, inspection and certification process.
• The Principal Contractor should provide marked-up drawings to the formworker which identify the areas that can be stripped and backpropped prior to the formworker commencing those activities.
• The Principal Contractor should ensure they receive competency assessments for the formworkers workforce prior to commencement of works. Principal Contractors should also conduct their own competency assessment once works have commenced by doing task observations in the workplace.

For further information:

• Contact the FSC Assist Line on 1800 652 500
• Contact the OFSC via email at ofsc@dewr.gov.au

Introduction

The Broadway Shopping Centre, originally the landmark Grace Bros department store on Broadway, was built in 1904 with distinctive and iconic clock towers and globes. 

In redeveloping the Broadway Shopping Centre, it was necessary to consider a number of unique obstacles. For example, the shopping centre falls under Heritage Commission guidelines. This restricted the changes that could be made to the existing building. In addition, the Broadway Shopping Centre has approximately 28 000 visitors each day and the expansion was carried out while the centre continued to operate. This meant that much of the work was conducted outside operating hours to reduce the impact on those working in or visiting the centre. 

Moving with the times

In 1998 the Walker Corporation redeveloped the shopping centre in compliance with Heritage Commission guidelines. The latest expansion of Broadway Shopping Centre commenced in March 2006 for completion in 2007. The works included the addition of a new level to the three floors of retail space and three additional car parking floors.

The expansion involved the demolition of the temporary office floor space, the construction of new stores and rearrangement of car parking spaces and access.

Safety obstacles

As the Broadway Shopping Centre continued to operate during the expansion, it was crucial that visitors and tenants were not placed at risk. 

At the end of each shift, cranes, elevated work platforms and other evidence of construction were moved from public view and the centre was cleaned in preparation for the return of shop employees and visitors.

Site safety management plan

A site safety management plan was developed using a template from the Walker Corporation Workplace Health and Safety (WHS) Management System. The plan was reviewed and amended as conditions at the site changed. 

The site safety management plan included:

• agreed roles and responsibilities for Walker Corporation personnel
• management of subcontractors
• a risk management strategy
• training and induction plans
• consultation arrangements
• management of plant and equipment
• management of inspections and audits
• first aid/emergency procedures 
• accident/incident reporting.

Subcontractors

All subcontractors were provided with a package that included relevant drawings, details of the scope of work and documentation that clearly outlined WHS requirements. Subcontractors had to provide documentation that met safety standards prior to receiving permission to start work on site. Feedback and guidance were provided to those who did not meet safety standards.

Audits were regularly conducted on subcontractor management systems, while frequent inspections occurred on worksites and safe work method statements for subcontractors were reviewed and signed off by employees and management. 

A risk register was established for the project and has been kept up to date with any new scope of work and the appointment of all subcontractors.

Risk management 

A risk management strategy formed a major part of the site safety management plan. The strategy included the management of noise, dust, general materials handling, traffic, shop employees, the general public, construction in the existing car park, workplace amenities and safe working procedures in general.

Emphasis was placed on the importance of continually identifying and assessing risks on site, while control measures were implemented or amended where necessary. For example, the increased traffic due to deliveries of plant, materials and equipment resulted in the incorporation of more detail in relation to traffic management into the site safety management plan. This helped address possible issues before they arose.

Communication and consultation

Communication was a key factor in developing the site specific plan. The roles and responsibilities of positions on the project were made clear to all personnel, contractors and subcontractors, with a strong emphasis placed on WHS.

A site safety committee was also established as part of the risk management strategy. The committee conducted weekly safety inspections, had regular formal meetings and distributed rectification lists for action to all subcontractors.

Team briefings for employees were held on a daily basis and acted as a forum to:

• discuss any new safe work method statements, plant or substances on site
• report on any incidents or accidents from the previous day  
• discuss the work planned for the coming day and WHS in general. 

SMARTEK system

Walker Corporation engaged a consultant to develop an IT system to assist with managing safety and general administration. The SMARTEK system allows for:

• photographic induction cards
• monitoring of certificates of competency
• changes in induction certificates
• currency of workers compensation certificates
• scanners to ensure an accurate tally of personnel on site (for use in an emergency). 

Results

As a result of the site safety management plan, site safety committee and SMARTEK system the Broadway Shopping Centre expansion was a safety conscious environment catering to shop employees, visitors and construction workers.

This project won an award for safety in the Master Builders Association of NSW awards and was a finalist in 2006 of the Master Builders Australia National Building & Construction Awards.

For further information about this safety initiative contact: Walker Corporation Head Office Ph: 02 8765 5000

About these case studies

The Australian Government is committed to improving the WHS standards for all workers on building and construction projects. 

These case studies have been developed to share practical ideas that can be adopted by industry to assist in their own management of WHS issues.

The Federal Safety Commissioner consults widely with industry, WHS authorities and other relevant agencies to promote a cooperative approach to improving WHS performance.

The vision of the Federal Safety Commissioner is a building and construction industry where no one is harmed.

For further information:

• Contact the FSC Assist Line on 1800 652 500
• Contact the OFSC via email at ofsc@dewr.gov.au

Safety is everyone’s responsibility

Safety in the workplace is everyone’s responsibility. But instilling a culture of responsible safety behaviour

can be a challenge.

Sharpe Bros (Aust) Pty Ltd is a family owned civil contracting and road maintenance company that is committed to improving the WHS awareness and performance of their employees. To support this commitment, they have implemented a simple yet effective program to develop and maintain a positive safety culture on their project sites.

Complacency is a safety hazard

Concerned complacency might increase the potential for an incident or injury in the workplace, Sharpe Bros management decided to implement a safety awareness program to reinforce safety policies and procedures to employees on the job. Specifically, they wanted a simple awareness raising device that would encourage employees to put themselves in the shoes of a safety officer and always consider the safety of themselves and their co-workers. 

They wanted a device that was visual, positive and fun, and would serve as a mascot for employees. For this, they developed the character, Safety Bro.

Building a safety champion  

Safety Bro is a champion of safety in the workplace who encourages important safety and injury prevention behaviours through the presentation of his image and motivational slogans such as ‘What would Safety Bro think?’ 

The original concept emerged during consultation with employees when one employee commented that safety is vital because ‘big brother’ is always watching you. Meant partly as a pun on the company name, Sharpe Bros, and joint Managing Directors, Michael, Richard and Hayden Sharpe, it wasn’t long before ‘big brother is watching you’ evolved to become ‘Safety Bro is working with you’ and the Safety Bro character was born. 

Given employee enthusiasm for Safety Bro, Sharpe Bros management took immediate steps to incorporate the concept into the company’s overall WHS framework. Used to complement the company’s formal policies and procedures, the image of Safety Bro was designed to remind employees to always consider safety—after all ‘What would Safety Bro do?’  

The Safety Bro image is now reproduced on stickers and prominently displayed throughout the workplace—on coffee cups, safety induction handbooks, message boards, work stations, lunch rooms and in the boardroom. The image is also advertised on all Sharpe Bros plant, equipment and vehicles. 

A Safety Bro website, www.safetybro.com.au, My Space page, www.myspace.com/safetybro, and mobile SMS are used to send regular messages and to make WHS announcements to employees. These activities all serve to remind employees of the importance of safe work behaviours and to make safety something tangible, likeable and memorable.  

A simple initiative with big results

The Safety Bro program has proved an excellent counter to complacency in the workplace and has renewed enthusiasm for safety in a way that has engaged all employees. New employees and contractors on Sharpe Bros’ projects are amazed by the bold and visual impact of Safety Bro, and many have noted how impressed they are that safety has a face at Sharpe Bros.  

A champion of workplace safety, the Safety Bro program has seen Sharpe Bros awarded the Best Workplace Health and Safety Practices in Small Business at the 2007 National Safe Work Australia Awards hosted by the Australian Safety and Compensation Council, and the 2007 WorkCover NSW Safe Work Australia Awards.

Commenting on the program’s success, Michael Sharpe remarked ‘Working in the construction industry, which has one of the highest rates of injuries, safety is paramount so we have invested time and energy building a strong safety culture. ..Safety Bro has become everybody’s best mate.  He is an integral member of the team and has inspired renewed enthusiasm for safety issues’.

Cultural change in small business

Since the 2007 National Safe Work Australia Awards, Sharpe Bros have been approached by other small businesses looking for a simple and effective method for promoting WHS in the workplace.

The lesson for small business operators interested in improving the WHS awareness and performance of their employees is that the simplest concept can be effective provided everyone in the workplace is involved and management are committed to getting the WHS message across.

About these case studies

The Australian Government is committed to improving the WHS standards for all workers on building and construction projects. 

These case studies have been developed to share practical ideas that can be adopted by industry to assist in their own management of WHS issues.

The Federal Safety Commissioner consults widely with industry, WHS authorities and other relevant agencies to promote a cooperative approach to improving WHS performance.

The vision of the Federal Safety Commissioner is a building and construction industry where no one is harmed.

For further information:

• Contact the FSC Assist Line on 1800 652 500
• Contact the OFSC via email at ofsc@dewr.gov.au

Background

Located north of Hobart Tasmania, the Brighton Bypass is a 9.5 km predominately dual carriageway constructed on the Midland Highway, bypassing Brighton and Pontville. The Brighton Bypass provides a safer, more efficient route between Hobart and Tasmania’s northern cities and ports.

The Bypass is Tasmania’s largest ever road infrastructure project, involving construction of thirteen major structures and associated civil engineering works.

The $191 million project—which received funding from the Australian Government Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government—was completed months ahead of schedule by Australian Government Building and Construction OHS Accreditation Scheme (the Scheme) accredited builders Thiess, John Holland, VEC Civil Engineering, and Hazell Bros Group.

Addressing the challenges

Key challenges faced during construction of the Brighton Bypass project included large companies working together as part of a joint venture, and a lack of available skilled workers due to a number of other major civil infrastructure projects taking place in Tasmania at the time. 

Thiess Constructions’ method of overcoming the skills shortage was to mix teams to integrate both experienced workers and newcomers to the construction industry. Thiess also realised that with lesser skilled construction workers on board, a greater focus on safety induction and management was required. When asked how they worked through the challenge of increasing the skill set of construction workers, Thiess explained that “the awareness of and attitudes to the current standards in safety management needed more focus. By acknowledging this prior to project commencement and conducting both on and off site training through various training providers, we were able to improve the skill base and safety standards of the local industry.” 

The challenge of working together was overcome by companies undergoing extensive training and workshops, and having the ability to recognise each company’s strengths. According to Thiess, “Early joint venture workshops and training sessions allowed all parties to bring their collective knowledge to the table and share amongst the project team”. VEC Civil Engineering added that “VEC Civil Engineering is a Tasmanian company based in Ulverstone, whereas Thiess is a large multinational company. Bringing the entities together for the Brighton Bypass resulted in having local knowledge and experience along with national support.  The best policies and practises from each company were decided on from the onset to ensure delivery of a high quality product on time, budget and safely.”

Helpful advice for companies undertaking similar projects

John Holland suggests companies undertaking similar projects should focus on safe design and constructability to ensure hazards are reduced or eliminated, and risks controlled before the commencement of any construction work. For example, John Holland revealed that “the Brighton Interchange Overpass was reduced from a two-span to a single-span structure during the early contractor involvement phase, eliminating a potential collision hazard with a central pier, and future maintenance WHS requirements were addressed in the design phase such as the provision of handrails on culvert structures.”

VEC Civil Engineering also noted that “a safety culture was developed around effective communications utilising regular toolbox talks, safety observations and multiple levels of safety control, involving all levels from labour to upper management.” Employees were encouraged by the company to be responsible for their own safety and the safety of others, and continual learning coupled with constant vigilance enabled the project to be finished safely and ahead of schedule.

The Australian Government Building and Construction OHS Accreditation Scheme and the project

The Scheme had a very positive effect on the safe construction of the Brighton Bypass project. Hazell Bros Group confirmed that the Scheme enabled them “to maintain a high level of system functionality and compliance”, while the Scheme’s reporting process also helped Hazell Bros Group to collect valuable data to assist in improving the company’s WHS performance.

Thiess agreed that their accreditation under the Scheme was beneficial to the safety of workers. They noted that “the OFSC guidelines enabled us to provide a framework of what was expected from all workers and Subcontractors on the project.  The knowledge that we had from our accreditation provided us with in-depth knowledge of industry best practice and guidelines that we could provide to our subcontractors and workforce.”

The outcome of this project is evidence that being accredited under the Scheme is a valuable asset to companies in improving safety performance and business practices.

About these case studies

The Australian Government is committed to improving the WHS standards for all workers on building and construction projects. 

These case studies have been developed to share practical ideas that can be adopted by industry to assist in their own management of WHS issues.

The Federal Safety Commissioner consults widely with industry, WHS authorities and other relevant agencies to promote a cooperative approach to improving WHS performance.

The vision of the Federal Safety Commissioner is a building and construction industry where no one is harmed.

For further information:

• Contact the FSC Assist Line on 1800 652 500
• Contact the OFSC via email at ofsc@dewr.gov.au

Disclaimer

The Office of the Federal Safety Commissioner has prepared this case study to promote workplace health and safety (WHS) in the Building and Construction Industry. When developing WHS initiatives, businesses and individuals should consider the circumstances and requirements particular to them, and seek professional advice where required.

While the Commonwealth has exercised reasonable care in providing useful information, the Commonwealth makes no representations, express or implied, as to the accuracy of the information contained in this case study. The Commonwealth accepts no liability for any use of the information contained in this case study or any reliance placed on it.

This case study may list persons, organisations, products, or services, or may incorporate material sourced from third parties. Such lists or material are assembled in good faith. However, any such list or material does not necessarily constitute any form of endorsement by the Commonwealth of that person, organisation, product, service, or third party. The Commonwealth does not accept any responsibility for such lists or material.

The Passport to Safety Excellence (PSE) Training Program is a John Holland Group workplace health and safety (WHS) initiative. It is a key element of the John Holland Occupational Health, Safety and Workers’ Compensation (OHS&WC) Improvement Strategy and aims to assist the company achieve their vision of ‘NO HARM’.

Safety critical positions

The first step of this WHS initiative involved the identification of all the safety critical positions within the company. 

To be considered safety critical the position had to have a direct and/or indirect impact on WHS in the workplace. 

Fourteen safety critical leadership positions were identified at John Holland ranging from Leading Hand to Managing Director.

Safety critical activities

The next step was to determine the WHS activities that needed to be undertaken by each position in order to achieve best practice safety standards in the workplace.

Thirty five safety critical activities were identified.

Some safety critical activities include:

• undertaking design safety reviews for constructability, operability and maintenance
• identifying and resolving workplace hazards
• planning and delivering Toolbox talks
• facilitating group/work team WHS discussions and meetings
• identifying and including suitable WHS requirements into subcontractor packages
• carrying out a formal WHS-related review of tender documents
• developing and implementing positive safety culture programs.

 John Holland then developed skill and behavioural competencies that were needed to effectively undertake every identified critical WHS activity. These competencies are closely aligned to the requirements of the company’s OHS&WC Management System.

Competency-based adult training module and assessment mechanisms were then developed to deliver the WHS training to the whole organisation throughout Australia. 

John Holland has had the Passport to Safety Excellence Training Program accredited nationally, as a Certificate IV in Safety Leadership—Construction. 

PSE benefits

The PSE is designed to equip personnel in these safety critical positions with the skills and behavioural competencies required to effectively carry out each of the safety critical activities, including:

• knowledge of what core tasks are needed to meet John Holland and legislative requirements
• an understanding of why, how and to what standard each task needs to be performed to achieve the required outcomes
• specific training and senior management support to meet the needs of individual positions
• proof of competency that is portable across John Holland and eventually accepted by all companies, institutions and sectors
• recognition from a national training body.

The future

Since introducing the program John Holland expects to deliver over 7000 training days to more than 1000 employees.  John Holland aims to extend the PSE to clients, subcontractors, other companies and relevant institutions.

No harm

To achieve the company vision of ‘NO HARM’, John Holland recognises the importance of providing personnel in safety critical positions with the skills and knowledge they require to complete their work effectively and deliver safe outcomes.

For further information in relation to the Passport to Safety Excellence Training Program contact:

Group Safety Manager

Ph: 03 9934 5209 

www.johnholland.com.au 

About these case studies

The Australian Government is committed to improving the WHS standards for all workers on building and construction projects. These case studies have been developed to share practical ideas that can be adopted by industry to assist in their own management of WHS issues.

The Federal Safety Commissioner consults widely with industry, WHS authorities and other relevant agencies to promote a cooperative approach to improving WHS performance.

The vision of the Federal Safety Commissioner is a building and construction industry where no one is harmed.

For further information:

• Contact the FSC Assist Line on 1800 652 500
• Contact the OFSC via email at ofsc@dewr.gov.au

The Office of the Federal Safety Commissioner congratulates the HMAS Creswell Redevelopment Team on winning the Category 4 Best Solution to an Identified Workplace Health and Safety Issue award as part of the 2013 Department of Defence WHS Awards. 

The HMAS Creswell Redevelopment Team was recognised for delivering Australia’s first fire fighting and leak stop and repair training unit to include a range of safety systems that coordinate, monitor, and control training scenarios. 

Project details

The HMAS Creswell Redevelopment project was undertaken by Australian Government Building and Construction OHS Accreditation Scheme accredited builders Hansen Yuncken Pty Ltd, and included works to design and construct training facilities at the Royal Australian Navy School of Survivability and Ship Safety at Jervis Bay. 

The redevelopment of the school aimed to provide world-class realistic training to 3,000 sailors annually in dangerous situations within safe, controlled facilities to enhance the protection of life and assets at sea.

Key challenges

With more than a little irony, the team was tasked with safely building a facility that was specifically designed to place sailors in simulated dangerous and life threatening scenarios, including fighting gas and diesel fires in confined spaces.

There were several technical challenges in obtaining safety standard certification on a number of critical safety systems, such as gas monitoring systems and timed fuel burns. Other safety features included lighting modifications to reduce the risk of electrocution, overflows to prevent the flooding of compartments, an emergency drainage system to avoid accidental drowning, and the inclusion of safety override systems. 

The project also involved a number of environmental challenges, such as minimising any potential contaminated runoff from the site and eliminating the emission of large plumes of black smoke from the fire fighting units. 

A unique project

The redevelopment was subject to a Navy Safety Case, the same system used to commission Royal Australian Navy ships. This introduced a whole new set of considerations. The most significant challenge with the Navy Safety Case was the use of different terminology between the manufacturing industry, from which the safety case was developed, and the building industry. At one stage the regulator believed that the team had omitted a stage, as the documents the team referred to as 'design' documents, were referred to as ‘user requirement specifications’ by the regulator. A similar discrepancy existed between the terms 'shop drawings’ and 'design drawings’. This caused the regulator great concern that the redevelopment team had skipped user requirement definition and gone directly to design/fabrication.

The unique nature of the redevelopment also raised questions as to which standard to apply to the Dynamic Leak Stop Units that formed the core of the training facility, with the closet applicable standard being the Australian Standard for Amusement Park Rides. The Managing Contractor, Hansen Yuncken Pty Ltd, also suggested that the team have the manufacturers peer review the designs as the best method of ensuring high levels of safety compliance.  This led to the inclusion of a number of critical safety systems such as gas monitoring systems, and timed burns of the fuels, which triggers an alert that shuts down the units should a flame continue to burn.

Safety approach 

Meeting these challenges and safely delivering new facilities required a commitment to safety from everyone involved in the project. Two particular elements that contributed greatly to the successful outcome were: 

• undertaking a comprehensive Navy Safety Case which reviewed the possible risks to personnel using the training facilities and set out necessary measures to ensure these risks were controlled in the design and construction process. A Navy Safety Case to a building project had not been undertaken previously in Defence for anything other than ships and ship-borne systems, and
• extensive collaboration between a range of stakeholders - particularly trainers and users of the training facilities - in the design and development of the Navy Safety Case. The Navy Safety Case remains a live document maintained by the operators of the facility into the future. 

Congratulations to the HMAS Creswell Redevelopment Team for successfully producing one of the safest training units of its type in the world.

About these case studies

The Australian Government is committed to improving the WHS standards for all workers on building and construction projects. 

These case studies have been developed to share practical ideas that can be adopted by industry to assist in their own management of WHS issues.

The Federal Safety Commissioner consults widely with industry, WHS authorities and other relevant agencies to promote a cooperative approach to improving WHS performance.

The vision of the Federal Safety Commissioner is a building and construction industry where no one is harmed.

For further information:

• Contact the FSC Assist Line on 1800 652 500
• Contact the OFSC via email at ofsc@dewr.gov.au

Disclaimer

The Office of the Federal Safety Commissioner has prepared this case study to promote workplace health and safety (WHS) in the Building and Construction Industry. When developing WHS initiatives, businesses and individuals should consider the circumstances and requirements particular to them, and seek professional advice where required.

While the Commonwealth has exercised reasonable care in providing useful information, the Commonwealth makes no representations, express or implied, as to the accuracy of the information contained in this case study. The Commonwealth accepts no liability for any use of the information contained in this case study or any reliance placed on it.

This case study may list persons, organisations, products, or services, or may incorporate material sourced from third parties. Such lists or material are assembled in good faith. However, any such list or material does not necessarily constitute any form of endorsement by the Commonwealth of that person, organisation, product, service, or third party. The Commonwealth does not accept any responsibility for such lists or material.

The importance of flexibility in the workplace

Often working hours in the building and construction industry are long and inflexible, placing pressure on the wellbeing of workers and their families.

The Cole Royal Commission into the Building and Construction Industry found that in order to achieve improvements in productivity it was critical that work practices became more accommodating. The Summary of Findings and Recommendations noted that flexible hours of work are important to many workers, who may have different preferences depending on their home or other commitments.

The Directors of Probuild Constructions aim to continue to deliver complex, high quality projects on time and within budget. Yet the company also has a commitment to developing a workplace culture which supports work and family balance.

The impact of long hours on WHS

Workplace health and safety (WHS) centres on the wellbeing of employees. Long working hours place pressure on relationships, health and the general wellbeing of employees. The resulting fatigue, anxiety and stress can have an impact on safety, particularly in the building and construction industry. 

Understanding work, family and life pressures

Senior management at Probuild Constructions believe that it is important for employees to feel that their responsibilities and interests outside work are recognised and respected. 

In 2005, the company established a working group in Victoria consisting of staff, union and management representatives. The working group gathered information about work–life issues currently impacting on employees through the use of two surveys, one for staff and another for their partners. 

In addition, the working group assessed work–life initiatives already in place and identified new initiatives that could form the basis of a work and family balance program. 

Employees’ views on the industry

While most employees reported that they were happy at work, they expressed concern that the constant pressure and long hours negatively affected their personal relationships. Some employees also thought that they might be disadvantaged if they used flexible working arrangements. 

Many partners of employees noted that they had almost full responsibility for day to day household management and family care, even though many were also employed themselves. Partners attributed this issue to the hours and workload of the building industry.

Addressing concerns

In response to feedback from the surveys, partners were invited to participate in a focus group to discuss issues with flexibility in the workplace and home life. 

Using the feedback received, the working group developed a work and life balance policy based on the following principles:

• all initiatives must be of mutual benefit to the individual and company
• achieving better work and life balance is a team effort involving individuals and managers
• there is no one solution that will meet everyone’s needs
• hard work can be done flexibly 
• good communication is fundamental to success.

The working group found that all employees needed to have access to flexible work arrangements suiting their work and family needs. In consideration of this finding, specific action plans were developed and each individual employee’s work and family responsibilities were thoroughly documented.

Information pack

An information pack was created to assist in developing a better work and family culture. The pack consists of a number of booklets and fact sheets that provide practical information on creating a better work–life balance. 

The information pack provides an overview of the work and life balance policy, detailing why the program had been created and what it hoped to achieve. There is clear guidance on the expectations of senior management in relation to working on Saturdays and excessive hours in general. All employees and partners were provided with an information pack at the launch of the program.

Implications for employees

The pack clearly outlines the responsibilities in relation to work–life balance for all levels of employees in the company, including senior management.

However, and perhaps most importantly, the booklet provides clear steps for employees on how to create a work–life balance to cater for their own personal needs.

A number of brochures developed by organisations, such as Mensline Australia and WIRE—Women’s Information, are included in the pack. These groups offer support, information and general counselling services.

Senior management commitment

Senior management has agreed to:

• monitor the implementation of individual action plans
• counsel all senior managers in relation to the program
• develop a consistent approach across sites and head office that recognises the needs of employees
• adjust individual position descriptions and performance review processes to ensure consistency with the program
• commit to a self-appraisal process that ensures continual monitoring of the program at all levels.

Results

Probuild Constructions will track the progress of the Work and Life Balance Program. Findings will be used to measure whether employees’ work and life balance has positively changed, while also indicating the company’s success in meeting business objectives.

For further information about the Work and Life Balance Program contact:

Human Resources Manager

Ph : 03 9693 8222

email: info@probuild.com.au

About these case studies

The Australian Government is committed to improving the WHS standards for all workers on building and construction projects. 

These case studies have been developed to share practical ideas that can be adopted by industry to assist in their own management of WHS issues.

The Federal Safety Commissioner consults widely with industry, WHS authorities and other relevant agencies to promote a cooperative approach to improving WHS performance.

The vision of the Federal Safety Commissioner is a building and construction industry where no one is harmed.

For further information:

• Contact the FSC Assist Line on 1800 652 500
• Contact the OFSC via email at ofsc@dewr.gov.au

Background

Construction companies Abigroup and Leighton Joint Venture (ALJV) designed and constructed the Westlink M7 motorway (M7) in Sydney. This case study focuses on an integrated safety approach, featuring a combination of training and safety initiatives to work safely with underground utilities, particularly electrical and gas services. Construction commenced in 2003 and the M7 was open to traffic at the end of 2006.

ALJV conducted an extensive risk assessment before starting on the M7 project. Survey drawings, obtained from Dial Before You Dig, provided details on where utilities may be located. Pot-holing was subsequently used to ensure accurate location and identification of underground utilities. The location of utilities found was progressively recorded by ALJV on a map. Pot-holing involved thousands of work hours hand digging and water blasting holes to help prevent underground utilities being struck during construction.

Safety approach

ALJV consulted service stakeholders such as Integral Energy (electricity), Agility (gas and electricity), and Duke Energy (gas) as well as their own engineers and safety personnel, to develop safety procedures for work with underground utilities. Collaboration between stakeholders and implementation of safety initiatives were key factors in delivering the project safely.

Underground utilities safety initiative

Training. ALJV and Integral Energy combined their expertise to create a comprehensive underground electrical services training program for personnel onsite. Training used graphic real-life examples to emphasise the reality of the dangers of working with electricity.

Aspects of training included:

• an Electrical Safety for Construction Site Workers course;
• site inductions; and
• ALJV personnel, at Integral’s invitation, attended the Integral safety course, traditionally only available to electrical contractors accredited to work on Integral utilities.

At ALJV’s request, Integral also made supervisors available onsite to liaise with construction teams.

In addition to training and liaison, several specific safety initiatives were introduced to ensure worker safety, such as:

De-energising. High-risk electrical services were de-energised, where possible, during work on sites using methods including rerouting of the power supply to remove the risk of exposure while surrounding areas could receive power supply.

Electronic detection of utilities. Global Positioning System backpacks were developed enabling the latest survey data to be used onsite. This technology was coupled with electronic wands and pot-holing to locate underground utilities. Accurate location of utilities lowered the risk of accidentally striking underground utility services during excavation.

Service identification. Colour coded conduits were used to identify the type of service, location and depth to ensure hazard awareness. This highlighted services in key areas to reduce the risk of striking utilities. 

Permit to excavate. These permits were developed by engineers and safety personnel. Each work crew was required to be in possession of a current permit before undertaking any excavation. The permits not only covered location but detailed who was responsible for managing the works. 

Onsite training took place with personnel to ensure the work crew understood the details of the permit to excavate before excavation took place. 

Safety coordinators ensured that all excavation work complied with the conditions of the permit to excavate and that permits were clearly understood by work crews. Safety coordinators were authorised to stop work if any aspect of the permit to excavate was not adhered to. Coordinators highlighted the importance of communicating safety messages between crews.

Non-destructive digging. Surface pegs detailing depth, type of service and position were used to identify the location of services to avoid digging in those areas. Spray paint was also used to mark the service location. Water blasting, hand digging and toothless buckets were used during excavation to prevent damage to underground utilities.

Safety awareness reinforcement. Banners, posters, stickers and signage were used extensively to reinforce procedures and identify hazards involved with underground utilities. For example, banners were hung at bridges near sites, showing messages such as ‘Must have a permit to excavate’ or the warning ‘Power live’. Variable message boards, intended for users of the completed road, were utilised onsite to convey reminders of potential hazards. Each worker completed an ALJV electrical course and received a pocket-sized safety list about working with underground utilities. These safety messages reinforced the inherent risks to safety when working with underground utilities. 

ALJV’s safety approach, with its combination of collaboration, training and onsite safety initiatives, helped to create and sustain a safety culture during the construction of 40km of dual carriageway through urban Sydney. 

Through extensive training, personnel had a raised awareness of the hazards and safety requirements when working with underground utilities. Most importantly, no fatalities or injuries from exposure to underground electrical utilities were sustained while undertaking this large and complicated project.

About these case studies

The Australian Government is committed to improving the WHS standards for all workers on building and construction projects. 

These case studies have been developed to share practical ideas that can be adopted by industry to assist in their own management of WHS issues.

The Federal Safety Commissioner consults widely with industry, WHS authorities and other relevant agencies to promote a cooperative approach to improving WHS performance.

The vision of the Federal Safety Commissioner is a building and construction industry where no one is harmed.

For further information:

• Contact the FSC Assist Line on 1800 652 500
• Contact the OFSC via email at ofsc@dewr.gov.au

Incident & Injury Free

Incident & Injury Free (IIF) is an international program developed by Bovis Lend Lease to encourage a positive health and safety culture in the company. 

Through IIF, Bovis Lend Lease have adopted the following vision:  Bovis Lend Lease will operate incident and injury free and we are committed to realising this wherever we have a presence.

IIF focus points

Incident & Injury Free was implemented by Bovis Lend Lease Australia in 2002. The IIF program complements the Bovis Lend Lease Environment, Health and Safety Management (EH&S) framework, and sets six focus points for the company. 

These are to:

• identify IIF leaders and champions
• motivate employees to operate and maintain IIF
• ensure efficient and effective implementation of EH&S processes
• assist subcontractors to implement IIF, and to improve execution of Safe Work Method Statements
• gain recognition, support and involvement from clients
• gain recognition, support and involvement from the community

IIF initiatives 

In consultation with workers, Bovis Lend Lease Australia have developed a range of innovative and practical measures to implement the IIF program. Initiatives including workplace signage and slogans, as well as safety BBQs and lunches, are just some examples.

The initiatives recognise the importance of promoting safety in a manner which is relevant to workers at the site level.

Workplace signage

Bovis Lend Lease worksites are distinctive for their safety signs, which have been introduced to increase safety awareness on site. 

Slogans, such as Enjoy Tomorrow—Think Safe Today, are developed by workers at the start of each project to remind those on site of the importance of safe work practices. Management at Bovis Lend Lease ACT believes that this helps to develop buy-in of workers, ensuring that they take ownership of their safety and that of their workmates.

Workplace safety plans

At the start of each project, an IIF safety plan is developed. This plan details the actions that will be undertaken to enable the worksite to meet the focus points of IIF. All company employees and subcontractors are required to read and adhere to the plan.

Through the IIF safety plan, workers are encouraged to take responsibility for their own safety and that of their co-workers. 

Workers and managers are also encouraged to identify and address unsafe practices, and to advise anyone working unsafely to do the right thing.

Safety barbeques

As part of the focus on developing a safety culture, Bovis Lend Lease hold regular safety BBQs for their projects. The purpose of these BBQs is to provide company employees and subcontractors an informal environment in which to discuss the WHS risks and hazards associated with their particular project, and to enable them to work out strategies for improvement.

Safety newsletters

To encourage awareness and participation in the IIF program, various project sites have developed monthly newsletters for circulation to company employees, subcontractors and clients. The newsletters showcase the safety initiatives being implemented on the worksite, and aim to encourage all those involved in the construction process to continue to aspire to higher WHS standards.

About these case studies

The Australian Government is committed to improving the WHS standards for all workers on building and construction projects. 

These case studies have been developed to share practical ideas that can be adopted by industry to assist in their own management of WHS issues.

The Federal Safety Commissioner consults widely with industry, WHS authorities and other relevant agencies to promote a cooperative approach to improving WHS performance.

The vision of the Federal Safety Commissioner is a building and construction industry where no one is harmed.

For further information:

• Contact the FSC Assist Line on 1800 652 500
• Contact the OFSC via email at ofsc@dewr.gov.au

Disclaimer

The Office of the Federal Safety Commissioner has prepared this case study to promote workplace health and safety (WHS) in the Building and Construction Industry. When developing WHS initiatives, businesses and individuals should consider the circumstances and requirements particular to them, and seek professional advice where required.

While the Commonwealth has exercised reasonable care in providing useful information, the Commonwealth makes no representations, express or implied, as to the accuracy of the information contained in this case study. The Commonwealth accepts no liability for any use of the information contained in this case study or any reliance placed on it.

This case study may list persons, organisations, products, or services, or may incorporate material sourced from third parties. Such lists or material are assembled in good faith. However, any such list or material does not necessarily constitute any form of endorsement by the Commonwealth of that person, organisation, product, service, or third party. The Commonwealth does not accept any responsibility for such lists or material.