Improvement notice issued by Worksafe Western Australia, and the subsequent decision of the WorkSafe Commissioner affirming the notice, revoked and ceased to have effect.

The Tribunal revoked an improvement notice issued to the applicant by the respondent for breaching s 19(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act 1984, requiring the applicant to implement the use of body-worn cameras, because the applicant provided information, demonstrating that extensive measures were being taken to control the risk identified in the notice and the respondent supported the revocation.

Background

The respondent issued an improvement notice to the applicant because a WorkSafe Inspector formed the opinion that the applicant’s security and emergency department staff were exposed to the risk of occupational violence and aggression, breaching s 19(1) of the OSH Act. The respondent directed that the applicant requires individuals or staff to wear body-worn cameras to reduce the identified risk.

The applicant applied to the WorkSafe Commissioner for a review of the improvement notice, which the WorkSafe Commissioner subsequently affirmed.

The applicant then applied to the Occupation Safety and Health Tribunal for a review of the WorkSafe Commissioner’s decision.

Contentions

The applicant contended that it had not breached s 19(1) of the OSH Act. The applicant submitted information about the controls, policies, and operating procedures in place to ensure safety and mitigate risk against occupational violence and aggression within the Emergency Department. Such measures comprise five pillars: training, communication and management, engineering controls, the security personnel presence and the use of the security personnel within the Emergency Department, and CCTV coverage.

Further, the applicant contended that the introduction of body-worn cameras is not an effective control measure of the risk identified by the improvement notice. Instead, body-worn cameras have insufficient evidence relating to their effectiveness as a control measure, would be a speculative trial control measure and would introduce additional risks, such as privacy issues.

Thus, it is not appropriate nor necessary to introduce body-worn cameras, the applicant contended.

The respondent contended that the improvement notice itself addressed the entirety of the control measures and the safety practices at the applicant’s site and identified a number of key issues other than the use of body-worn cameras. However, the respondent submitted that, based on the evidence that the applicant provided to the Tribunal, it supports the revocation of the improvement notice.

Findings

The Tribunal revoked the decision of the WorkSafe Commissioner and improvement notice, with both ceasing to have effect. This decision was based on the applicant’s evidence and the respondent’s submission.

The decision can be read here.