Occupational Health and Safety Insights

28 August 2007

Welcome to the August edition of Clayton Utz Occupational Health & Safety Insights, in which we'll investigate whether the Work Choices decision opened the door to a national OHS regime - and what benefits that might bring.

We'll also look at why dismissal might not be the right penalty for a safety breach, the new OHS obligations imposed on key construction stakeholders in Queensland, and who is responsible for a contractor's safety in WA.

A national occupational health and safety regime: how close are we?

By Christa Lenard and Joe Catanzariti.

We operate under a patchwork of different OHS laws, and workers' rights very much on where they are - but could that all be about to change, ask Christa Lenard and Joe Catanzariti.

"Unfair" sacking for breaching safety rules!

By Glen Bartlett.

Employers need to have penalties for breaches of their safety policies, but as Glen Bartlett warns, the penalty needs to fit the breach.

New obligations for construction stakeholders in Queensland

By Hedy Cray.

Key construction stakeholders in Queensland have new OHS obligations, as Hedy Cray explains.

Clarity for "deemed" employers of contractors in WA?

By Glen Bartlett.

Are principals and site managers responsible for a contractor's safety? A recent case has clarified the situation in Western Australia, as Glen Bartlett reports.
Key Contacts

To view claytonutz.com correctly, you should upgrade your browser

Download Google Chrome
Download Firefox
Download Safari
Download Internet Explorer