CHAPTER 4: COMPLETE DOCUMENTATION AND ASSIST REVIEW OF EMERGENCY RESPONSE.

  1. Record details of identified hazards, risks and incidents using workplace documentation.
  2. Discuss WHS arrangements and emergency response with relevant persons to seek feedback, exchange information and identify procedural improvements.

4.1 Record details of identified hazards, risks and incidents using workplace documentation.

Record keeping serves several purposes and provides numerous advantages, including:

  • Demonstrating (to your employees, the regulator, investors, shareholders, customers, and others) that you are effectively managing workplace health and safety and complying with the rules.
  • Showing how you make decisions about safety problems.
  • Providing a foundation for future decision-making or risk assessments.
  • Assisting you in targeting training for major workplace risks for your employees, managers, and supervisors.
  • Assisting you in reviewing risks because of changes in legislation or your company activity.

Recording details of identified hazards, risks and incidents using workplace documentation:

Workplace documentation may include the following:

  • Activity logs
  • Incident reports
  • Request for assistance forms
  • Vehicle and personnel movements
  • Written and electronic reports.

4.2 Discuss WHS arrangements and emergency response with relevant persons to seek feedback, exchange information and identify procedural improvements.

  • Work health and safety (WHS) involves managing risks to the health and safety of everyone in your workplace, including your workers, customers, visitors, and suppliers.

Examples of WHS consultation mechanisms include:

  • Establishing Health and Safety Committees
  • Electing Health and Safety Representatives (HSRs)
  • Conducting regular ‘Tool Box’ meetings
  • Conducting regular Staff Meetings

Identifying procedural improvements:

Procedural improvements can be identified for the following inadequacies:

  • No formalised process:
  • No or poorly defined acceptable risk levels:
  • Wrong team members:
  • No authority:
PreviousNext