Raising awareness

Safe design, or safety in design, is about hazard identification and risk management early in the design phase to eliminate or reduce risk of injury in construction, use, maintenance and demolition of structures.

A challenge in the building and construction industry is to raise awareness of safe design. The Office of the Federal Safety Commissioner (OFSC) encourages and promotes safe design through a number of activities. One of these activities has been to provide development opportunities for engineers.

Supporting education of engineers

In 2007–08, the OFSC provided support to the Association of Consulting Engineers Australia (ACEA) by funding ten regional engineers to attend the two-day course, ‘Associated Professional Certificate in Safety in Design’. This course was created and organised by ACEA and the University of Sydney.

By the end of April 2008, six OFSC-funded participants had attended. These engineers would not have been able to attend without this funding. A total of 198 participants have attended since courses started in May 2007.

The course is aimed at increasing awareness of the role and obligations of consulting engineers. The course covers topics such as legislation, guidance material, codes of practice, practical tools for safe design and developing a safety culture.

Safe design in action

OFSC-funded participants are already putting their new skills to good use by incorporating safe design in their work planning and procedures. Practical examples from our participants include: 

• introducing an office procedure to document safe design
• implementing a simple and effective procedure for safety into the quality management system in the form of a job safety and environmental analysis worksheet
• instigating a systematic approach to identifying WHS issues in buildings or structures.

The OFSC will continue to support safety in design through awareness and education. More information on the work of the OFSC on safe design is available at www.fsc.gov.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

Small business making a difference

D Williams Builders is a small building contractor that has provided commercial building and maintenance services in Tasmania since 1855. 

D Williams Builders currently employs five staff, although the company also uses subcontractors when required. The company has been recognised for its commitment to workplace health and safety (WHS), including its use of a WHS management system tailored to small business.

Support of senior management

David Williams is the Director of Business at D Williams Builders. David has taken a number of steps to show senior management commitment and support of WHS, including: 

• the provision of specific WHS related responsibilities for each employee with overall responsibility for maintaining a safe and healthy working environment remaining with the Director
• identifying potential hazards in the workplace at the introduction of any new systems of work
• conducting regular site inspections
• providing safety audit reports to subcontractors as a helpful tool
• adopting an WHS management system.

How the WHS management system was established

WHS is an important consideration in the planning and management of D Williams Builders. During the mid 1990s, D Williams Builders instigated the development of a WHS management system to improve the overall health and safety practices of the organisation. 

The company received safety and risk management documentation from a number of oil companies and noticed their thorough policies which included checklists, guidelines and safety audit information. After considering this documentation and with the knowledge that building and maintenance services are equally high risk, D Williams Builders drafted their first WHS management system.

About the WHS management system

The WHS management system established by D Williams Builders consists of an overarching policy that details the objectives, expectations and safety requirements of the company. This policy is accompanied by fact sheets, guidelines, templates and checklists specific to particular tasks. The overarching policy combined with the attachments form the WHS management system.

The WHS management system includes:

• Safe work procedure fact sheets
• excavation/trenching
• sun protection
• General guidelines
• motor vehicle and trailer safety
• personal protective equipment
• Templates
• return to work plan
• risk assessment and control form
• job safety analysis form
• Auditing checklists 
• safety action audit schedule
• health safety and environment performance report

Employees and subcontractors are provided with a folder containing these documents and are encouraged to keep it with them for easy reference on the job.

Safety day

Every year D Williams Builders hires a conference room where management, employees and subcontractors meet to review the WHS management system. This provides an opportunity for everyone to become involved in the system, apply relevant knowledge and discuss work-related experiences to improve the documentation.

Results 

Through establishing this WHS management system, D Williams Builders has:

• reduced the rate of incidents and injuries
• reduced the number of workers’ compensation claims
• reduced workers’ compensation premiums
• received a number of local and national WHS awards.

D Williams Builders plans to continue to implement safety and wellbeing in all areas of their business. The WHS management system will be reviewed as required or at least at yearly intervals during Safety Day. A greater effort will also be made to assist subcontractors reach the standards set by D Williams Builders.

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 challenge

For all of the recent advancements in technology and equipment, building and construction is still a very ‘hands on’ industry. It should therefore come as no surprise that a high number of incidents reported to the OFSC involve hand and finger injuries. Statistics from the 2013 July to December Analysis of Biannual Data show that over a third of injuries reported by our accredited contractors occurred on the upper limbs (41%). Hand injuries can be costly in terms of lost time and productivity, but more importantly can also be devastating to workers. 

The importance of reviewing data

A number of accredited companies recently reviewed their own internal injury data and reached a similar conclusion; that a high proportion of reported injuries relate to hands and fingers. Having identified this trend, accredited companies Lipman Pty Ltd, Cooper & Oxley Builders, Sitzler Pty Ltd, and Sarah Constructions Pty Ltd are now addressing the high instance of hand injuries through a number of targeted hand safety awareness initiatives. This highlights the importance of not only accurately reporting incidents internally, but also conducting regular reviews of collected incident data in order to effectively focus WHS initiatives on problem areas.    

Raising awareness

In response to these findings each company sought to reduce the instance of hand injuries by both raising awareness of the importance of basic hand safety within their workforce and combating complacency.

Sarah Constructions distributed a hand safety awareness poster titled ‘Five Steps to Hand Safety’ to all of its sites. The poster includes statistics regarding the number of hand injuries sustained by Sarah’s workforce and provides steps to follow to reduce the number of injuries. The poster was designed to act as a prompt for conversations around hand safety issues and the wearing of appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE). The importance of PPE is to be further highlighted in a second poster, currently in development, that identifies the types of gloves specific trades should require. 

Lipman launched an initiative with the catchy slogan ‘TAKE 5 to KEEP 5’. The campaign includes training presentations and site posters designed to raise awareness of common causes of hand injuries and provide workers with five simple steps to help prevent injury.

Shock Value

Sitzler designed and distributed its own poster depicting extremely graphic hand injuries and has used shock value to raise awareness of the potential impacts hand injuries can have on workers. The posters were accompanied by toolbox talks discussing hand injury statistics, causational factors and tips on how to assess the risks to hands involved in different work tasks.

Subcontractors

Sarah Constructions also considered subcontractors to be an important aspect of their awareness program and has included a discussion of Sarah’s ‘Five Steps to Hand Safety’ poster in all site specific subcontractor inductions. The company also requires subcontractors to identify specific controls which limit hand injuries in all Safe Work Method Statements (SWMS) and Job Safety Environmental Analyses (JSEA). Sarah’s aim is for these subcontractors to take this awareness and concern for hand safety with them to other sites.  

The use of gloves

Each company also reviewed its PPE policy regarding gloves as a possible method of reducing the number of hand injuries.

Cooper & Oxley Builders trialled mandatory glove use over a two week period at their Shenton House construction site. The company invited a safety glove consultant to survey workers about their experiences wearing gloves while undertaking a number of different work tasks. The aim of the trial was to instil the importance of basic hand safety in their workers, making them think about the kind of treatment their hands receive on the job, and hopefully reduce hand injuries. 

Sitzler consulted with a variety of different trade groups on the introduction of a mandatory glove policy, and implemented Safe Work Observations to monitor work tasks with and without the use of gloves. Sitzler found that while gloves reduced hazards for some workers other trade groups were visibly hindered by wearing gloves. This has allowed the company to tailor its glove policy to ensure adding gloves to tasks did not add additional risks.   

Lipman has issued gloves and glove clips to all workers to ensure they will be available when required. Sarah Constructions has made various glove types available to its workers and subcontractors in preparation for the distribution of its new ‘Hand Protection Selection Guide’ poster.

The results

The four companies have experienced a number of positive outcomes from these hand safety initiatives including:

• a statistical reduction in the incidence of hand injuries
• an increase in worker and subcontractor awareness of the major causes of hand injuries 
• worker input into PPE policies
• greater use of work gloves by workers
• discussion of hand safety issues by workers and site safety personnel
• cultural change.  

Each of the initiatives is ongoing with awareness posters a fixture in on-site amenities and hand safety a regular agenda item at toolbox talks across the companies. The hope from these four accredited companies is that through ongoing education workers will be reminded that hand injuries are preventable and that their numbers will continue to decrease.

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.

Multinational company hails FSC accreditation as best practise!

Bouygues Construction Australia, part of the massive French multi-national group Bouygues S.A. which reported sales of  over €33 billion in 2013, has praised the Australian Government Building and Construction WHS Accreditation scheme (the Scheme), as representing global best practise in safety systems management. 

The BYCA National QSE Director, Mr Ritchie Green said:

 “The best practice BYCA safety systems that were developed in conjunction with the Federal Safety Commissioner (FSC) will now be rolled out to the English speaking countries in which Bouygues Construction operates.”

An ever increasing number of international companies are applying for and achieving accreditation under the Scheme. On 21 January 2014 Bouygues Construction Australia Pty Ltd (BYCA), the Australian arm of the international company Bouygues Construction, achieved FSC accreditation for the first time. In this case study BYCA shares their experience of achieving FSC accreditation and offers advice for other international companies considering becoming accredited. 

Seeking FSC Accreditation and WHS Background

For BYCA, attaining FSC accreditation was a key strategic priority. It not only gives the company the opportunity to undertake major Commonwealth funded infrastructure projects, but will also help them build on their “local footprint” which has been established over the past 20 years through their work on major infrastructure projects. 

BYCA’s current portfolio includes the Sydney to Airport Rail Link; Brisbane Hale Street Bridge; Glenfield Junction Alliance, Sydney; Landsborough Highway Upgrade, Queensland; and the North Strathfield Rail Underpass, Sydney.

BYCA have also been selected as preferred bidder in a 50:50 partnership with Lend Lease to design and build the NorthConnex link road in Sydney with a construction budget of $2.65 billion; and as part of the East West Connect consortium they have recently signed the finance, design and construct contract for Melbourne’s East West link project – a contract worth $6.8 billion.

For BYCA a commitment to health and safety is part of their approach to doing business which they call ‘Actitudes.’ The ‘Actitudes’ approach ensures all employees understand that health and safety is the company’s core organisational value, and empowers them to make positive decisions regarding their health, safety and welfare.

BYCA’s health and safety standards are underpinned by a safety cultural program that includes a senior management leadership inspection program, safety focus group, supervisor training program, and a focus on positive performance indicators. 

According to Mr Green, aligning the company’s existing WHS Management System (WHSMS) with FSC criteria was consistent with the company’s safety strategy as the criteria focus on system elements that BYCA believes are critical to achieving positive safety outcomes. These include safety in design, risk management, and leadership commitment. Alignment to the FSC Evidence Guide also supports the company’s goal to maintain a lean and efficient WHSMS which is practical to implement at the coal face.

Furthermore, Mr Green said:

“The alignment of the BYCA WHSMS to FSC requirements provided our company Board assurance that our system had achieved an industry leading standard, something which makes the accreditation extremely worthwhile”. 

Achieving FSC Accreditation

BYCA’s first step in the accreditation process was to perform a gap analysis to benchmark their International WHSMS against FSC Criteria. 

Mr Green said that the company’s objective was “to retain our existing international system where practicable, and where required customise our system to meet requirements detailed in the FSC Evidence Guide, thus achieving uniformity in our business operations”. 

Like all other companies, in order to achieve FSC accreditation BYCA was also required to undertake an on-site audit. A unique aspect regarding the BYCA audit was that it took place on an international project site, the Port of Miami Tunnel Project located in Miami, Florida, USA.  

International Audit – Port of Miami Project

The Port of Miami Tunnel Project, valued at approximately $700 million (USD), connects MacArthur Causeway to Dodge Island, providing direct access between the seaport and highways I-395 and I-95.

Additionally, the Port of Miami tunnel is designed to improve traffic flow in downtown Miami and aid ongoing and future development in the area.

BYCA performed the design and construction of the two road tunnels, the construction of operation buildings, access ramps, connections to the port road network, ventilation, safety, surveillance, communication and fire-fighting systems, as well as relocation of the utilities affected by the project and an upgrade to the port's railway line.

An international audit presents unique challenges, and for BYCA the biggest of these was implementing their Australian WHSMS on a foreign site. This challenge was accentuated by the Port of Miami project being substantially underway, and the disparity between the United States and Australian legislative requirements. According to Mr Green, “the collaborative effort between the BYCA QSE Team and the Port of Miami Tunnel Project Team underpinned the success of the project audit. BYCA attaining FSC accreditation via a complex international audit also sets a precedent in the industry as only a small number of contractors have achieved this result with a single Project Audit.” 

Design for a Global System

For Bouygues the audit undertaken at the Port of Miami project was also an important step toward achieving their goal of a Global WHSMS. The company intends to utilise BYCA’s WHSMS for operations in all English speaking countries around the world. The significant investment made in aligning Bouygues’ American and Australian WHSMS builds a platform for such a Global system while the attainment of FSC accreditation provides a ‘mandate’ to utilise the BYCA WHSMS.

According to Mr Green, this decision is due in part to the perception that the company’s Australian WHSMS is superior to other parts of the world, and provides Bouygues with the best opportunity to eliminate high consequence incidents. For BYCA aligning a Global system to FSC requirements ensures the company maintains an industry-leading system which is lean and efficient whilst maintaining operational continuity.

Advice to International Companies

BYCA offered the following advice to other international companies seeking accreditation:

• Make sure senior management are 100% committed to the accreditation process and proactively lead it. BYCA had commitment from their executive and senior management, including Managing Director Philippe Bouquet. 
• Ensure your company’s WHSMS is streamlined, practical, and not overly onerous to implement, as the major goal of any system should be to support operational personnel meet their safety obligations. 
• Ensure your safety team can effectively engage with project teams to help employees understand the tangible benefits of implementing an industry-leading WHSMS (e.g. reduced injury and illness rates, increased productivity, reduced legal exposure). 
• Develop a WHSMS that invests a peak level of energy into managing potential Class 1 hazards including mobile plant, work at heights, cranes and lifting, energy isolation, electrical, utilities management, and temporary works.
• Implement positive performance indicators to measure the effectiveness of your WHSMS rather than relying solely on prohibitive zero harm regression targets. 

According to Mr Green: 

“The application of the above principles provides BYCA’s WHSMS a point of difference, and ensured our success in attaining FSC Accreditation.”

I want more information

Any international companies considering accreditation can find more information regarding the Australian Government Building and Construction WHS Accreditation Scheme and accreditation at: fsc.gov.au. 

Companies can also contact the Office of the Federal Safety Commissioner on 1800 652 500 or at ofsc@employment.gov.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

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.

Background

Three companies accredited under the Australian Building and Construction WHS Accreditation Scheme (the Scheme) won the Safe Work Australia ‘best workplace health and safety management system’ award in April 2013 for their collaboration on the Ipswich Motorway Upgrade: Dinmore to Goodna (D2G) project. The Origin Alliance comprised Abigroup Contractors, Fulton Hogan and Seymour Whyte. 

Located to the West of Brisbane, the federally funded $1.95 billion D2G project was opened on 15 May 2012. It was delivered six months early, and approximately ten per cent under budget. The project was considered one of the most complex road infrastructure projects ever undertaken in South East Queensland.

The D2G project aimed to provide a less congested and safer motorway, including increasing local road connectivity and functionality, access to public transport, and increasing and improving facilities for pedestrians and cyclists. A state of the art Intelligent Transport System was also installed to improve ongoing management of the motorway, and to provide increased driver safety.

These improvements were achieved by:

• Widening the existing motorway
• Adding new service roads
• Adding 24 kilometres of shared pedestrian and cyclist facilities
• Adding 26 new bridge structures
• Upgrading two motorway-to-motorway interchanges.

Safety Challenges

Alliance members report that the Origin Alliance had its own unique safety culture, vision and goals. Every employee understood what was expected of them, thus enabling the successful delivery of the D2G project safely, on time, and on budget.

Throughout the life of the project there were extensive safety challenges that needed to be addressed, including:

• The management of 1200 people
• Upgrading the Motorway under live traffic conditions
• Working in a narrow construction corridor
• Demolishing 13 existing bridges
• Removing more than 200 unexploded ordnance across the construction footprint due to parts of it being a former rifle range
• Dealing with the devastation caused by the January 2011 Queensland floods.

Addressing the Challenges

The key objectives of Origin Alliance’s approach to safety consisted of:

• Making everybody on site accountable for safety
• Training people so they understood what was at risk
• Equipping project leaders at all levels with the skills, knowledge and tools they needed to think and work safely
• Genuinely caring for people
• Enabling everybody on-site to do the little things well
• Creating a no blame culture.

When forming the Origin Alliance, the alliance partners all provided input into the project’s Workplace Health and Safety (WHS) Management System and safety culture. As a result, the Origin Alliance designed a plan for key safety behaviours to be adhered to on site. The Origin Alliance referred to these as the ‘Golden Rules’ and everybody who was inducted onto the D2G project was required to sign a ‘contract’ specifying that they would abide by these ‘Golden Rules.’ Ten thousand people were inducted onto the site over the life of the project. 

The Origin Alliance wanted employees to work safely not because they had to, but because they wanted to. They instilled a culture whereby all workers on site had to embrace the ‘Origin Alliance Way’ of safety. They ensured that everybody on site was genuinely cared for, and received the right training, knowledge and tools to allow them to perform work safely. 

A no blame culture was also created, encouraging people on site to speak up if they were being asked to undertake unsafe practices, or if they believed there were safer ways of performing tasks.

The Origin Alliance also tracked people’s commitment to—and understanding of—on-site safety requirements, by collecting information on their OHS Management Systems. They also monitored key lead and lag indicators regularly to identify any emerging safety trends. Origin Alliance stated that their aim was to ‘achieve a deeper level of analysis to identify long term trends and underlying reasons for incidents, injuries and near misses so it could continually improve its safety performance.’ Safety was always the first item on the agenda for meetings and if any issues arose, they were communicated ‘up the chain’ and minuted for action. ‘Lessons learnt’ documents were also created from safety incidents to ensure the same incident would not happen again.

Helpful advice for companies undertaking similar projects

Origin Alliance members believe that it is essential for a company to create an effective site culture at the very beginning to ensure projects are delivered safely and effectively, ‘creating a safety culture is not just about developing the right attitude and commitment to safety from everyone working on-site but also about ensuring that everyone on-site has the necessary skills, resources and support they need to do their job safely.’ 

As well as creating a safety culture, companies must also encourage employees and subcontractors to speak up if they are being asked to work in an unsafe manner, and to also report any incident, no matter how big or small.

Scheme Accreditation and the project

Accreditation under the Scheme has proved to be extremely beneficial to the Origin Alliance. Alliance members noted the Scheme was particularly useful when it came to things such as:

• Effective management of plant
• Development and implementation of D2G’s safety in design policies and processes
• Motivation to exceed safety requirements through audits.

The Alliance stated that ‘knowing an FSC audit would take place in 2010 was a huge motivating factor to ensure that Origin Alliance did not just meet its safety requirements but exceeded them where possible during the entire life of the project.’

Working together

The Alliance noted that a great example of how the Origin Alliance team worked together was during the January 2011 Queensland floods. The flood submerged the D2G project site and everything located on the ground floor was lost. They formed a flood recovery team and every person asked to participate gave a one hundred per cent commitment to recovering the project site and helping the local community. After the floods the local community and key stakeholders also saw the Origin Alliance as people that they could turn to for help. The Origin Alliance not only provided assistance with equipment and man power, but also served as people others could talk to. The Origin Alliance stated that: 

‘The work undertaken by the Origin Alliance during the floods created an enormous amount of goodwill, support and respect within the local community and across other key stakeholders. It also created relationships based on trust within the community and across the Origin Alliance team. These relationships were a major contributing factor to the project being delivered under time and budget.’ 

Mentoring, team building and empowerment also played an important role in the Origin Alliance’s ability to work well together. Sharing new ideas and giving feedback on ways to work safely were also encouraged. These strategies helped the Alliance meet their deliverables, and were achieved by:

• Specific information sharing activities
• Activities designed to maintain Origin Alliance’s unique culture
• Activities designed to bring the Origin Alliance team together as often as possible
• Opportunities for people to provide feedback.

Mark Bingley, Safety Manager of the Origin Alliance added: ‘I believe the project has been a success because of the leadership that it has had and the way the culture has been developed and nurtured from day one. There really has been a strong commitment to the end goals, not just from a construction point of view but from across all aspects of the project. From day one, Mick O’Dwyer provided strong, visible, practical leadership, particularly in the application of our safety policy on a site-wide basis. As Alliance Manager, he personally applied the policy to everything he did on a daily basis. Mick truly believed the project could be delivered safely and he instilled this belief in everyone who worked with him.’

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.

Background

Musculoskeletal injuries are common in the building and construction industry. Despite the mechanisation of many tasks, heavy and awkward work persists and often leads to soft tissue injuries to the back, neck and shoulders. Such incidents don’t have the immediate visual impact of other injuries such as cuts and lacerations, bruising or fractures. Workers are also often treated by their regular GP off site and at a later date. All of this means that many musculoskeletal injuries are out of sight; however they should never be out of mind. These kinds of injuries often result in at least a couple of days off work for employees and can develop into chronic pain.

A reduction in musculoskeletal injuries has been identified as a national priority in the Australian Work Health and Safety Strategy 2012-2022. One of the Strategy’s three targets to be achieved by 2022 is “a reduction in the incidence rate of claims for musculoskeletal disorders resulting in one or more weeks off work of at least 30 per cent” (Australian Work Health and Safety Strategy 2012-2022, Safe Work Australia). 

A number of accredited companies are implementing initiatives that go beyond simple manual handling training, in order to reduce the number and severity of musculoskeletal injuries. The companies include Telstra Corporation Limited, Lend Lease Project Management & Construction (Australia) Pty Limited, VOS Construction and Joinery Pty Ltd, and the Dinmore to Goodna Joint Venture (D2GJV) comprising Abigroup Contractors, Seymour Whyte Constructions and Fulton Hogan Industries. 

Telstra Corporation Limited

Telstra sought to reduce the instances of musculoskeletal injuries through the launch of their ‘Musculoskeletal Health Strategy’ and ‘Ergonomic Injury Early Response’. Telstra’s ‘Musculoskeletal Health Strategy’ aims to assist workers to understand how the task, the environment around them, their lifestyle and time demands can contribute to the risk of musculoskeletal injury. As one of Telstra’s WHS managers stated “it is about looking beyond the task being undertaken and taking ownership and action to remove the risk to their health”. The ‘Ergonomic Injury Early Response’ initiative is designed to prevent injury by intervening early and providing workers with strategies to change the way they are working and provide them with the right tools and knowledge for removing or reducing soft tissue injury risks. It will also allow injured workers to return to pre-injury duties as soon as possible. 

Both of these initiatives are in the early stages of development and implementation; however what has been observed thus far is encouraging. Feedback from Telstra’s workforce has been very positive, and the material and guidance has been described as “usable, fresh and relevant”. The company intends to constantly measure incidents, injuries and return to work rates to establish if the desired reduction in musculoskeletal injuries is achieved.

Lend Lease Project Management and Construction (Australia) Pty Limited

Lend Lease ordinarily manages musculoskeletal safety through its Environmental Health and Safety system (EHS) on a risk assessment basis. However, recently the company’s New South Wales and Queensland Regional Business Units (RBUs) have begun their own local awareness programs.

The NSW program comprises an awareness session with a local EHS manager for all apprentices, construction workers, foreman and selected construction managers, complemented by a practical session with an industry-recognised occupational therapist. The occupational therapist offers practical sessions on movement and bending while undertaking activities, and on improving general flexibility and range of movement. The idea is to give employees the tools they need to keep themselves injury free, which in turn should reduce injury rates. 

In 2012 the Queensland RBU partnered with the Queensland Government in the ‘PErforM Initiative’, developed jointly by Workplace Health and Safety Queensland (WHSQ), the University of Queensland and the Curtin University of Technology.  PErforM is a simple manual task risk management program based on participative ergonomics: an internationally recommended approach for reducing musculoskeletal disorders. The initiative provides a framework to help employers engage with workers at all levels to identify, assess and control manual task risks within their workplace. The philosophy behind PErforM is that workers are the experts at performing their own work tasks. A number of Lend Lease’s Queensland employees have been through the training ready for implementation. 

Lend Lease have so far found that all sessions in NSW received positive feedback from program participants. During the program participants were required to undertake a specific basic risk assessment of a hazardous manual task scenario. Results from a review of these assessments indicate a raised level of awareness on the part of participants. 

VOS Construction and Joinery Pty Ltd 

In 2012 VOS Construction and Joinery reviewed its injury statistics and found that the majority involved “soft tissue” injuries to backs, necks and shoulders. In order to reduce the high number of musculoskeletal injuries VOS became creative and implemented the ‘Back Care Sessions’, a two hour presentation by an exercise physiologist who has previously worked with the Australian Cricket Team.  The initiative provides a holistic approach which doesn’t limit itself to focusing on manual handling skills. Regardless of such skills, if workers do not maintain a high level of fitness and strength—especially around their ‘core’ muscles—they can still suffer an injury.  

VOS’s presentation equipped workers with strategies for maintaining the ‘curve’ in one’s back, something vital to preventing injury, along with daily exercises designed to keep the muscles that protect the back, neck and shoulders strong. Follow up one-on-one sessions were available for interested workers, with individual exercise plans devised. 

VOS has received excellent anecdotal feedback from employees who had “niggles” here and there, with many stating that their pain has ceased after they implemented their personal exercise program. VOS has also experienced a reduction in Lost Time Injuries (LTIs) so far in the 2012-2013 financial year; though more data will be necessary to determine the role the ‘Back Care Sessions’ have played in this reduction. 

Dinmore to Goodna Joint Venture

The Dinmore to Goodna Joint Venture (D2GJV)—head contractor on the Ipswich Motorway upgrade in Brisbane’s west— conducted an extensive risk assessment prior to commencing work on the project. This risk assessment revealed that, based on previous experiences and statistics, the most common injuries suffered by workers of the joint venture companies were sprains and strains resulting from poor manual handling. 

To combat this risk D2GJV chose to implement Onsite Health Solutions’ flagship injury prevention program ‘SafeSpine,’ due to its previous success in the mining and construction industry. SafeSpine is a musculoskeletal health education program specialising in injury prevention and reduction. SafeSpine aims to create a positive workplace culture, a statistical improvement in injury figures, and ultimately a health and safety focused workforce. 

SafeSpine initially involved a hands-on educational workshop to all on-site workers aimed at improving awareness, the understanding of safety, and the importance of looking after their bodies. Through the workshop 15-20% of the D2GJV workforce became trained SafeSpine leaders, able to lead daily prestart exercises called SafeStarts. The educational workshop has since been incorporated as a part of the mandatory site induction, setting an expectation to what would be best practice on site.  

SafeSpine also involved ‘specialists’, two of whom were on site five days a week, to ensure sustainability components of the program (such as leader up-skilling, competitions, regular field visits, first aid consultations, night shift visits as well as injury risk assessments and musculoskeletal rehabilitation) remained ongoing.

The result of SafeSpine has been a cultural shift across the D2GJV workforce where, according to program managers within Abigroup Contractors, “the workers understood the importance of reporting a musculoskeletal concern or injury early, prior to it becoming more serious.” 

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.

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