Hon Robin Chapple questions the Minister for Consumer and Employment Protection regarding Worksafe's handling of safety complaints at Kalgoorlie Cement Works, specifically concerning obscured warning signs and the rights of individuals to report breaches.

AnsweredQoN 859Legislative Council
Asked
13 June 2003
Portfolio
Consumer and Employment Protection

QuestionView source ↗

I refer to the Kalgoorlie Cement Works (KCW) operated by Mr Mark Posa in Kalgoorlie Boulder and a email or letter written by Arthur Livock from Worksafe -
(1) Does Mr Right have a right to complain to Worksafe about ‘every possible breach’ identified by himself regardless of how minor Mr Livock or any inspector may perceive them to be?
(2) If no to (1), will the Minister for Consumer and Employment Protection clearly advise the wider public that they do not have a right to complain to Worksafe about any possible breaches of statutory legislation given Mr Livock or others may simply just regard or perceive them as minor and of no consequence to occupational health and safety within the workplace?
(3) If yes to (1), can the Minister explain why?
(4) Can the Minister state the specific text of the section or regulation which covers the ‘warning sign being obscured’ at the KCW premises?
(5) If no to (4), why not?
(6) Can the Minister state what is the penalty if any for covering or obscuring warning signs under occupational health and safety statutory legislation?
(7) If no to (6), why not?
(8) Can the Minister state what is the specific purpose of employers having to erect warning signs at their premises for occupational health and safety legislation given that Mr Arthur Livock does not seem to be factually concerned that warning signs are obscured?
(9) If no to (8), why not?
(10) Does the Minister agree that it would have been very easy for the owner of KCW with minimal cost to simply place the warning signs on the outside of the tarp or in some other location so that employees or any visitors to the site can easily see them?
(11) If no to (10), why not?

AnswerView source ↗

Answered
26 June 2003
Responded by
Minister for Racing and Gaming representing the Minister for Consumer and Employment Protection
Response time
13 days
(2) Not applicable (3) The Government and WorkSafe support the public responsibly reporting workplace safety breaches. WorkSafe, through its enforcement policy, establishes the appropriate response to any confirmed breaches. (4) Regulation 3.11 of the Occupational Safety and Health Regulations 1991 states that, where at a workplace there is a hazard that may not be readily apparent to a person entering, or working in, the area, then the employer must ensure a sign relevant to that hazard is displayed. (5) Not applicable (6) A penalty of up to $25,000 applies for an employer who fails to comply with the relevant regulation. (7) Not applicable (8) The specific purpose of erecting warning signs is answered in the response to question (4). The warning sign was temporarily obscured by a tarpaulin in good faith by Kalgoorlie Cement Works in an effort to address a previous concern reported by Mr Right to WorkSafe in relation to spray drift emanating from the site. (9) Not applicable (10) Yes (11) Not applicable.
(3) The Government and WorkSafe support the public responsibly reporting workplace safety breaches. WorkSafe, through its enforcement policy, establishes the appropriate response to any confirmed breaches. (4) Regulation 3.11 of the Occupational Safety and Health Regulations 1991 states that, where at a workplace there is a hazard that may not be readily apparent to a person entering, or working in, the area, then the employer must ensure a sign relevant to that hazard is displayed. (5) Not applicable (6) A penalty of up to $25,000 applies for an employer who fails to comply with the relevant regulation. (7) Not applicable (8) The specific purpose of erecting warning signs is answered in the response to question (4). The warning sign was temporarily obscured by a tarpaulin in good faith by Kalgoorlie Cement Works in an effort to address a previous concern reported by Mr Right to WorkSafe in relation to spray drift emanating from the site. (9) Not applicable (10) Yes (11) Not applicable.
(4) Regulation 3.11 of the Occupational Safety and Health Regulations 1991 states that, where at a workplace there is a hazard that may not be readily apparent to a person entering, or working in, the area, then the employer must ensure a sign relevant to that hazard is displayed. (5) Not applicable (6) A penalty of up to $25,000 applies for an employer who fails to comply with the relevant regulation. (7) Not applicable (8) The specific purpose of erecting warning signs is answered in the response to question (4). The warning sign was temporarily obscured by a tarpaulin in good faith by Kalgoorlie Cement Works in an effort to address a previous concern reported by Mr Right to WorkSafe in relation to spray drift emanating from the site. (9) Not applicable (10) Yes (11) Not applicable.
(5) Not applicable (6) A penalty of up to $25,000 applies for an employer who fails to comply with the relevant regulation. (7) Not applicable (8) The specific purpose of erecting warning signs is answered in the response to question (4). The warning sign was temporarily obscured by a tarpaulin in good faith by Kalgoorlie Cement Works in an effort to address a previous concern reported by Mr Right to WorkSafe in relation to spray drift emanating from the site. (9) Not applicable (10) Yes (11) Not applicable.
(6) A penalty of up to $25,000 applies for an employer who fails to comply with the relevant regulation. (7) Not applicable (8) The specific purpose of erecting warning signs is answered in the response to question (4). The warning sign was temporarily obscured by a tarpaulin in good faith by Kalgoorlie Cement Works in an effort to address a previous concern reported by Mr Right to WorkSafe in relation to spray drift emanating from the site. (9) Not applicable (10) Yes (11) Not applicable.
(7) Not applicable (8) The specific purpose of erecting warning signs is answered in the response to question (4). The warning sign was temporarily obscured by a tarpaulin in good faith by Kalgoorlie Cement Works in an effort to address a previous concern reported by Mr Right to WorkSafe in relation to spray drift emanating from the site. (9) Not applicable (10) Yes (11) Not applicable.
(8) The specific purpose of erecting warning signs is answered in the response to question (4). The warning sign was temporarily obscured by a tarpaulin in good faith by Kalgoorlie Cement Works in an effort to address a previous concern reported by Mr Right to WorkSafe in relation to spray drift emanating from the site. (9) Not applicable (10) Yes (11) Not applicable.
(9) Not applicable (10) Yes (11) Not applicable.
(10) Yes (11) Not applicable.
(11) Not applicable.

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more