❓ A parliamentary question probes the Department of Mines and Petroleum (DMP) regarding safety complaints and disciplinary actions at the KCGM Superpit, specifically concerning the role of union representatives and the handling of bullying allegations. The Minister's response clarifies the process for raising safety complaints and addresses privacy concerns regarding disciplinary actions.
AnsweredQoN 2472Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the KCGM Superpit operations, and questions on notice No’s. 2287 and 2432, and ask -
(1) Regarding the answer provided in part (7)(viii), for question on notice No. 2287, is it correct that the inspectors referred to in this answer are, Mr. Alan Holmes and Mr. David Watson, both from the Department of Mines and Petroleum (DMP), and that the union representative referred to in this answer is Mr. Shaun Maddock of the Australian Workers Union (AWU)?
(2) If no to (1), what specifically is correct?
(3) Is it correct that this is the same inspector and union representative, referred to in question No. 2432, in which Mr. Alan Holmes specifically refused to receive a complaint concerning serious safety breaches from Mr. Shaun Maddock, because he was an AWU representative?
(4) If no to (3), what specifically is correct?
(5) Can the Minister explain how the process involves both the inspectorate and union representatives, given that the AWU representative has not been contacted in any way since the initial complaint was made on 27 November 2009, and given that on or about 13 May 2010 Mr Alan Holmes refused to take a complaint from Mr. Shaun Maddock?
(6) If no to (5), why not?
(7) Can the Minister explain and detail the process in relation to the answer which refers to involving inspectorate and union representatives?
(8) If no to (7), why not?
(9) Can the Minister explain how, KCGM staff involved in the alleged bullying have been disciplined, as stated in part (7)(xiii), of question on notice No. 2287?
(10) If no to (9), why not?
(11) With respect to the discipline of KCGM staff referred to in question on notice No. 2287, has this discipline been limited to Mr Tony Brown?
(12) If no to (11), what are the names of the staff against which disciplinary action was taken?
(13) If yes to (11), does the DMP regard the nature of the discipline as being appropriate to serve as a deterrent for the rest of the workforce not to engage in bullying, victimization and intimidation?
(1) Regarding the answer provided in part (7)(viii), for question on notice No. 2287, is it correct that the inspectors referred to in this answer are, Mr. Alan Holmes and Mr. David Watson, both from the Department of Mines and Petroleum (DMP), and that the union representative referred to in this answer is Mr. Shaun Maddock of the Australian Workers Union (AWU)?
(2) If no to (1), what specifically is correct?
(3) Is it correct that this is the same inspector and union representative, referred to in question No. 2432, in which Mr. Alan Holmes specifically refused to receive a complaint concerning serious safety breaches from Mr. Shaun Maddock, because he was an AWU representative?
(4) If no to (3), what specifically is correct?
(5) Can the Minister explain how the process involves both the inspectorate and union representatives, given that the AWU representative has not been contacted in any way since the initial complaint was made on 27 November 2009, and given that on or about 13 May 2010 Mr Alan Holmes refused to take a complaint from Mr. Shaun Maddock?
(6) If no to (5), why not?
(7) Can the Minister explain and detail the process in relation to the answer which refers to involving inspectorate and union representatives?
(8) If no to (7), why not?
(9) Can the Minister explain how, KCGM staff involved in the alleged bullying have been disciplined, as stated in part (7)(xiii), of question on notice No. 2287?
(10) If no to (9), why not?
(11) With respect to the discipline of KCGM staff referred to in question on notice No. 2287, has this discipline been limited to Mr Tony Brown?
(12) If no to (11), what are the names of the staff against which disciplinary action was taken?
(13) If yes to (11), does the DMP regard the nature of the discipline as being appropriate to serve as a deterrent for the rest of the workforce not to engage in bullying, victimization and intimidation?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
10 August 2010
Responded by
Minister for Mines and Petroleum
Response time
75 days
1) Yes
2) Not applicable
3)
This is the same inspector who advised Mr Maddock of the correct process for raising a complaint or a dispute pursuant to the
Mines Safety and Inspection Act 1994.
4) Not applicable
5) There is no process under the
Mines Safety and Inspection Act 1994
for a Union Representative to raise a safety complaint with a District Inspector unless they are an employee or a Safety and Health Representative at the particular mine.
6) Not applicable
7) Section 25(2) of the
Mines Safety and Inspection Act
1994
allows an Employee Inspector to report to a trade union on matters concerning safety factors and the safety of working conditions at a mine if a member of that trade union is employed at the mine and the subject matter of the report concerns the member or the member's work at the mine.
8) Not applicable
9) No
10) It is considered by the Department of Mines and Petroleum that appropriate action has been taken against the individuals concerned.
11) No
12) I am not prepared to name the individuals as this is a privacy issue.
13) I am not prepared to comment on any action taken by any company in relation to its internal disciplinary actions.
Notice: This document is created or edited using unregistered or evaluation copy of rtLib valid for testing or development purposes only. To use it for productive or any other purposes please register it. You may purchase the license on
http://www.rtlib.com
2) Not applicable
3)
This is the same inspector who advised Mr Maddock of the correct process for raising a complaint or a dispute pursuant to the
Mines Safety and Inspection Act 1994.
4) Not applicable
5) There is no process under the
Mines Safety and Inspection Act 1994
for a Union Representative to raise a safety complaint with a District Inspector unless they are an employee or a Safety and Health Representative at the particular mine.
6) Not applicable
7) Section 25(2) of the
Mines Safety and Inspection Act
1994
allows an Employee Inspector to report to a trade union on matters concerning safety factors and the safety of working conditions at a mine if a member of that trade union is employed at the mine and the subject matter of the report concerns the member or the member's work at the mine.
8) Not applicable
9) No
10) It is considered by the Department of Mines and Petroleum that appropriate action has been taken against the individuals concerned.
11) No
12) I am not prepared to name the individuals as this is a privacy issue.
13) I am not prepared to comment on any action taken by any company in relation to its internal disciplinary actions.
Notice: This document is created or edited using unregistered or evaluation copy of rtLib valid for testing or development purposes only. To use it for productive or any other purposes please register it. You may purchase the license on
http://www.rtlib.com
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.