MEANINGFUL MONITORING PRESENTED BY Director Sue Bottrell LAST

MEANINGFUL MONITORING PRESENTED BY: Director Sue Bottrell

LAST TIME • Why onboard? • To deliver information to contractors about your operations to keep them safe • When onboard? • Before and during work • What information to deliver? • Your hazards and how you manage them

Webinar 3 Meaningful Monitoring

TODAY 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Meaningful Monitoring Why NOT monitor? Why and what to monitor? When to monitor? How to monitor? What to do with monitoring results?

WHY DO YOU MONITOR? • Provide one or two words as to why you undertake monitoring

WHAT IS MEANINGFUL MONITORING? Meaningful monitoring is a cooperative process designed to facilitate contractors and Principal Contractors to communicate, identify issues and raise issues, encourage collaboration and cooperation to manage risks.

Contractor. LIFE - Episode 3

WHY NOT MONITOR Daniel v. Directors, &. of Metropolitan Railway Co. (1871) LR 5 HL 45 ". . . the ordinary business of life could not go on if we had not a right to rely upon things being properly done when we have committed and entrusted them to persons whose duty it is to do things of that nature, and who are selected for the purpose with prudence and care, as being experienced in the matter, and are held responsible for the execution of the work. "

WHY NOT MONITOR? Stevens v Brodribb Sawmill 9186 “supervision by a Brodribb employee of the independent contractors while they were working could have been prescribed but it might have been an irritating distraction to those engaged in loading. At all events, it would have been unreasonable to prescribe supervisors of experienced contractors. ”

WHY NOT MONITOR? Because it is not reasonably practicable; 1. Knowledge? 2. Suitability to monitor experienced contractors 3. The cost monitor all contractors is prohibitive Because it 1. Undermines the PC /contractor relationship 2. Potentially increases liability 3. It is of questionable value

WHY & WHAT TO MONITOR? 1. To seek information and cooperate with contractors 2. To identify issues for PC management 3. To confirm i. ii. Representations made by contractors in prequalification Contractor compliance with induction and PC risk management a. b. Site safety Specific hazards iii. Management of critical risks impacting on PC operations

WHAT NOT TO MONITOR? Contractor controlled systems of work unless; 1. There is an identified reason to do so e. g. Critically impacts on PC staff, clients etc 2. You are competent to do so

WHEN TO MONITOR? At anytime preferably in real time to obtain real time evidence 1. Before work starts to confirm safety agreed / critical safety arrangements are in place 2. During work

MONITORING METHODS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Direct observation Discussion Photo’s Video Interview Paper work (last resort)

WHAT TO DO WITH RESULTS OF MONITORING? 1. Don’t monitor if you aren’t going to do anything with the information 2. Provide feedback 3. Encourage cooperation 4. Raise concerns to; a. Obtain explanation b. Cease work c. Terminate contract

DPP V DOWNER EDI & VICROADS CASE STUDY • Downer were engaged by Vic. Roads to undertake road works. • Vic. Roads had appointed Downer as PC • A street sweeper backed over another contactor (ironically setting out bollards to separate the worksite and traffic) and killed him • Vic. Roads were charged with failing SFARP, to provide and maintain for it’s (sic) employees a working environment that was safe and without risk to health • Vic. Roads pleaded guilty Poll - DO YOU THINK VIC ROADS SHOULD HAVE BEEN CHARGED?

DPP V DOWNER EDI & VICROADS CASE STUDY • The charges alleged • Downer was subject to the Supervision of Vic. Roads • Vicroads directly employed persons at the workplace and engaged independent contractors • It was reasonably practicable for Vic. Roads to ensured that a risk assessment was undertaken or arranged by Downer EDI, as part of the Traffic Management Plan approval process NOTE – Vic. Roads had reviewed and approved Downer’s traffic management plan. Poll - NOW DO YOU THINK VICROADS SHOULD HAVE BEEN CHARGED?

DPP V DOWNER EDI & VICROADS CASE STUDY Vic. Roads pleaded guilty and was convicted and fined $250 K What are the issues here 1. Was there valid appointment by Vic. Roads of Downer as PC? 2. If so who was responsible for traffic management at the site? 3. Was that appointment undermined by reviewing and approving traffic management arrangements? 4. What monitoring could Vic. Roads have undertaken and not assumed responsibility?

IN SUMMARY When planning monitoring always ask 1. Why am I monitoring? 2. What will I do with the information? 3. What do I want to know? 4. What is the best way to collect meaningful information? Monitoring is a cooperative process designed to facilitate communication between contractors and PC on how risk is being managed across the site/ during work.