 Thank you all for joining us today both our in theater audience and those joining us online My name is Andrew Detmer. I'm the national president of the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union and a Safe Work Australia member Firstly, I would like to acknowledge the traditional custodians of the land on which we meet the Ngunnawal people I acknowledge and respect their continuing culture and the contribution they make to the life of the city and to this region and I pay my respects to their elders both past and present Today's discussion explores the crucial action area from the Australian strategy healthy and safe by design and How it applies to the safe design of machinery Healthy and safe by design means that hazards and risks are eliminated or minimized at the design phase That is before they enter the workplace Before I introduce today's speakers. I want to share with you a real story a Casual factory hand was helping out at a plant that makes cardboard boxes On this particular day he had moved into a tight space between a printer the slaughter and stacker machine and the outtake conveyor It is understood that he was trying to remove some jammed cardboard pieces His clothing became caught on a roller spinning at over 60 revolutions per minute and he was dragged over the top Another worker hurt him scream located and push the emergency stop button and meant to help him He remained trapped in the machine for over 45 minutes ambulance officers tried to keep him alive while the fire brigade worked to free him He was eventually freed and rushed to hospital, but he died the following day His death was completely preventable The subsequent work safe and coroner's report found No hazard identification had been undertaken before the plant was commissioned The emergency stops were not properly labelled The company had not provided adequate information nor training regarding the machine's safe use and the level of supervision was inadequate Across Australia all works health and safety laws require designers and manufacturers to ensure so far as is reasonably Practicable that machinery is designed and manufactured to be without risks to health and safety and to provide adequate and up-to-date information about the machinery Yet the story I've just told you and data from Safe Work Australia tells us that the poor design of machinery continues to kill and injure workers a Recent Safe Work Australia report reveals 188 work related deaths were possibly caused by the unsafe design of machinery between 2006 and 2011 Our research also tells us that involving experienced workers in the design and testing process Before man machinery enters the workplace results in better work health and safety outcomes to workers We should and we must do better So I'm delighted that today our speakers will discuss this important topic Our first panel member is the executive director of the work health and safety Division with Safe Work New South Wales Peter Dunphy has over 25 years experience in public health and work health and safety And is currently completing a doctorate of public health with the University of New South Wales. Welcome Peter Our second panel member, Wes Wilkinson is the principal of work systems technology He is a qualified mechanical engineer risk manager and human factors specialist He is a certified practicing professional and has 30 years experience in industries such as agriculture Manufacturing and the legal and commerce sectors Where's provides specialist consultancy services for the design and manufacture of machinery and is regularly called as an expert witness in major work health and safety prosecutions welcome with Our third panel member Dr. Liz Bluff is a research fellow with the National Research Center for health and safety Occupational health and safety regulation with the Australian National University Liz has over 30 years experience in research policy legislation and management of work health and safety She authored safe design and construction machinery and regulation practice and performance and co-authored work health and safety law and policy Welcome Liz Last but not least let me introduce my old friend today's facilitator Brian Russell He's the former executive director of Safe Work South Australia and of course a member of Safe Work Australia and Played a key role in the introduction of national work health and safety legislation and national uniform Mine safety laws and explosive legislation Welcome Brian and please join me in welcoming our speakers Thank you, and I'll now hand over to Brian to start today's discussion Thank You Andrew, and thank you everyone for joining us in the audience today and for those joining online For those who are joining online I invite you to tweet any comments or questions that you may have in the course of discussion You can do that through our live chat facility or through the hashtag virtual WHS Just on that I'll add that at the end of today's broadcast. We will be Providing an additional period of time where the speakers stay behind To answer any additional questions online that we didn't resolve through the course of discussion today I Would like to take just a moment to reflect on some of the introductory comments that Andrew made and Regrettably the tragic story that Andrew told us about today Is all too common the fact that we have almost 200 deaths over a five-year period Related to unsafe machinery and poorly designed machinery is alarming For that reason the elimination minimization of hazards at the design stage is a priority in the Australian work health and safety strategy in that sense Safe work Australian members are united in efforts to elevate the safety and design as a national action area and that underscores the discussion that we're having here today and People often bandy about expressions about safe design and safe machinery But they're not really sure at times what that means what I would like to do today is to Explore that a little bit further and I'll start off with you Peter as a regulator What's your understanding of safe design and safe machinery? Yeah, Brian. I think it's regulators We can often have lofty ideals, but I think you can explain really quite simply that for us really safe design is about thinking ahead It's really about thinking through the whole life cycle of the the plant that you're dealing with Thinking about the sorts of things that can injure you along the way of use of that plant and really then go into a harm prevention process of really ensuring that you identify what the the hazards are that arise out of all the life cycle of the the plant and then ensuring that you either eliminate those or control those and that you also ensure that you risk communicate so that you provide appropriate information around The actual item of plans whether that be safe operating procedures or whether that can be In terms of training and I guess from a regulatory perspective, that's how we see it I don't know Liz from an academic perspective whether the the literature Characterizes it any differently to that but but certainly that's how we we certainly Certainly yes, I think that Peter's highlighted some important principles with that and I think one of the main things that works well in terms of Improving safety at the design stage is for those who are involved in designing and manufacturing to be very conscious of the different Ways in which machinery can be hazardous and that might seem like a fairly obvious point, but for a lot of people Safety of machinery starts and finishes with mechanical hazards and the issue of guarding But there are a lot of other ways in which machinery can be hazardous So it can be hazardous in terms of different aspects of the structure or the power sources that are used that raise safety issues there may be economic issues related to the Working positions and postures of people or perhaps the design of controls which might be poor so that they're hard to interpret There can be problems of noise vibration Substances that are used in all produced by machinery And there can also be issues related to access and it's something that's really quite commonly overlooked is whether people can get easy Access without slip-trip for problems Onto or into where they have to be working with machinery So I guess that the pitfall there is when people have a bit of a narrow focus on Certain types of issues and don't properly properly recognize the range of problems that there can be with machinery Commissioning and decommissioning of plants is a really important aspect to which often gets overlooked in terms of that in terms of safe design Thanks Peter and thanks Liz for that as well Peter in terms of the laws How is how is safe design covered in the work health and safety laws and what are the legal duties that apply to people who are Responsible yeah, well safe design is really picked up. It is really a cornerstone of our work health and safety legislation So in terms of the primary duty holders of person conducting a business or undertaking It is a critical component of their ensuring work health and safety and ensuring the safety of their workers so the maintenance and Ongoing provision of safe plan to the workplace is a really important aspect it also follows on to the the further duties which are in the The work health and safety legislation and that sort of tracks through the life cycle of whether it's the designer who has duties whether it's the The manufacturer the import of the supplier someone who's in control of plant or whoever's Installing on decommissioning the plant. So it's a really broad range of duties that are covered across there And it's a very comprehensive duty In a very important feature of our work health and safety legislation So the laws cover all aspects with respect to safety and design from the actual design process through to commissioning and The operation of the equipment itself Yeah, so it's it really is about trying to make sure that we do have Consideration to safety at all aspects of the of the life cycle of the item of plant and it really is about ensuring that Those are considered very much at the design phase, but also during the life of the plant In terms of that and ensuring that that all duty holders and I shouldn't forget other duty holders such as Directors and and workers and others also have duties under the legislation to ensure that They follow instructions that some there's due diligence in terms of directors in terms of the plant at the workplace So it's a very broad range in Duties and again I guess the other point is that those duties are often shared to amongst different people whether it's the PCBU the supplier The manufacturer and the designer so often they can be They can be overlapped in terms of those duties So it is really important in terms of the legislative framework that there is good coordination and cooperation amongst duty holders Okay, Liz. I might just come back to you in terms of what works well for designers and manufacturers in this space And you mentioned the the range of issues that they need to consider Do you like to expand on that a little? Well, I guess the next step in that is recognizing that there is that sort of range of different ways in which machinery can be hazardous is For those who were designing a manufacturing machinery to also be well informed about The different options that are available in terms of the control or risk control in order to address those different types of hazards So I guess what we're trying to do is encourage people to actually eliminate hazards And or integrate state-of-the-art risk control measures So really being familiar with what the different options might be is important to underpin that that aspect of Designing things to be safer in the first instance. So I Suppose another important point to sort of underline in all of this is that what we're trying to encourage is making machinery inherently safer and So that can be a bit of a pitfall if people tend to see machinery safety as being about providing warning signs or Devices, you know, whether it's flashing lights on machinery or beeps or something like that That can be an important part as Supplementary measures if you like for risk control to help further minimize risks But if you look at that, they're not fundamentally dealing with the actual hazards of the machinery It's still of they're still about trying to get people to work safely around the machinery Well, I'm not actually controlling the fundamental hazards. And so that point about making it inherently safer I think is a really fundamental one. It's a really difficult thing to do though I think in old plants and I mean one of the things regulators and I'm sure was you experiences to is that in terms of You know older plant. There's always that issue about retrofitting and how do you make old plant? Inherently safe and and whether retrofitting can actually do that Actually might come to you wears on that point now and as a consultant designer for manufacturers Can you tell us please a little about what you do in practice and why safety and design of machinery is really so important in workplaces? Yes I think Peter hit the nail on the head that it's basically from start to finish or cradle to grow. Yeah, so I assist industry with Safe design and machinery from inception to disposal effectively Ensuring regular regulatory compliance is one of the most critical steps, but it's understanding that relationship and what is regulatory compliance from a manufacturer or an employer's point of view and the interpretation of that differs from each business to the next one because the legislation really gives your Control and your safe design and machinery to your process in the way that you're using it your machinery the way that you're Applying it installing it Operating it and so on so I assist with the risk assessment process and and that's something that we've had a lot of I suppose trouble with an industry simplistic risk assessment is is is commonly done on Not complex plant, but basic plant, but the more complex the the machinery the more complex the process The more complex the risk assessment has to be because you have to capture all of these aspects of designing Operating maintaining cleaning disposing decommissioning so on if you don't Get those captured in the risk assessment process You can't possibly move on to what is the most critical step, which is your risk control design I spend so much time in the risk control design area because that's where we get the paybacks if we can put in and one of the things that people do in industry is They do the the process of risk assessment very badly because they don't have the skill sets within their Reference groups when they're trying to find that information on on the process out from task and so on and you know disposal maintenance And so on so they don't have the skill sets in there People don't have that knowledge to know where to go with the process So they see as I think Liz mentioned before a simplistic mechanical hazard and we'll deal with that as a mechanical hazard But what should the risk control for that be so they don't have the depth of knowledge to understand and explore the risk assessment process So in summary on more complex processes. We don't do that risk assessment process particularly well So that's where I usually get involved and start getting people thinking about How do we go about this process to get something meaningful out of it? And also you've got to think from the regulatory point of view can that document stand up in court? Have we done it thoroughly as I think the first example? The case of the fatality pulled out had that document been done Well, if it had been done was it done properly did it explore all the the hazards and risks and task-related issues and I'd answer that no at this point because we need to probably inject a little bit of skill there but then we look at risk control development and risk control development is where I get my job satisfaction because we're talking about trying to change a culture and industry from a lowest cost solution a simplistic answer to trying to get people to Almost we're trying to change that culture We're trying to twist their minds, but we're trying to aim also for for senior executives so that we can make that critical link between good design better design of and safe design of machinery and The bottom line of the business if we can get that relationship right and get those people appeal to the entrepreneurs in the group Twist the minds of the CFA's from a dollar driven Process to a return on investment and demonstrate that then I think that's where we win But that's that's the areas or they're the areas that I work in and certainly the most rewarding is the the risk control design area Okay, and whereas you mentioned some of the challenges faced by manufacturers and designers in this space And you've had a lot of experience in this What are some of the unexpected benefits that you've derived from working directly with these people the unexpected benefits? I mean, I'll I'll give a Case study I've worked in the timber industry quite a lot. It's a very difficult industry and It has the highest industry levy rates. It has woeful statistics Horrific injuries and it's pretty much on par with the meat industry as well now those two industries have done a lot of work in recent times to try and lift their game and I've worked with a hardwood timber mill and they took a different approach and the owner of that business was an entrepreneur or he's an entrepreneur and He decided he was going to bring in some CNC controlled equipment from Europe the trouble is it landed on the deck here and the risk controls went with it and What was there wasn't compliant with Australian standards So before that process could be put in place and become operational the systems had to be developed the good side of that Is that The solutions that were developed became state of the art that supplier adopted the risk controls a zoning model specific risk control to very difficult problems of Things like tracking the saws once you've installed the massive band saws to break the logs down That process itself and I'll put you in the picture of that if you're the supervisor you were expected to basically Adjust this thing manually looking at it and if it went wrong You wore this massive Bandsaw if it came off the the guide wheels So that was a risk that was totally unacceptable the solutions to that process of a zoning model Which meant that no worker was in the same place and time classic risk management theory With the hazards so that you've separated your workers in your hazards. You've controlled it all remotely no worker handles Any part of the timber until such time as the processes at zero state where the control or whole power and then the Operation of those controls was done from the control room. So the unexpected benefits and that was also the manufacturer adopting those as worldwide standards OE standards for their equipment solving the problem of their bandsaw tracking Meaning that it was done from the control room after you'd install the bands not from within the process while it's running And the cost on return on investment which really appealed to the owner of the business was the fact that it cost Between 15 and 20,000 roughly to put in the the risk controls to track those saws And do it safely the payback on that when you're considering a timber mill this kind Costs, you know in excess of probably five or six thousand dollars an hour to run, which is fairly typical figure You look at that We do a change every shift at least once So saving 15 minutes you do some simple maths depending on what shift structure they're running payback was between four and eight days To put in a process that then became state of the art worldwide If you think about that that is a huge improvement And to see the rewards from that but other unexpected benefits of this employer Running with this in in an entrepreneurial way and and basically Homing in on that relationship because they could see that it was great for the bottom line of the business They had significant discounts in their workers comp insurance considering that they're at the worst industry rate They were the industry was performing very badly their performance became so much better than industry that their Reductions and premiums were in the millions So they're the unexpected benefits and very rewarding unexpected benefits Where's you touched on this in terms of talking about the bottom line and and obviously in terms of incorporating those Safety features it did represent an upfront cost it did to what extent is cost consideration and issue For manufacturers and designers in implementing those safety principles into their equipment Cost is is probably the major issue. It's it's probably my number one enemy in The sort of work I do because everything you do is going to cost money You're dealing with CFOs and CEOs that don't want to spend money. We're trying to create a link between Better safer design machinery better performance in OHS and the bottom line Concruiting that link in and getting acceptance of it and getting these guys to free will is is where we need to be Because that's the biggest challenge the finance always gets in the way because we can save money there But they don't look at the holistic picture. They look simply at Investment bottom-line cost, but they don't look at return on investment So it's our challenge as professionals to be able to demonstrate that return on investment and do it in a pretty much I mean I cut my teeth in the automotive industry and we had continuous improvement gurus like Deming and if you've in Manufacturing it's lovely because you've got all these process measureables you can draw on Intelligent use of those measureables you can demonstrate that what we're doing Improves the bottom line you win the CEOs and the CFOs over you've got the game there But it's that's the biggest challenge of all is the financial and getting that Culture in place. Okay. Well might come to you in a moment. There's about cost issue as well But as an extension of that where's can you tell me? How does a manufacturer or designer market their product? When as a consequence of the extra cost it's going to be at a higher cost than its competitor I think we'd be be crazy in in Australia's Climate at the moment industrial climate we need to market the abilities we have and our technology skills Superior and we need to market that so if we've got Manufacturers here designing equipment that is state of the art in terms of risk control That's giving us a positive benefit to the bottom line We need to market that we need to market it on regulatory compliance because if we're not doing that I mean, I'm trying to in my client base. It's Regulatory compliance is mandatory. We got to accept that. We must do it, but I don't want to see Very basic compliance. I want to see us going to a level where we select a Compliance at a point where it is a positive for the business not just a have to do Minimal compliance because the minimal compliance will turn around an ambush you yeah So that's that's probably the key message. So it's also return on investment return on investment and demonstrating that you can't just say It's nice to have Because you won't get any response from a CFO on on that You've got to have a Demonstrated result and you've got to be able to show them the tools that you're using to be able to demonstrate We need to play on their turf in other words We need to play in their language with dollars numbers and all of that and demonstrate to them that what we're doing Can actually demonstrate that result and that is probably the biggest challenge in doing the sort of work I think getting it right up front does actually save money in the long term because the cost of recalls and retrofitting is Very expensive. So to actually design something well and elegantly at the beginning of the process Actually is a win-win situation for everybody. It certainly is and you don't want to be playing catch-ups and particularly if if you've been found Not compliant with the legislation And you're getting any further action as a result of that whether it's simply notices of improvement or whatever a prohibition But any subsequent legal action out of that is very costly to a business and a fatality is a Major a cost to a business that can some by times be terminal and we never want to go there We don't want to injure people. We don't want to kill them at work We want to design processes that are user-friendly and actually work and are productive Okay, Liz. I might just come to you in terms of cost. Is your research found that cost considerations are an issue? Absolutely cost is an issue and actually I'm going to just deflect this a bit and pose a challenge for Peter Because what the research actually suggests is that one of the biggest issue is Companies like those that Wes deals with Feeling okay, we're dealing with safety, but that company over there that's doing the same sort of stuff They're not dealing with safety the regulator doesn't seem to be inspecting and enforcing with them So we've got this unlevel playing field and actually there's some really rather sad examples of companies that had put themselves out To do safe design had come up with some great safe design solutions And then found that they couldn't compete with other companies that were still producing the same type of machinery But without the safety features that were effectively adding to the cost of it So all of this for me raises the issue of how do we get a more consistent and I think Networked approach to inspection involved inspection and enforcement Which would mean that as a regulator you're doing it strategically Through supply chains and markets, so you're not just focusing on particular companies one at a time Maybe when something terrible goes wrong because there's a fatality a sort of company that Wes is dealing with But let's take another example food processing machinery, let's say if we could have Strategies which are dealing with those that design manufacture supply import Key customers as the end users of the system who are all Being interacted with as part of regulatory strategies Then you get that impetus through supply chains and markets to help reinforce the importance of safe design Perhaps reinforce key messages about what the design solutions are that you're looking for And at the end of the day you've got a level playing field where people don't feel that they're going to be missing out Because they are trying to deal with safety Excellent. I think that that has Obviously Provided some fertile information for people who might have questions. So I might at this point in time See if there are any online questions that we have and also invite members of the audience to think about questions as well We do have a question from Kathy online and the question is there is some discussion about the need for designers to take a Holistic approach when designing machinery What does this mean and how can designers do this? Well, so I think this is one for you in terms of your experience working directly with Manufacturers and designers. How do they take a holistic approach? Well, the holistic approach is that you're not just looking at operating the plant Because most people think that okay, it's it's while we're normally running The process or the machinery or whatever it is that there's a problem and they look at that isolated area in their risk assessments They don't look at Maintaining they don't look at cleaning they don't look at Decommissioning or commissioning they don't look at installation. So holistically we mean we need to look at the whole picture of owning and operating that piece of machinery or process of whatever it is and I think That's that's basically what it's about. So it's broadening your vision taking the tunnel vision off and looking at your risk assessment processes and being far more thorough and Laterally thinking a little bit along the lines of that. Thank you, Peter. I might just come to you on that and you touched on it earlier Does the the the law? Establish a framework for a holistic approach Well, it does it eternally covers all of those things that was was talking about and it really does ensure that people need to The designers do need to factor in every aspect of the the lifecycle of the the item of plant and that's quite Critical in terms of how they do that. So no, it is it's a really important element of design safety and the ensuring that we Actually do that Liz from your research. Are we achieving that yet that holistic approach? I would say not I think actually to the extent that designers and manufacturers are addressing issues for those who Install maintain clean repair and so on it tends to be a bit incidental to what they're doing for the sort of Every-day operation. So if you've got good measures for the operation User of the machinery, maybe they're going to flow on to other people as well But maybe not because you've got different things going on when you're maintaining and so on and I think one of the one of the big issues really is for Designers and manufacturers to in a sense get their hands dirty in terms of really understanding or understanding the real nature of work And certainly that involves consultation with workers But it's even a step more than that because it can be quite hard to get people to actually have input as workers into Discussions about safety, especially at the design stage which raises the I guess the issue of well How do you do that? effectively and certainly those who who do Get to a better understanding I guess of what really goes on in work are those that Trial with prototypes or models if it's not the sort of machinery that you can actually have the whole thing there for people to trial people using models simulations and all sorts of things to try and Get workers with that sort of experience to tap into their experience and and raise the genuine safety issues that need to be Addressed I think there's also a role there with regulators in bringing the parties together I think where we've had our best successes has been where we've been able to get the designers the manufacturers and the end users Which ever part of the life cycle together to really understand what are the issues and what need to be addressed? And I think there is an important role for regulators to help build those networks and build those Conversations because often where we see the problems It's where there isn't necessarily the needs of the end user has been really addressed in the design process Okay, thank you and thank you Kathy for that question. We have another online question So we'll go to that now. This is from Terry Terry asks How do you address the competing objectives of aesthetics? Practicability cost and functionality during the manufacturing stage So in other words, we've got these competing issues Making the machine look good the aesthetics of the machine the practicability cost and functionality and balancing all of those up and in certain instances It may be that the manufacturer decides that functionality overrides some of the others Where's you have any experience with that any views about that? It's a pet topic of mine. Excellent the the problem we have is that that if we can put the question up against us so I can get the whole context of it, but we need to look at all of those aspects and I've basically got a copyrighted expression that when we're looking for risk control for Processes and that we're looking not just for an answer that excels in one area like we want to keep the Finance people happy and they want to see the process is productive. Well, that's great But at what cost because they're not looking at real cost They may be looking at just getting parts or getting things out of the end of the process We've got to look at all aspects of that process and get a best possible Compromise risk control solution for that item of machinery and by compromise I mean we've our risk assessment is going to throw up all the different variables that make that process tick We don't want to excel in some and fall down miserably in the plant safety or the risk control area So we need to get that right. We need to get the user-friendly part, right? The ergonomics the human factor side of it the psychology of the relationship with the process All of that, right? And we want to get that answer that's going to work So I think that's the key to it is good the best possible compromise risk control Excellent. Thanks. Thanks very much. We's and thanks Terry for that question covers all aspects of Safety and design we have another question online and this question is from Kenneth And the question is can the panelists talk about some real-life examples of great machinery design and What does well-designed machinery look like? Please I might just come to you on that you've done fair bit of research here and in terms of From your research. Have you seen some great machinery designs? For me the for me the best examples are those ones that come out of an understanding of what the real nature of work is like and one that comes to mind is an example of It's it's actually well a hand-operated but reasonably large device that's used for finishing surfaces and the people who developed that Actually came out of an industry where they used that kind of machinery and it's interesting I think how often those sorts of solutions actually come out of people with that real firsthand experience And the reason that it was good was that they understood Exactly what it was like to be dealing with dusts which might be coming from all sorts of Synthetic as well as timber materials They knew what it was like to be straining with an item of machinery in terms of the physical strain and potential for overuse and so basically came up with a design which was a device that was easy to manoeuvre and Really effectively Controlled the dust issues in terms of dust extraction so and there were some other things But I guess the point there is really when you understand the real issues for people using it It means so much more when you're coming up with the solutions Okay, and where's you mentioned the timber industry in the example. Yes the example I was giving earlier is an example of intelligent design very good design in the sense that Okay, if anyone's ever been into a timber mill or traditional mill your hand feeding timber into machines and it's things can go horribly wrong and People end up being severely injured as a result this process by separating the hazards from the workers Creates an environment that is very difficult to get injured if the hazards are in there And you're out here And if you want to go in there then the hazards are no longer there because you place that zone in a controlled state Or a whole power state if you're doing major maintenance work So that sort of design is very good But not only that your interfaces with the process and the user friendliness of those Because if you've done your homework with your risk assessment with your user groups And you've got that interaction and got the dynamics going in that group You've developed an interface that's very friendly to them and performs well. It doesn't frustrate them It doesn't drive them nuts because it breaks down every five minutes and you've got to fix it They're the sorts of issues that you need to home, you know So a good design process will tick all the boxes as best as possible across the line And that's what great design is about is getting something that works in all those areas That your people can take ownership because they've had the Involvement in the development of the process and it's quite amazing how that that relationship snowballs Once you've got those people accepting that they were part of the design of the the process that actually works Whereas it hasn't before The the sort of dynamics of that getting that moving and getting that ownership is just the power that's that in that relationship Is amazing. Thank you guys time Peter. I was just about to answer regulator any views there about real-life machines Yeah work. Yeah, just picking up on Liz's point I mean I really like the idea of design thinking and I mean architects do it all the time Prototype they design they they do drawings for their clients and work through and eventually prototyping something that works Our best example I think of where we have worked with industry and worked with users and there are a good couple of examples in our safe design program Where we've you know, whether it's been grain augers or fence place drivers or woodchippers where we've sat down with the industry and tried to Work through what what wasn't working and what needed to be working and that was an iterative process of working out Some different trial and error about what would work better and more effectively in terms of that So I think we can learn a lot from the architecture profession in terms of how they use that process of Prototype in and in continuous learning and working with clients to actually understand their needs and what you want to get out of The process a theme of engagement on reading from this process as well, which is important I might now just ask our audience here if there are any questions you have a panel members. Yes Yes, my question is does anyone have any comments on Approaches for working through situations where there's really conflicting views about what constitutes safety and design Because I'm thinking of an example for example in quad bikes It's been quite an issue of what is safe design of quad bikes Okay, I might actually invite to put it to respond to this and perhaps Liz from you as well from your experience So Peter and the example of quad bikes has been mentioned and views about what actually constitutes safety and design Yeah, I think that's a great the great question because it's a really live issue in terms of quad bikes and For us, I guess it is about getting down to Again getting all of the parties together to try and work out a solution on what the issues are so for quad bikes only You know part of the approach we've taken is to commission research So really have an evidence-based approach to try and really resolve some of the design issues and some of the Concerns that we know uses have in terms of quad bikes and then working with the industry to To try and change perceptions and understanding I guess of what those issues are so for us It's been again a bit of an iterative process of working through you know focusing on things going through from PPE right through to actually Better stability of the quad bikes and better design and really pushing trying to push the suppliers up the Basically up the hierarchy of hazard controls to try and get them to think about well It's not just about training. That's not just about the helmets It's not about how people use the equipment You really need to design in elements that are going to make the the equipment more more stable and more safe to use So we've certainly been Using that as an approach and I think there's some really good learning from that I mean one of the things we've been pushing for I guess is the idea of having some consumer safety better consumer safety information about the stability of different types of quad bikes that people have more choice about the About the safer options in terms of those or actually using other side-by-side equipment So what else is safer to use in terms of those so There's a whole range of things that we're doing at the moment to look at that But it is a really good question because Quad bikes is a really complex issue because it's not just a workplace issue. It's also a recreational issue It's used in lots of other aspects. So It's hard it shows the complexity I think in plant plant often covers not just workplaces it covers across many other boundaries So as a regulator, it's a very complex space to navigate sometimes Does that resonate with you in terms of your research? Yes, it does and actually I was going to just say that I think you could sort of answer this question Into context in a way one's this sort of wider regulatory context where it's been really important with the particular example that you've raised of the quad bikes For that to be underpinned by some really sound research as to what the what the technical issues are in terms of Stability and all those sorts of factors which then I think puts the regulator and others in a better position to Actually advocate for what is safer design? And there are some other good examples of that being done by regulators in the past In Victoria, there was some really good research that was done around forklifts because everybody presumed presumed as with quad bikes That the issues were all about the operators hooning around and not what you know operating these things safely And it actually turned out that there were real serious issues that related to forklifts Not actually having the braking capacity for the usual speeds that they were driven at All sorts of issues around stability and tendency to tip over and things like that So in that case there was a role there with the regulator being able to define Define some design solutions and advocate for those solutions to be put in place But the other context I wanted to just raise because I guess these Differences of opinion about what's safe they come about for individual companies as well in the context of you know one-off particular designs and The research that I've done certainly suggests that those issues are better resolved when you involve teams of people basically in that process of recognising and Recognising hazards and deciding what you're going to do about them. So bringing people from different perspectives again, but in the workplace context Similar to what you're trying to do. I guess in a regulatory context as well Yes, thanks Liz any further questions from the audience question here Thanks Thanks, you've talked about this a bit already, but Costs but does regulation tend to drive safe work design or is safe work designer commercial imperative particularly for the designers reputation? Thank you for that question. I think that any other panel members could probably have a view on this So does regulation drive safe design or is safe design a commercial issue? I think I think just relying on legislation isn't enough I mean, I think what designers need to do is really be focusing on harm prevention because we know you can comply with standards But still have you know, I'm you know unsafe Safety issues in terms of the the plant that you're producing so for us It's so and certainly I know as regulators we can check that people are compliant with the standards But often There are other issues that need to be addressed in terms of ensuring harm prevention. So I would always be advocating for For duty holders to be looking at the harm prevention What's going to cause harm? What am I doing about that and how am I controlling it and not thinking so much about well Is this if I ticked all the boxes in terms of the statutory obligations because that doesn't necessarily lead to to safe design Ultimately, so so for me, it's really about an emphasis on the harm prevention. Okay, where's your experience? The regulatory framework sets basically the the standard or the basic minimum Compliance level, but it's up to the the person who is the duty holder to actually explore that and work out Where their solution to the problem sits? That's probably the bit we don't do well as I touched on before But it certainly is a commercial imperative because if we're going to do it properly We've got to sell the benefits of doing it properly back again As far as I'm concerned, it is absolutely critical that we get that relationship in there Because we're going to get it right if we can prove that it works Okay, Mr. Your research show that The regulatory requirements Prevail or do the commercial instincts drive the manufacturer? I think the research suggests that the commercial instincts are drivers but Regulation and I use that in the sense of both the law and the inspection and enforcement is part of the mix in terms of Factors that motivate organizations to address health and safety issues I'm inclined to say that regulation in that sense is Yes, it's a driver, but it doesn't It doesn't give people all that they're looking for in terms of Capacity so understanding what it is that they actually need to do and that's where other aspects of the wider regulatory Influences come into play and in particular things like the technical standards for the safety of machinery which are not Formally legal standards. They're certainly referenced in codes of practice But they have a momentum in a way that for example health and safety act Regulations type of thing don't so the technical standards are an important part of that Momentum for driving health and safety improvements. Thank you. One of the things I liked about your research this was that idea that Community of practice is almost as important as the regulation and if you can connect people and they learn from each other And that's really I think an important role for us all to be facilitating that and showing that Communication is becoming a powerful instrument in this space. Yes, okay now have one more Question online and I'd like to take that question now. This is from Leo Leo runs a small business How can he get help to ensure that the machinery he puts into the workplaces safe? And this is most relevant question because we've been talking about the information and communication process Here we have a small business person. He wants to make sure that what he puts into the workplaces safe How does he how does he go about making sure that that's the case? Where's if I can address that I look at I mean it's the duty on any Small business operator any employer that they need to get appropriate expertise to assist them with what they're doing This is not a commercial plug But certainly they need to seek technical advice to be able to assist them to make sure that they've got the machinery in Their workplace safe and and that's where the duty is so it's really their responsibility to engage someone or talk to the regulator Who can quite often provide advice and assistance of guidance in those directions? Certainly bring them up to speed with what their responsibilities are And that's a sort of a great starting point for them probably but bringing in that that Resource is probably the most important thing to that business so Peter contacting the regulator will assist in Providing information about what the legal requirements are that that's absolutely right And I mean I we have great sympathy for small business operators in how they access that information I mean we're actually operating a global economy and People are often buying things from overseas buying them, you know from trade shows and all sorts of things you know internationally and often standards which are Told to be you know said to be equivalent and not always equivalent So there certainly is worth checking if people are buying major purchases certainly checking out with the regulator and them We're certainly willing to help we do see people get into trouble where they think they've done the right thing and bought something But it may not be compliant with them with the Australian standards or Australian requirements. So it's really important I think to do the homework. Yes. Thank you. Just on that point. I'd like to ask Is the legal framework adequate for dealing with safe designer machinery look, I think the legislative framework We've got is the the best you can have in terms of Addressing that we've got very much a a Prevention approach to the legislation. So I mean it really is a performance base. It's really designed about trying to get the right outcomes So you can't be too prescriptive because we know that you know internationally things social Environments change in technologies change and you can't anticipate every change in terms of plants So the framework we've got is is good. I Think it is effective in terms of having the right controls, but it's more about Really about making sure people are aware of those controls and I think as Liz was talking before people don't necessarily always You know refer to the legislation so it's raising awareness not so much about legislation But about what's important in terms of what people need to do to design safely So yeah, there's in the context of what put has just told us about the legislation and the legal framework What do you think needs to be done now to improve the outcomes in the safe design of machinery? Look the from the research that I've done people who design a manufacturer machinery have a strong preference for I guess what I'd call hands-on learning in the sense of Getting practical opportunities to actually find out How to actually do safety in a sense so you know you can provide Information in a written form about safety, but actually what people are looking for is how do you do it in practice? And that leads me to think that there would be great value in I think regulators banding together with educational education providers professional industry associations and looking at providing programs which can I Structured around those practical opportunity. So what does it actually mean in practice to be? Recognizing hazards. How do you go about doing that? What are the practical ways for actually making sound decisions about how you control risks? How do you do your testing and examination of machinery that you're expected to do? How do you effectively involve workers? So these are all very practical hands-on type things and I think there'd be great value in Looking at how we can provide programs that help build capacity and build those sorts of knowledge and skills Okay, thank you, Lisa. I'd like to now again ask our audience here if there are any further questions that you might have Yes one question here How important is it to know who you're designing for? know their shape their size given a lot of Machinery is about people having to control difficult and complex environments How do we know That we're designing for Australians Okay, well as I might refer this one to you and this is a question about how do you cater for all of those hazards? And that includes the hazards of catering for differences in individuals Okay, I'll put my agronomists hat on for that one We need to when we're designing Interfaces for people we need to design those interfaces for the people which means we need to take into consideration the variation in stature Physical size etc in our workforce Unfortunately in Australia our databases are Not where they probably should be but there's a major project Within the human factor society to work on getting us a database of the Australian population But an agronomist knows how to interpret the databases that are available and there's various software packages that are available They assist you in designing for people, but it is it is critical that we design Interfaces for for the range of user groups, and I'll give you an example from a shift manufacturing organization and They were operating assembly machines And on the day shift the guy that operated it was about six foot four and On the night shift the lady that operated it was about four foot two and She's basically working up here, and he's working down there So there was a total mismatch in the design of those workstation So if you appreciate that both of them were there in we're within Perhaps 95% of our expected user population if we know those limits We know where the boundaries are we can design to cater for that and we can put in Appropriate risk controls like adjustable floors Adjustable processes to be able to get those interfaces to the correct height and get those working Relationships because it it's a three-dimensional model. It may not be just height. It may be reach it It can be any way that we relate with with people Vision if we're talking control room environments and that sort of stuff You've got a design for focal lengths and for information and interpretation that information So a professional agonist is is someone that can assist you in that area in terms of getting that information and making that Relationship work for you. Thank you Tom. Any further questions. No, not further questions. We start to Come to the conclusion of the discussion and for that I'd actually like to refer to the panelists about a particular takeaway message So in other words, we're dealing with a very key issue with respect to safety and design design of machinery And I'd like to ask each of the panel members what their takeaway message is for you when you go away from here and think about safety and design What is it you should be thinking about so Peter from a regulator's perspective? What's what's a key takeaway message with respect to safety and design? Yeah Well for me it is about that thinking early and really trying to anticipate all of the types of hazards that will arise Throughout the life cycle of the product. So really making sure at the front end that we get that right So people the users of the the back end are not being injured in the process And Liz I think for me it's it is that fundamental message about we're trying to make machinery Inherently safer and at the end of the day We'll only achieve that when we do recognize the full range of ways in which the machinery could be hazardous And take steps to address those that range of hazards and ways Look my takeaway message would be that injury and illness from work is unacceptable And we need to target the decision-makers. We need to convert their thinking and we need to achieve a culture of Not having to do it, but a culture of wanting to do it, right? And that's I think the fundamental message I'd like to put through Cheers thank you and clearly safety and design is a Fundamental issue it is embedded within the Australian work health and safety strategy. It's an identified action area and What I would like to think is that today We've had a vital discussion on some of the issues of concern with regards to safety and design But more importantly on how we achieve positive outcomes that are going to drive Safety for people operating machinery and equipment and and we've got key messages here And I think if I could sum it up in terms of saying that some of those key messages relate to communication Information and engagement and what we need to do is to work actively with one another as regulators as researchers and as Practitioners within this space to ensure that we look at the front end process to ensure that the hazards are eliminated or minimized At the design start stage. That's what this is all about That's what this discussion has been about And I'd like you to put your hands together and thank our panel members. Peter, Liz, Wes