Wednesday, March 14, 2007

Bonuses Linked to safety for Managers In BP?!


UK: Call for BP chiefs to have bonuses linked to safety

UK shareholders are calling for BP directors to have their bonuses linked closer with the company's safety and environmental performance, following incidents such as the March 2005 Texas City refinery fire, where 15 people were killed and 180 were injured. The Local Authority Pension Fund Forum has called on BP chair Peter Sutherland to address the issue of how senior executives' pay is related to non-financial issues. Corporate governance body Pirc, which has been advising the local authority pension funds, said: 'Health and safety and environmental criteria should have a more prominent role in the executive remuneration performance indicators of energy companies.' The pressure on BP comes as incoming chief executive Tony Hayward prepares to meet former US Secretary of State James Baker, who last week savaged BP in an a BP-commissioned report into its safety performance in the United States, which said a 'corporate blindspot' on safety went right up to the London-based global board, headed by chief executive Lord Browne. Pirc said it was awaiting 'with interest' a response from the oil group. BP said this week that annual bonuses for executives were already linked to health and safety and environmental issues. The company added that Texas City and other problems in the US were partially responsible for Lord Browne's 2005 annual bonus being cut to £1.75m (A$4.35m), from £2.28m (A$5.7m) for the year before - although his overall pay package increased by almost £700,000 (A$1.75m)!

Source: Risks 280 Read more

Source: ohsrep.org.au

Sustainability Development Checklists/Ideas

'An interesting site that is designed to promote a sustainability tool.I haven't used it as yet but looks interesting.'Let me know what you think.Ciao

Duties Definitions under some sample acts in Australia

I have been researching some of the more detailed defintions and derivations of responsibility for safety and duties for staff ,employees,ohs reps and other responsibles such as safety advisors.This gives some ideas for some of these groups in this sometimes complex and confusing area.



'
Duties of 'others'
Just like the 1985 Act, the 2004 Act places duties on other parties - the basic duties are the same, but some of the duties have been separated out. There has also been an important addition, which is the duty of designers of buildings or structures (Section 28).
Section 26 Duties of persons who manage or control workplaces

This is the same section as the 1985, except that previously it referred to the 'occupier'. This section means that it does not matter whether the employer (or 'person') owns the building or not: if they have 'to any extent' the management or control of the workplace, they must make sure that workplace and the means of entering it or leaving it are safe and without risks to health.

The level of duty is in relation to matters over which the 'person' has managment of control - the higher the level of control, the higher the duty.
Section 27 Duties of designers of plant

This section places a duty on the designers of plant (who 'know or ought to know' that the plant will be used in workplaces) to:

* design it to be safe and without risks to health
* carry out testing of the plant to ensure that it is safe and without risks to health
* give the necessary information to those s/he supplies the design to (eg possible manufacturers) regarding the purpose fo the plant, the test results, and any conditions necessary to ensure the plant is safe.

This information must also be given, if requested, to anyone who uses or will use the plant.
Section 28 Duties of designers of buildings or structures

This section now covers what had been a gap in the 1985 Act, where designers of workplaces did not have a duty to ensure that buildings or structures that they know, or ought reasonably to know, are to be used as workplaces must ensure so far as reasonably practicable, that these are designed to be safe and without risks ot eh health of people who will be using them.

WorkSafe has produced a guide Designing safer building & structures in order to assist dutyholders in complying with the new requirement.
Section 29 Duties of manufacturers of plant or substances

Under this section, a person who manufactures plant or substances they know or ought reasonably know is going to be used at a workplace, must do it so the plant or substance is safe and without risk to health. This means testing and providing adequate information to those to whom the plant or substance is going to be provided to or who will use it.
Section 30 Duties of suppliers of plant or substances

Anyone supplying plant or substances they know or ought reasonably know is going to be used at a workplace must make sure that it is safe and without risks to health 'when used to the purposed for which it ws designed, manufactured or supplied' and must provide adequate information.
Section 31 Duties of persons installing, erecting or commissioning plant

These persons have a duty to ensure that nothing about the way in which plant has been installed, erected or commissioned makes its use unsafe or a risk to health.
See also:

WorkSafe has produced a number of pdf publications which are available free or can be downloaded from their website:

* Information for Occupiers and those who manage or control workplaces
* Information for Manufacturers and Suppliers of Plant
* Information for Manufacturers and Suppliers of Substances

The 2004 Act can be downloaded (in both pdf and Word format) on the Victorian government legislation repository website.'
Source: ohsrep.org.au

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.1 Australia License.