Sorry, I’ve just had a run in with a male censor whose self-justification just made me throw up. Otherwise I adore men, truly!

Ansell has a lot to answer for. Let’s make the best of it.

http://oosterman.wordpress.com/

The doctors asked me if I would go there one day a week and speak to women who were in danger of a permanent injury unless they took a break from their job, and that’s how the support group/s started. They thought that if the patients spoke to someone who had it severely, which could’ve been prevented, they might take more notice! Some did, some didn’t? Those who didn’t usually were forced to leave due to pain and disability - they said after, that they thought I was exaggerating - I wasn’t! Too many had financial commitments of course!

A couple of men came and they were most welcome. The issues including personal ones that related to women meant that they often didn’t feel comfortable with men around. Pain in spine, neck, arms and weak and painful hands/wrists overlapped all parts of their lives including sex lives, looking after babies and children, housework etc. This was the 1980’s? There were at least two 4 Corners programs during that time, and they were about the almost ‘pandemic’ in the public service, and the second about my friend who was an outworker, and the first one in NSW to take her 4 employers to court. SBS which was Channel O at the time had at least one documentary that I can recall.

I suggested that the men start one, and then we’d combine about once a month, but it didn’t happen. I spoke to them on the phone from time to time though. Women seem to show more initiative re setting up support networks, after all, that’s how we get women’s centres and women’s health centres, rape crisis centres etc. Men whinge, but all too frequently don’t get off their bums!

Incidently, my then husband wasn’t sympathetic to either him or I. I went to court with him, his father was a no show! It’s easier to type than write, and I like being engaged in these topics. I take breaks! Have you ever read the poem about being a member of Women’s Liberation?

Part of it reads, “……..if we stand up for our rights we’re aggressive and unfeminine, and if we don’t, we’re typical weak females…….” It’s interesting how some men always resort to the ‘standing over us wagging the finger of disapproval’ to us little girls who’ve stepped out of line? Men can be bombastic and whatever, but other men attack the argument; men like you play the disapproving father role when it comes to women with forceful points of view! Most interesting! If I can put up with it, he? can cope with a ‘bollocking’ as you put it? Needs to toughen up, I’ve had to! I’m off to bed! G’night!

LIZ45, if your problems are related to RSI, have you considered using the keyboard less and smelling the roses more? And bully for your voluntary work although you take care to note that you have confined your work to womenfolk around the country. Not one to care about blokes?

How about support for such as my son, who first developed RSI at age 20. Any support for him, or is he disqualified due to his gender?

Mr/Ms “earnest scribbler” copped a bollocking from you on first entry to this thread, perhaps to Crikey!’s feedback pages, yet you gave both barrells.

Please take the medication.

Way to go girl.

There are men who have done it and are ‘male feminists?’ but sadly, there are too many like you and others(usually male) who feel so intimidated when a strong feminist speaks out, that your only response is to belittle my(or heaps of other women’s) anger, forthrightness etc because nobody has educated you re the basic human right of all of us, and that is to be treated as equal, to not be the subject of abuse, and where you’ll actively react in a positive manner to any or all outbursts of sexist/agesit and unjust judgements?

I find your attitude really amazing in 2010. I raised my sons from an early age, that violence between human beings doesn’t solve anything. That, any fool can use his fists, but it takes an intelligent human being, with a caring attitude, who’ll solve conflict with his brain - not his fists! I was determined that they would be sensitive to all women/girls, and would not be guilty of being a sexist, oppressive and chauvinist s**t who thinks, that women were put on this earth for MAN’S use and benefit. I taught them how to cook, clean, sew and look afterthemselves, and that being part of a community(family, sharing rental responsibilities, or sharing a home with kids) is pulling your weight, and not causing resentment in a relationships by sitting on your arse with a tinny, while your wife/partner is almost exhausted by feeding a baby, looking after a todler, and spending time with a 4-5 yr old! Recent stats show, that in 2010 over 70% of the housework is done by women. We have a long way to go, and if you’re not capable and exercising re housework or looking after your kids, then you’re a failure, contributing to the fatigue and unhappiness of your partner/wife!

I find it very discouraging, that people like you find my point of view so confronting, that you have to omit any self analysis, because it’s too easy and convenient to make me out to be a tyrant. I am not!

So, while I don’t have any qualifications re dangerous occupations like installing insulation obviously is or can be, I do have many qualifications( I just lack ‘pieces of paper?) re the horrific abuses of workers throughout the country, and the almost criminal lack of accountability or care and concern for their welfare. I believe, that we should enact as a matter of priority, that every worker who leaves home prior to their work shift has the right to safely return to their loved ones at the end of it! I also believe, that it’s usually via pathetic abuses by employers, that too many workers are killed or injured at work, usually due to unnecessary or culpable negligence of their employers. For this reason, a Labor Government, in the federal sphere should ensure, that they diligently and with commitment always emphasise their commitment to health and safety. I also blame Howard a lot for the present attitude of some employers. He let them know most emphatically via WorstChoices, that their right to profit took precedence over the rights of their employees, including the right of a safe and healthy work environment.

When workers/unions/employers act as one re workers safety, statistics show, that there are less deaths and injuries in the workplace! I’ll always speak out in support of this, as I know only too well, the pain and disability of sustaining aPREVENTABLE injury/disease in the workplace after 26+ years! I think I have a right to be scathing against anyone who chooses to patronise the messenger, rather than take due note of the message!

My advice: by all means, switch off the house - ie throw the main switch. After that, physically remove every fuse or circuit breaker from its holder/base, to provise a visible break. Thus, at the very least, two actions would be needed in order to send current back into the workplace.

To rely simply on a switch which cannot be locked is not really secure. There’s nothing wrong with putting the fuses in your tool box while you do the work, thus removing temptation from those not familiar with your work plan.

A note placed on the door of the box is not going too far. Perhaps accompanied by a padlock on the door.

Am I paranoid? Maybe. But I am still alive.

I know from your previous posts that the male of our species is not held in high regard by you. If you detect a strongly patronising attitude on my part, then I apologise. It was not my intention. I detect a strongly aggressive, irrational and emotional attitude from you re males, and usually manage to read straight through, focussing more on the argument than the packaging.

However, a lifetime in heavy construction work has exposed me to workers’ comp from most angles, including my own family members’ issues. You mention that you once had a compensation issue and that you researched your situation. One case. In one jusisdiction. Your previous posts indicated none of this and from them I deduced that your contribution, if not your knowledge of the subject, contained gaps.

My contribution, however poorly worded, was a fair dinkum attempt to outline the broader flow of liability and responsibility.

Bottom line: It is drawing a very long bow indeed to try to pin the safety management of contractors on the Minister under the current circumstances, no matter how much some would like to do.

I would far prefer to be known as being just once unintentionally patronising than as a bitter and twisted man-hater. Lighten up, for whatisname’s sake!

Again I ask — did you watch the senate c’tee? Did you listen to the evidence? The sec. stated most vehemently that the recommendations were used to formulate the process. And those recommendations were sifted and put, where applicable, to the minister (as is the normal process of developing programs in govt.) But no — TA and Hunt say ‘lets chop off his head!’

At the micro level, people rorted the system. At the macro level, regs. were beefed up as soon as that became apparent. Is the minister supposed to be prescient? As far as I know prescience is not a job requirement for anyone in this country.

It was the ‘jumping to conclusions’ without listening to the actual evidence that characterised the Salem witch trials. This is remarkably similar in that people are listening to the one-line grabs that have appeared in the press without actually looking beneath the surface.

The discussion is at a stalemate … those of us who actually look at the evidence have one point-of-view while the others have been merely listening to the confected outrage of the politicians and neither side is likely to shift their view.

Once again I find myself agreeing with you as I clean up after you”

What sort of patronising nonsense is this? You couldn’t just say you agree with me, you have to put a rider on it! I bet I know more about Workers Compensation issues than you do. I bet I know of the grounds of a Common Law or negligence claim than you do, as I’ve lived through it personally. I did lots of research re my own case, more than my solicitors did for either case - of which they acknowledged! I was also told at the time(by my barrister who wanted to sell me out to the insurance company - tell me I had a weak case, and the Judge I had would never award me the full workers comp weekly payments blah blah blah- I won, and that Judge did! I was the 1st in NSW that it happened to - all this went on over 6 yrs, so don’t try and tell me that you’re more knowledgeable, because unless you’ve been there - you’re not?)

You agree about the rights and responsibilities of the States re worker safety; you agree about the responsibilities of the employers, as I’ve been advocating, but you just can’t help yourself - you’ve got to take a paternalistic and patronising role - because after all, you’re a superior person being a male? God, it gives me the ?????

The essential thing that really saves the Fed govt from culpability, is that Howard didn’t win the last election, after which his next quest was to nationalise the Workers Comp system, and the States would probably have lost that as they did WorstChoices action/s in the High Court? As you correctly state, the responsibility for workers’ safety belongs to the States and territories. Perhaps if Garrett had’ve put this program in their hands, the outcome would not have been so tragic for those 4 lovely young men - what a tragedy! But who is responsible for a worker dying from dehydration for god’s sake - the supervisor, employer etc? Using metal staples? The same? Not a 16 or 19 yr old who’s had only 4 hours training and in the summer months? Crazy? I’m not a boss, just a woman with common sense!

I couldn’t care less about either side but to say that the whole Garrett debate is a beat up is ridiculous and sad. In fact, it is only the extreme left that think it is a media beat up.

We are talking about a ‘failed’ process, a process which failed to identify advice and express recommendations given by Minters (amongst others) a year ago. A year ago.. try telling the victims family that this is just a media beat up. This is a policy breakdown on a macro level.

Do you also believe Air France, even though expert advice said that the new turbine engines were faulty, was not to blame for the plane that crashed into the Brazillian ocean last year?

My support of Garrett stems from the fact that the ‘blame’ is being misdirected for political purposes.

If you watched the senate c’tee you would have seen the ‘realistic’ argument. If anything, he and his dept. have done more to up the OH&S of the sector, and provided regs to a sector that operated under the previous govt without any regs at all. A sector with inherent risk — the very nature of the work is risky.

It is like blaming the infrastructure minister for the 1000s of road deaths each year. But those deaths just flow by everyone without a single blip on the political radar.

And according to figures approx 80 housefires regularly took place each year when less that a quarter of the insallations occurred in the years prior to the scheme. Who are you going to blame for those? Malcolm Turnbull ?

All this fake outrage is sickening. Abbott again got on the tube making bold statements with no clear foundation. It is time for people like you to get real and look at the evidence, not the fake outrage, which is, in itself, spin.

Last time I looked the onus was to prove guilt, not to prove innocence. This is, and has from the outset, been trial by media. Never mind the truth.

“…again the ‘politicising’ by both the press and the Opposition skated along without a moment’s pause…”

Amidst the endless spin and spurious rhetoric from Dear Leader about “open and accountable government” you knew that someday someone would get caught?

Why are you so dogmatic in your support of Garrett?

What has he done as a Labor politician that has so enamored you of his ministerial capabilities?

I just watched AM Agenda — again the ‘politicising’ by both the press and the Opposition skated along without a moment’s pause.

Once again I find myself agreeing with you as I clean up after you.

The States are, as they have been for many years (100+?), responsible for workplace safety. I may need to be corrected in relation to the territories or Victoria post-Kennett, where they sold their worplace relations to a willing federal conspirator.

However, the Federal Minister for the Environment is far removed from workplace injury. I have watched TV reportage of these galoots working on tiled roofs without any visible harnesses or restraints or sacaffolding or… who cares? I do.

If I send a worker onto a roof or into a confined space as a supervisor or boss of some kind, and that worker isn’t working safely, then the first places to look are the system of work, the safeguards which are present, the training, qualifications and competencies of the workers, the actions of the supervisors. Remember, if I am trained and qualified, I may still not be competent. I have personal experience of an earthmoving plant operator who would have been competent, except that his wife and 2 kids had left him the previous evening. He was not able to keep his mind on the job and came to grief. He lived, luckily, but at great expense to his employer.

Peter Garrett is not at fault for the four deaths which have become the centre of debate. He had no part to play in relation to selecting or training these particular employees. In fact, they may not even have been employees - they may have been subcontractors, perhaps via a dodgy arrangement. He has no part to play in determining the work methods or the safety procedures in place as they went about their work.

This is a massive distraction from the real issues.

Issue 1: Should Minister Garrett have continued the insulation and PV programs as initiated by the preceding Minister? Read: Malcolm Turnbull. PG has since reviewed and amended these programs in light of emerging knowledge regarding their performance.

Issue 2: Were these employees/subcontractors working safely and in accordance with relevant State and Territory law? Not Peter Garrett’s problem.

Issue 3: Were these employees/subcontractor installing the various insulation and PV systems in accordance with the relevant (State and Territory) law, the relevant Australian Standards, the Building Code of Australia and in accordance with any contract in force between the householder and the Contractor? Again, not Federal responsibility, let alone the responsibility of a Minister.

Anybody who thinks that Peter Garrett is in any way responsible for these outcomes is mad.

However, I note that he has suspended several schemes which have been poorly implemented, as would anybody who is authorising expenditure on a program which is not delivering the expected results.

Move on, folks! Nothing here to see.

The big mistake that was made in my view, was that the States should’ve been in control of the project. It’s the States that have the Workers Compensation Laws, the Laws pertaining to safe work practices etc. It was the businesses in each state that employed the people who would install the insulation. They were probably all working under their own State awards. It was a major oversight, but the media in this country were not interested in genuine investigations or reporting. They ‘smell’ blood and they’re out to outsell their competitors. I have nothing but contempt for all of them, including the ABC? You, like others don’t even mention the projects that were put in place by Howard. Nobody in the media did any research on the numbers of worker accidents/deaths via the installation of insulation over ????yrs prior to this stimulus project. Reading your posts on a variety of topics, I don’t expect you to take an adult, serious and intelligent line on any of this? You’re no better than the ‘tarts’ in the media, who’ll exploit the death of other peoples’ children to gain some political advantage. You, like them, are beneath contempt!