دانلود رایگان مقاله قانون کار بهداشت و ایمنی وظیفه مهندسان آتش سوزی

Abstract

Fire engineers are in general, aware of their duties under Building legislation. However, they are often unfamiliar of separate duties under Work Health and Safety legislation. This paper describes an Australian case-study, but one that is presented generally so as to have applicability in those other jurisdictions where similar Work Health and Safety obligations exist. As society becomes safer, Work Health and Safety has evolved from being solely about the employer–employee relationship, to also impose duties on other participants, such as building designers. Fire engineers are building designers that by the very nature of their work, directly influence the safety of a workplace. Most buildings upon which fire engineering is practiced are workplaces. Under Building legislation, fire engineers must design to minimum performance requirements. In the process, usually adopting the most cost effective approach and thereby creating economic benefits. Under Work Health and Safety legislation however, fire engineers have a duty to adopt the highest possible level of precautions, unless it is not reasonably practicable to do so. The reasonably practicable test must follow the hierarchy of controls and consider all relevant matters, the last of which is cost. Fire engineers that ignore Work Health and Safety duties, intentionally or not, are exposed to claims of negligence.

Conclusions

As the safety culture evolves, Work Health and Safety (WHS) legislation has become more than an employer–employee relationship. It now imposes duties on other participants such as building designers who have an upstream influence on WHS. Fire engineers are a category of designers who have a direct influence on safety precautions. Most buildings upon which fire engineering is practiced are workplaces. Fire engineers therefore have dual duties in such cases. Under Building legislation, fire engineers must design to minimum building code performance requirements. In the process they most usually adopt the most cost effective approach, creating economic benefits. This is not necessarily a bad thing except that it neglects that under WHS legislation fire engineers have a duty to adopt the highest possible level of precautions, and only do less if it is not reasonably practicable to adopt the highest precautions. The reasonably practicable test must follow hierarchy of controls and consider all relevant matters, the last of which is cost. Fire engineers that ignore WHS duties, intentionally or not, are exposed to claims of negligence. The paradigm has changed towards a safety culture and fire engineering practice must change too. To many this will seem impractical and inefficient. However, it is the law.