The MBA will be conducting Infringement Notices Information Sessions on Monday 8th July and Thursday 18th July from 4.30-6.00pm
EDITION 4-2013 http://www.mba.org.au/ files/view/?id=594 MASTER BUILDERS EXECUTIVE COUNCIL President – Simon Butt Treasurer – Frank Porreca Chair, Commercial Builders’ Sector Council – Valdis Luks Chair, Suppliers and Subcontractors’ Sector Council – Grace Ferreira Chair, Residential Builders’ Sector Council – Frank Porreca Chair, Civil Contractors’ Sector Council – Andy Crompton Chair, Professional Consultants’ Sector Council – Hans Sommer MASTER BUILDERS MANAGEMENT TEAM Executive Director – John Miller Deputy Executive Director – Jerry Howard Director Industrial Relations – Mike Baldwin Senior Management Accountant – Louise MacCallum Senior Manager - Marketing & Membership Services – David Leitch MASTER BUILDERS GROUP TRAINING General Manager – Wendy Tengstrom
Master Builders Association of the ACT 1 Iron Knob St, Fyshwick ACT 2609 PO Box 1211, Fyshwick ACT 2609 Tel: (02) 6247 2099 Fax: (02) 6249 8374 Email: canberra@mba.org.au Web: www.mba.org.au
SAFETY BREACH INFRINGEMENT
NOTICES!
Information Sessions with Mark McCabe at the Master Builders. New on-the-spot fines for workplace safety breaches will come into force from 1 July 2013, greatly broadening the number of offences which will earn fines of $3600 and putting the onus of safety more firmly on the employer rather than workers wtites Jerry Howard. ACT Work Safety Commissioner Mark McCabe said the new fine schedule would also take some of the pressure off the court system when WorkSafe had no option but to seek a prosecution over relatively minor offences. From 1 July, inspectors will be able to issue on-the-spot fines for workplace safety breaches including: not notifying WorkSafe ACT of notifiable incidents; not providing first-aid equipment; not providing personal protective equipment; not providing training and instruction on the use of personal protective equipment; not preparing a safe work method statement for high risk construction work; not ensuring work is carried out in accordance with a safe work method statement; not stopping work if the work is not being carried out in accordance with the safe work method statement; not minimising the risk of collapse of trenches; not preparing a work health and safety management plan; and not ensuring a worker has undergone construction induction training. Mr McCabe said the fines, which are $720 for an individual and $3600 for a company, targeted employers rather than employees and “will greatly add to our ability, where appropriate, to get an immediate health and safety effect, rather than a significantly delayed one through courts”.
Mr McCabe said the new fine schedule also better reflected the most common safety breaches he and his team were encountering, but were currently limited to imposing improvement or prohibition notices which did not carry a financial penalty. The infringement notice can still be disputed through the court process. The MBA will be conducting Infringement Notices Information Sessions on Monday 8 July and Thursday 18 July from 4.30-6.00pm, with the ACT Work Safety Commissioner, Mark McCabe. The objective of these sessions is to advise our members of the actions and the processes that they should put in place to minimize the risk of being issued with an infringement notice. I have had discussions with Mark McCabe and I believe that there are certainly areas that could be subject to varying levels of interpretation by the WorkSafe ACT inspectors when they are in the process of giving consideration to issuing an on-the-spot fine. Hopefully WorkSafe ACT will be training their inspectors and issuing clear guidelines.
THE
HAMMER hits the nail on the head
WORKERS' COMPENSATION The word is that the ACT building and construction industry is about to be told that based on Workers' Compensation data the Territory is by far and away the worst performing jurisdiction in the country when it comes to workplace health and safety. They’re kidding, aren’t they? Just like Tim, wait, there’s more. They’re going to fix this by beating the daylights out of business with fines and other sanctions. If this wasn’t all so serious it would laughable to the point of uncontrollable hysteria. The Territory for so long has been the soft touch of the country, a place where any number of social experiments have been trialled before being foisted on unsuspecting jurisdictions across the land. History is going to record the failings of many of these experiments very poorly and then turn on the decision makers like hyena on a carcass. It may take some time but it will happen. For so long the ACT Workers’ Compensation Scheme has been a noose around the neck of business. Ignored report after ignored report has fingered every weakness with such a scheme yet it still prevails because of the largesse it provides those who play in the system. Why did the ACT Government get rolled when it made an attempt to bring about changes to the Workers’ Compensation Scheme a few years ago?
It was on the back of a concerted campaign by parts of the legal system which stood to lose most, in concert with other dreamers who had nothing to lose. This wasn’t about moral high ground on behalf of those they purported to represent. This was about money and ideology. There was nothing rational about the decision. The Territory’s numbers are meant to look bad. It doesn’t suit those with most to lose if it was any other way. The local scheme plays perfectly into the hands of increasingly lazy numbers looking for a fast buck and a quick way out and to fill the coffers of those who have been able to manipulate the system to their own benefit. Let’s not forget the Government through the regulator as they increase the size of the stick to flog business. The imperative to return to work under the ACT Workers’ Compensation Scheme is vastly different than anywhere else in the Commonwealth and yet we are supposed to make comparisons of health and safety performance measuring oranges against apples. It’s a sad fact that when there should be more done to promote ethical and moral behaviour and make a contribution to society, there is less reason to do so. The ACT Workers’ Compensation Scheme is
living proof of a system so easily rorted and becoming increasingly so with the new phenomena of the 21st century, bullying and stress. Just ask the Commonwealth about the new phenomenon as Commcare deals with the contagion of stress leave. Business is almost exclusively portrayed as heartless and ruthless when it comes to the Workers’ Compensation debate. This mythology will continue to be perpetrated for the purposes the public debate because it suits the deliverers of such fallacy. The vast majority of businesses do care about their staff and their welfare and yet a system is persisted with that caters for the lazy and the greedy. Worse still, while the pockets of hard-working business people (and their good staff ) are picked by such a flawed system, the Government uses the spurious data produced to ensure business and, in the longer term, the community will be hammered.
Work Health Safety Active Certification WHO? Contractors on Government building projects in the ACT. Superintendents and Principals Authorised Persons (PAP) on ACT building projects. Government approved auditors on Government building projects in the ACT. WHY? This Active Certification Policy has been developed as part of the ACT Government’s overall work health and safety response to the “Getting Home Safely” report published in November 2012. The Active Certification Policy attempts to: •
prevent fatal, permanent and serious debilitating injuries within the construction industry; and
•
improve work health and safety practices on sites where ACT Government construction projects are being delivered.
WHEN? The Active Certification Policy will be applied to all new construction contracts from 1 July 2013. For an initial bedding down phase, any points allocated through the audit process will be notional points and not applied for the purpose of the policy. Subsequently points allocated against contractors will count towards loss of prequalification. It is proposed to review the implementation of the system in September to assess progress. Based on this review a decision will be made about when the bedding down phase will end. During the bedding down phase the ACT Government will consult with industry and auditors to identify any issues regarding implementation. WHAT IS THE PURPOSE? The audit process (including the allocation of points for non-conformance) will be one means through which the ACT Government may record and monitor work health and safety performance of its contractors. The Active Certification Policy will operate as a supplementary policy informing the various prequalification schemes operated by the ACT Government for construction contractors. The operation of the Active Certification Policy will not restrict the ACT Government from taking other actions it believes are appropriate under a prequalification scheme or the contract for engagement of the contractor. Completion of a satisfactory audit under the Active Certification Policy will have no bearing on the findings or decisions of a WorkSafe ACT Inspector. WorkSafe ACT audits, on-site inspections and other activities sit outside the Active Certification Policy, except insomuch as a WorkSafe ACT inspection or finding may be a catalyst for an audit and an adverse Active Certification Policy audit finding which may be referred to WorkSafe ACT for their consideration or action. HOW? The ACT Government will only prequalify construction contractors where they demonstrate they have in place and implement systems to address work health and safety practices. All contractors and entities seeking prequalification (including renewal or upgrade of prequalification) under a prequalification scheme are covered by this Active Certification Policy. The Active Certification Policy
will enable the ACT Government to satisfy itself, through an audit process conducted by Government approved auditors with appropriate expertise, that contractors working on its projects are implementing their safety management systems. PREQUALIFICATION? The Active Certification Policy relies on prequalification as a tool to ensure contractors are effectively managing work health and safety. Contractors tendering for Government building projects in the ACT must be prequalified to tender for projects valued over $250,000. Contractors must follow the Active Certification Policy in order to maintain prequalification to tender for future Government building projects in the ACT. RESPONSIBILITY ON SITE? Prequalified contractors are likely to have been given control of sites on which construction projects are being performed. As such is it likely they will also be given management of work health and safety matters on those sites and be appointed principal contractor. Given this position the prequalified contractor will be responsible for other contractors including any non-conformance by those entities. As such any non-conformance referable or attributable to another contractor will be a non-conformance of the prequalified contractor and may attract the allocation of points under the Policy. POINTS? Following review of the auditor’s interim report Shared Services Procurement will determine the initial points to be applied for reviewed and accepted non-conformances as follows: TYPE OF NON-CONFORMANCE
INITIAL POINTS
Major non-conformance Moderate non-conformance Minor non-conformance
50 Points 10 Points 5 Points
The initial points will be notified by Shared Services Procurement to the contractor following review of the report prepared by the auditor referable to the initial audit and/or follow up audit(s). Following receipt and review of the auditor’s report referable to the close out audit, Shared Services Procurement will allocate final points against those non-conformances which have been rectified or mitigated to the satisfaction of Shared Services Procurement. Where Shared Services Procurement finds that the contractor’s has failed to rectify or mitigate the non-conformance to its satisfaction, the interim points allocated to that non-conformance, may, at the discretion of the ACT Government, be doubled and become the final points allocated to the contractor. Shared Service Procurement will notify the contractor of the allocation of final points in writing. Points will only be allocated against a contractor when they are final points subject to the following exception. Where following the determination of initial points the total points referable to a contractor including those initial points exceeds 100 points, and following any close out audit it would not be possible for the total points allocated to the contractor to fall below 100, the initial points will immediately be allocated to the contractor as final points and the ACT Government shall take steps to cancel the prequalification of the contractor as provided for in the relevant prequalification scheme.
Work Health Safety Active Certification
Type of Nonconformance
Major nonconformance
Initial Points
Final Points rectification or mitigation has occurred to satisfaction of SSP
50 Points
25 Points
Moderate non- 10 Points conformance
5 Points
Minor nonconformance
5 Points
2 Points
Type of Nonconformance
Initial Points
Final Points
Major nonconformance
50 Points
100 Points
rectification or mitigation cannot occur or has not occurred to satisfaction of SSP and SSP decides to double the points
Moderate non- 10 Points conformance
20 Points
Minor nonconformance
10 Points
5 Points
SANCTIONS If the contractor is allocated 100 or more final points, the contractor will lose prequalification and will not be permitted to apply for prequalification under any prequalification scheme in the ACT for a minimum period of 6 months. The ACT Government may choose to extend the length of time for which the former prequalified contractor will be permitted to reapply for prequalification having regard to the work health and safety performance of the former prequalified Contractor. Loss of prequalification does not mean loss of contract, this will be determined at the discretion of the ACT Government at the time of the prequalified principal contractor attaining 100 points.
POINTS RETENTION Final points will be allocated to a prequalified Contractor for a period of 2 years from the date of the initial audit (or if applicable the follow up audit) at which time the non-conformance referable to the allocated final points was first identified. Final points allocated will be attributed to a contractor at the time they seek to renew, upgrade or apply for prequalification status under any prequalification scheme.
APPEALS If the contractor (or former contractor) is dissatisfied with a decision of the ACT Government under this Active Certification Policy. The contractor may appeal in writing within 10 business days of the date of the correspondence notifying the appellant of the decision. The appeal must be lodged to the Executive Director of
Shared Services Procurement and include all reasons and other supporting documentation the contractor will rely on for its appeal. Upon receipt of the written appeal, the Executive Director, Shared Services Procurement will appoint an independent WHS specialist (for example a member of the Safety Institute of Australia) to investigate the appeal. Following completion of the investigation, the Appeal Investigator will make a recommendation to the Executive Director, Shared Services Procurement whose decision will be final. DATABASE Records of any active certification points and the non conformances to which they relate, prepared for the purpose of Active Certification Policy, will be held on a database maintained by the ACT Government. Reports, notifications and other documents may also be held on or linked to the data base. The information will only be transparent to the ACT Government. On request information about the contractor may be presented to that contractor. The database may be used by the ACT Government to inform reports on WHS matters and for any other matters.
Note: The implementation of the Active Certification Policy does not in any way relieve contractors of their contractual obligations or their obligations under WHS Legislation including licensing obligations; reporting obligations and compliance with any notices issued under the WHS Legislation by any regulatory entity including WorkSafe ACT. The implementation of the Policy will not prevent the ACT Government from seeking to impose a sanction (or taking such other action provided for in the prequalification scheme) against a contractor if determined appropriate. The contractor must not place itself, and must ensure, to the extent reasonably practicable, that its officers, employees and sub contractors do not place themselves in a position that may or does give rise to an actual, potential or perceived conflict of interest between the interests of the ACT Government and that of the contractor during the audit process. The contractor must, prior to the conduct of any audit, advise the ACT Government if it believes there is an actual, potential or perceived conflict of interest as a result of the appointment or proposed appointment of an auditor to conduct an audit.
For more information please go to: www.procurement.act.gov.au
DV306 - Commences 5 July 2013 Jerry Howard
Variation 306 to the Territory Plan commences on 5 July 2013. The provisions will not apply to development applications lodged before 18 June 2013 until 5 July 2014. This means:
This rule applies to all of the following:
This rule does not apply to:
•
All development applications lodged before 18 June 2013 will be assessed under the Territory Plan provisions in force before 5 July 2013 (ie before variation 306 comes into effect). These applications will be granted a year to get assessed before being subject to the new provisions in variation 306 on 5 July 2014.
a) large blocks
•
b) mid sized blocks approved under an estate development plan after (commencement date)
mid sized blocks approved before the commencement date (except in Molonglo)
•
compact blocks.
c) compact blocks approved under an estate development plan after (commencement date)
1.6 Sun angle building envelope
All development applications lodged from 18 June 2013 will be assessed against the provisions of variation 306.
d) all blocks in the district of Molonglo Valley
•
all large blocks in all areas (new areas, established areas)
e) integrated housing development parcels
•
Exempt development that complies with the current residential and estate provisions in the Territory Plan will need to have the building application approved before 5 July 2013, otherwise it will have to comply with the new provisions in DV306.
This means that it will apply to all mid sized and compact blocks in an EDP that is approved after the commencement date and is not dependant at all on when the lease is granted.
mid sized & compact blocks approved after the commencement date (i.e. future mid size blocks)
•
all blocks in Molonglo Valley
•
integrated housing development parcels
•
•
(This will allow certifiers with existing building applications on the books, time to get them finalised before the new rules come in). More information can be found at http://www.actpla.act.gov.au/ tools_resources/legislation_plans_ registers/plans/territory_plan/ admin/documents/number_306
It should be noted that the standard building envelope provision applies to slightly different blocks (i.e. it specifically refers to the date lease is granted). In summary, I have listed below the details of where the various building envelopes apply: 1.5 Building envelope R6 – applies to •
all large blocks in all areas (new areas, established areas & Molonglo)
We also sought to clarify the situation that would trigger DV306, i.e. when is it deemed that the block is considered to be approved. The following information has been provided by ACTPLA.
•
mid sized blocks approved after the commencement date (i.e. future mid size blocks)
•
midsized blocks in Molonglo Valley
In the single dwelling code in particular, the new solar envelope rule states the following :
•
integrated housing development parcels
or by calling 6207 1923.
R7 – applies to
This rule does not apply to mid sized and compact blocks approved before the commencement date (except in Molonglo). 1.7 Building envelope R8 – applies to mid sized blocks approved before (commencement date) except in Molonglo Valley (NB building envelope provisions exist in the relevant precinct codes for Molonglo)
Lack of Supervision or knowledge of Site Sequencing? In my role at the MBA I am often called out to investigate owners' concerns about building quality issues with some work delivered by our members. Most issues are easily dealt with, some require further explanation and referral to the BCA or Australian Standards but increasingly some defects are quite noticeable and clearly outside allowable tolerances. Below are some examples where the defects found weren’t referred through a complaint writes Jason Grieves.
Recently I arrived at a house under construction to find that the edge beam of the raft slab protruded about 250mm outside the face of the brickwork of the entry wall as illustrated in picture 1. Apparently it was alright because the termite barrier had been placed on the slab edge, just nowhere near its correct position? It was difficult to see how this occurred, was it because the builder didn’t check the formwork dimensions after the concreter set up the slab? Had the builder just not supervised the project properly and not attended site at all?
carpenter to move the wall to its correct position and fix a ribbon plate in place, or was there not adequate supervision? One very possible answer has been left out of all of the above scenarios, ‘understanding site sequencing’. It is possible that the contracting trades involved didn’t understand how site sequencing takes place and what the following trades require to reduce time delays, defects or unwanted outcomes. For example in picture 1 if the Carpenter understood the Bricklayer's role and that his brick skin would be 150mm outside of the frame,
Similarly in picture 2, there was no need for the graded step down in the garage slab to continue past the garage opening but that doesn’t excuse the bricklayer for compounded issues in laying the brick courses the way they had. Was this caused by a set-out oversight, lack of care of care by the concreter or lack of supervision? Either way the bricklayer should have commenced the brickwork with cut bricks to suit the grade.
Picture 3
Picture 1
Finally to picture 3, in my opinion it doesn’t really get any easier than this. The bottom chord of the roof truss has ‘support points’ clearly marked on them however there was no ribbon plate attached to the wall below and in any case the wall misses the point by about 200mm. Was the framing carpenter leaving it for the fix-out
Picture 2
why didn’t he notify the builder that the slab edge was out of position and the termite protection was not going to be effective in its current position and have it moved? Similarly so with the Concreter in picture 2, the step down was beneficial but its extended position didn’t benefit the Bricklayer and in turn the Builder. I clearly remember as an apprentice that other trades involved in building projects would make mention of site sequencing and leaving work they completed in good order to make it easier for following trades to continue with their work. For example after setting the window heights to suit brick courses, the Carpenters would install the windows in frame openings to suit full and half bricks and tack them in place allowing the Bricklayer to move slightly if required. It appears that the Carpenter fixes the window in the frame opening and the Bricklayer is forced to open and close his perpends to suit the window position and in some cases close his
bed joints to suit window head heights to avoid cutting a solider course in. The ACT doesn’t licence sub trades which leaves the appointed builder responsible for supervision of the work being undertaken by his/her sub trades under the Building Act 2004. The licensing system of other occupations may well be argued around boardroom tables as the talk of ‘National Licensing’ and ‘Supervision’ under a review of the Building and Construction Occupations Acts continue and a positive outcome on any of these changes may never eventuate. However if they did it still wouldn’t solve the issues of sub contractors not understanding site sequencing and assisting each other during the build process. As the focus on building quality continues to gain momentum we must place greater emphasis on training and less emphasis on potential for litigation. Perhaps it’s time some players in the industry helped take focus off building quality by understanding sequences and working together? A successful building project relies on a team of individuals working together to achieve a desirable outcome not a group of individuals dismissing site sequencing and worrying only about their portion of the project. The builder was instructed to provide remedial work to remedy the above problems. If only they had got it right in the first place. In our endeavour to address some of the above issues, we are currently in the process of developing a specific training program dealing with supervision on construction sites. We are hoping to have this training program ready for delivery toward the end of this year.
National asbestos exposure register established
Mentoring Opportunities with the Master Builders
The Construction Apprenticeship Mentoring Scheme (CAMS) is calling on more volunteer mentors. This is a great opportunity to get involved with apprenticeships in the ACT .The program is aimed at apprentice retention, which has an alarming drop out rate with almost half of apprentices not achieving completion. Giving support, knowledge and skills to the next generation of trades people will be key in changing this statistic. The Federal Government has now created a register to record the details of people in the Australian community who think they may have been exposed to asbestos containing materials. It is part of the Government’s national plan to prevent exposure to asbestos fibres and to eliminate asbestos-related disease in Australia. Legislation to establish the Asbestos Safety and Eradication Agency was introduced into the Parliament in March, leading to the establishment of the Office of Asbestos Safety. The new independent national Asbestos Safety and Eradication Agency is to work with state, territory and local governments to develop a national strategic plan for asbestos eradication, handling and awareness from July 1 2013. The project will provide a focus on issues beyond workplace safety to encompass environmental and public health issues and ensure asbestos issues receive the attention and focus needed to drive change across all levels of government. Anyone who believes they may have been exposed to asbestos-containing materials can register on the National Asbestos Exposure Register. Details about how to register and other information is available at http://deewr.gov.au/office-asbestos-safety
We are encouraging experienced trades people from varying trades and backgrounds to get involved. Mentors will be given specialised mentor training and have constant access to our support staff throughout the program. The commitment to the program is dealt with on a case by case basis depending on the availability of the Mentor. Mentors can be matched with between one and five apprentices. For more information on CAMS call or email our program coordinator Malcolm Beer. Email: mbeer@mba.org.au Phone: 6175 5955 Mob: 0450 962 276
COMING EVENTS FOR 2013 Master Builders ACT Annual Dinner
Date: Thursday 17 October I
Where: National Arboretum, Canberra
Master Builders Australia National Conference
Date: Friday 14 - 16 November I
This year the Master Builders ACT Annual Dinner will be held at the newly opened National Arboretum. More details to come.
Where: Canberra
This year, the conference will be in Canberra at the recently refurbished Rydges Lakeside, November 14-16. Delegates will have the opportunity to join in the celebrations of the centenary of our nation’s capital.
TRAINING DATES FOR 2013 SAFETY LEADERSHIP - ADVANCED OBSERVATIONS & CONVERSATIONS SKILLS TRAINING
Date: There are a number of available dates. (Contact Cecilee Miller at cmiller@mba.org.au to book your place)
WORKING AT HEIGHTS
Date: 16, 20 July / 10 September (Contact Cecilee Miller at cmiller@mba.org.au to book your place) The aim of this course is to provide participants with information, tuition and activities that will enable them to identify, assess and safely work above 1.5 metres from floor level with fail protection where required.
The program consists of three 4 hour modules and two on site coaching seesions. The Safety Leadership Program looks at the way human factors affect the development and maintenance of safety culture. Participants develop awareness and learn skills, to better influence safety culture on site.
SECTOR COUNCIL MEETINGS 2013 COMMERCIAL
20 AUG
15 OCT
CIVIL
30 JUL
19 NOV
RESIDENTIAL
24 JUL
16 OOCT
SUB-CONTRACTORS & SUPPLIERS
2 JUL
3 SEP
PROFESSIONAL
14 AUG
11 DEC
12 NOV
ACT PRIVATE SECTOR BUILDING ACTIVITY $100
MILLION
$80 $60 $40 $20 $0
Apr-12
May-12
Jun-12
Jul-12
Aug-12
Sep-12
Oct-12
Nov-12
Dec-12
Jan-13
Feb-13
Mar-13
The above graph and table below summarise private sector building activity for the various building sectors in the ACT over the past 12 months. The values for each month are depicted in millions of dollars. // To Insert New Data Goto Object/Graph/Data
• Copy and Paste Pivot Table Data into Data Additions and Alterations (Residential) Commercial Building Work Garages, Pools, Decks and Similar Structures Multi Unit New Housing
Apr-12 May-12 Jun-12 5.5 5.8 5.2 14.3 39 80.2 1.7 9.0 10.2 0.13 34.5 33.1 40 53 49
Jul-12 6.3 83 9.5 5.5 67
Aug-12 Sep-12 Oct-12 Nov-12 Dec-12 Jan-13 Feb-13 Mar-13 5.3 8.2 5.8 7.02 5.00 6.2 6.4 5.02 17.1 27.5 51.27 34.0 38.2 19.2 68.6 24.3 15.0 13.8 15.8 18.3 13.8 11.6 11.4 13 0.5 1.8 14.6 0 11.2 16.4 10.2 18 17.2 40 56 72.3 55.5 55.5 43.2 51.2