The Institute believes that architects as designers have a real contribution to make, as part of a community-wide strategy, in helping improve occupational health and safety (OHS) outcomes through a Safe Design approach. We support State and Federal Government objectives to assist those involved in the construction of buildings to adopt a 'Safe Design' approach. Safe Design is a process that integrates hazard identification and risk assessment early in the building procurement process to eliminate or minimise the risks of injury throughout the life of the building. Workplace accidents and deaths in the construction industry must be avoided wherever possible.
The effect on workplace accidents and deaths during construction of ‘upstream’ factors, such as building design, has been receiving increasing attention in recent years. It has been wrongly concluded that safety in construction can be influenced more by the design of the building for its end-use than by the design of construction plant, work practices or the layout of the construction site.
The Institute strongly disagrees that research supports such a causal relationship. Research has consistently failed to distinguish between the quite different 'design' activities involved. Product failures of construction equipment causing death or injury, or unsafe construction processes are not part of building design undertaken by architects. Better analysis is required to ascertain the extent to which design decisions made by architects and other designers of the end result are indeed a causal factor as opposed to failure to apply (or design) appropriately safe construction processes to the inherent risks.
Designers never have ultimate control of the construction process. Responsibility for managing hazards during construction must lie with those best able to control them, i.e., those who have control of the building site, the building contractor and its subcontractors. The Institute strongly believes that the obligation and effectiveness of architects in minimising risks does not extend to managing hazards during construction.
Recent changes to OHS legislation have in some cases directly translated the unproven causal relationship between ‘upstream’ building design and workplace accidents into imposition on designers of a duty during construction to ensure workplace health and safety.
For example, under Section 30B(1) of the Workplace Health and Safety Act 1995(QLD)
A Designer of a Structure has an obligation to ensure the design of the structure does not affect the workplace health and safety of persons:
1) during construction of the structure; and
2) when the structure has been constructed and is being used for the purpose for which it was designed.
Not only does the legislation misconstrue the designer’s level of control over construction activity required to produce the building, but the duty is extended beyond taking reasonable precautions and effectively becomes a duty to guarantee that the building will not affect a person’s health and safety (ever) – an impossible standard.
Legislation which misunderstands the limited role of designers and sets impossible obligations will be difficult to put into practice and is therefore unlikely to be effective in improving safety. Only legislation that is conditional on what is ‘reasonable and practicable’ is likely to bring about improved OHS outcomes through building design.
Some building design alternatives may present fewer construction safety risks than others and cooperation between designers, owners and building contractors is essential to minimize such risks while still meeting project objectives.