Big miners fight to protect on-site executives from new penalty

Major mining houses are fighting to exclude senior on-site executives from the penalties of new industrial manslaughter legislation. Submissions are now being taken for the Mineral and Energy Resources and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2020. Glencore's submission argues that the industrial manslaughter offence should only apply to those people who are genuinely the most senior people in the organisation and exclude SSEs and their direct and indirect reports. But if the government intended to expose those people to potential criminal liability for industrial manslaughter (which it strongly opposed), Glencore said the offence should also apply to 'all natural persons, irrespective of their level of seniority.' BHP has also called for SSEs and those reporting to them to be excluded from the individual offence of industrial manslaughter. The company said the proposed 'senior officer' offence was already generating significant anxiety among its SSEs and those reporting to them. It argues that potential exposure to an industrial manslaughter offence could make the SSE qualification, and the take up of SSE positions, less desirable. "The consequence of this is that the coal mining industry could face a rapid decline in the level of skill and experience held at the SSE level, as highly experienced SSEs exit the profession and suitable people are deterred from obtaining the qualification in the future. This would undermine the Bill’s objective of strengthening safety culture," BHP submits. Peabody Energy also voices concerns about the 'very broad and ambiguous' definition of senior officer in the Bill. "SSEs and statutory roles are already heavily regulated and obligated under the CMSHA (Coal Mining Safety and Health Act 1999). We believe that adding further Industrial Manslaughter provisions to those roles will drive away experienced people from the industry which will have a detrimental impact on safety culture and safe workplaces," vice president - government relations Australia and Asia Pacific Janette Hewson writes. Peabody argues the legislation as it is currently drafted has the potential to damage the safety culture of the resources industry, "In particular we are concerned that the legislation will lead to safety learnings across the industry not being shared as findings may be tied up in legal privilege," Ms Hewson writes. Anglo American has also voiced serious concerns about the current drafting of the Bill. "Our view is that the unintended consequence of the Bill, if it passes as drafted, would be to weaken mine safety systems and safety performance in the State," head of corporate relations Victoria Somlyay submits. "The exposure of site statutory positions and other site employees to criminal charges, with limited defences, would be a strong deterrent for the individuals in those positions to take ownership of safety-related decisions including risk assessments. "The practical implication of this may be for decisions to be delayed, delegated or avoided by Coal Mine Workers - acting in the opposite way to the Intent of Coal Mining Safety and Health Act 1999 (Old). This is a fundamental issue, which the industry has raised throughout the consultation period, and has not been addressed by the Government." The Mine Managers’ Association of Australia (the Association) says it has not experienced a legislative proposal that has elicited such angst and ire amongst its membership as the proposed Bill. https://www.i-q.net.au/main/mining-manslaughter-laws-must-apply-to-all-union

Big miners fight to protect on-site executives from new penalty

Industry Queensland

Related News

Vecco advances Julia Creek critical minerals plans

Chatham edges closer to Korella North mining lease

Push to take anti-corrosion innovation to next level

Get access to breaking mining news, now.