Skip to main content

Common WHS Scenarios - Practical Applications

How WHS Framework Works in Practice​

This page provides common construction scenarios showing how WHS duties, risk management, and hierarchy of control apply in real situations.

Scenario 1: New Worker Starts on Site​

Situation​

Apprentice carpenter starts first day on residential construction site.

WHS Framework Application​

PCBU Duties:

  • Provide safe workplace (PCBU duties)
  • Provide information, training, instruction
  • Ensure adequate supervision

Actions Required:

  1. Site Induction (visitor management principles apply)

    • White Card verified (general construction induction)
    • Site-specific induction (hazards, emergency procedures, PPE)
    • Induction record signed and filed

  2. PPE Provision (PPE requirements)

    • Hard hat issued (AS/NZS 1801)
    • Safety boots verified (steel cap, AS/NZS 2210)
    • High-vis clothing provided if apprentice doesn't have
    • Safety glasses, hearing protection available

  3. Training and Supervision

    • Assigned to experienced carpenter (supervision)
    • Shown safe work practices (tool use, housekeeping, hazard identification)
    • SWMS explained for tasks (Safe Work Method Statements)

  4. Consultation (consultation requirements)

    • Encouraged to ask questions, raise concerns
    • Informed of HSR (if present)
    • Toolbox talk schedule explained

Worker Duties: (worker responsibilities)

  • Follow instructions
  • Use PPE as instructed
  • Report hazards
  • Take reasonable care for own safety and others

Scenario 2: Hazard Identified During Work​

Situation​

Plumber discovers asbestos cement sheet behind wall during renovation work.

WHS Framework Application​

Immediate Actions:

  1. Stop Work (worker right to cease unsafe work)

    • Plumber ceases work immediately
    • Doesn't disturb suspected asbestos further
    • Notifies supervisor

  2. Secure Area

    • Supervisor cordons off area
    • "DANGER - POSSIBLE ASBESTOS" sign posted
    • No entry until confirmed safe

  3. Hazard Assessment

    • Licensed asbestos assessor engaged
    • Samples taken and tested
    • Confirmed as asbestos cement sheet

  4. Control Implementation (asbestos management)

    • If removal required: Licensed asbestos removalist engaged
    • If left in place: Asbestos register updated, area sealed, signage maintained
    • Workers informed via toolbox talk

Risk Management Process: (4 steps)

  • Identify: Asbestos discovered
  • Assess: High risk if disturbed (inhalation of asbestos fibers → lung disease)
  • Control: Engage licensed removalist (elimination); seal and label if not removed (isolation)
  • Review: Asbestos register updated, work method reviewed to prevent future unexpected finds

Scenario 3: Working at Heights - Gutter Installation​

Situation​

Need to install gutters on single-story house (4m working height).

Hierarchy of Control Application​

Level 1 - Elimination:

  • ❌ Can't eliminate working at heights (gutters must be installed at eaves)

Level 2 - Substitution:

  • ✅ Prefabricate gutter lengths at ground (minimize time at heights)

Level 2 - Isolation:

  • ✅ Exclusion zone below work area (barricaded, prevents falling objects striking workers below)

Level 2 - Engineering:

  • ✅ Scaffolding with edge protection (guardrails) - most reliable fall protection (fall protection hierarchy)
  • Alternative: Elevating work platform (EWP)

Level 3 - Administrative:

  • ✅ SWMS for working at heights (high-risk construction work)
  • ✅ Trained, competent workers
  • ✅ Supervisor checks scaffolding before use
  • ✅ Weather restrictions (no work in high wind, rain)

Level 3 - PPE:

  • ✅ Hard hats (all workers, falling objects)
  • ✅ If edge protection not practicable for specific task: Fall arrest harness + lanyard + anchor point (but edge protection preferred)

Outcome: Scaffolding with edge protection eliminates fall risk (most effective control). SWMS, training, and PPE provide additional layers.

Scenario 4: Noise Hazard - Concrete Saw​

Situation​

Need to cut concrete slab, saw generates 110dB noise.

Risk Management Application​

Step 1 - Identify Hazard:

  • Concrete saw: 110dB at operator position, 95dB at 5 meters

Step 2 - Assess Risk:

  • Exposure standard: 85dB(A) 8-hour TWA
  • Operator: High risk of hearing damage (110dB far exceeds limit)
  • Nearby workers: Risk if within 10 meters

Step 3 - Control Risks (Hierarchy):

Elimination:

  • ❌ Can't eliminate cutting (required for construction)

Substitution:

  • ✅ Electric saw instead of petrol (5-10dB quieter: 100-105dB)
  • ✅ Diamond blade (quieter than abrasive)

Isolation:

  • ✅ Cut in designated area, 20m from other work (distance reduces noise exposure to others)
  • ✅ Acoustic barriers around cutting area (temporary noise screens)
  • ✅ Exclusion zone (5m radius, only operator in zone)

Engineering:

  • ✅ Saw with enclosed blade guard (reduces noise emission)
  • ✅ Water suppression (wet cutting quieter than dry)

Administrative:

  • ✅ SWMS for noisy work
  • ✅ Time limits (1-hour blocks, rotation between operators → reduces individual exposure)
  • ✅ Schedule cutting when fewer workers on site
  • ✅ Training in saw use

PPE:

  • ✅ Earmuffs (Class 5, 30dB attenuation) for operator → reduces 110dB to 80dB (below 85dB limit)
  • ✅ Hearing protection for workers within 10m

Step 4 - Review:

  • Noise monitoring to verify controls effective
  • Worker feedback (can operators hear instructions? Too hot with earmuffs?)

Outcome: Combination of controls reduces operator exposure to safe level. (Noise management)

Scenario 5: Consultation on Site Change​

Situation​

Principal contractor plans to change site access route (due to neighboring construction).

Consultation Requirements (when to consult)​

Trigger:

  • Change may affect worker health and safety (vehicle/pedestrian movements, access to amenities)

Consultation Process:

  1. Information Sharing (effective consultation)

    • Draft traffic management plan prepared
    • Shared with HSRs and workers (drawings, written explanation)
    • Reason explained (neighboring site blocks current access)

  2. Opportunity to Contribute

    • Toolbox talk scheduled (paid time, all shifts)
    • Workers invited to provide feedback on proposed route
    • HSR reviews plan, raises concerns from work group

  3. Taking Views Into Account

    • Workers identify issue: New route requires reversing near amenities (reversing hazard)
    • Suggestion: Extend one-way loop to avoid reversing
    • PCBU revises plan incorporating suggestion

  4. Advising Outcome

    • Final traffic management plan shared
    • Email to all workers + subcontractors
    • Explanation: Worker feedback led to one-way loop (safer, eliminates reversing near pedestrians)
    • Implementation date confirmed

Methods Used:

Outcome: Worker input improved safety of final plan. Consultation built engagement and compliance.

Scenario 6: Incident Occurs - Investigation and Review​

Situation​

Worker slips on wet floor in amenities, sprains ankle (lost time injury).

Response and Review Process​

Immediate Response:

Incident Investigation: (maintain and review)

  1. Gather Information

    • Interview injured worker, witnesses
    • Inspect area (wet floor, no warning sign, leak from tap)
    • Review maintenance records

  2. Identify Causes

    • Immediate cause: Water on floor from leaking tap
    • Underlying cause: No regular maintenance inspection of amenities
    • Contributing factor: No wet floor signage available

  3. Identify Controls

    • Engineering: Repair leak (immediate)
    • Administrative:
      • Implement weekly amenities inspection (checklist)
      • Assign responsible person (cleaner)
      • Purchase wet floor signs (available for immediate use when needed)
    • Training: Toolbox talk on slip/trip hazards, reporting maintenance issues

  4. Consultation

    • Incident discussed at HSR meeting
    • Workers asked: Other areas with slip risks? Any leaks not reported?
    • Additional issue identified (poor drainage at wash area) → added to maintenance schedule

  5. Implementation and Review

    • Controls implemented
    • After 1 month: Review effectiveness (no further slip incidents, inspections being completed, leaks reported and repaired promptly)

Regulatory:

  • Notifiable incident? No (not serious injury requiring immediate treatment or hospitalization)
  • Record in site incident register
  • Report to insurer (workers compensation claim)

Outcome: Incident investigated, controls improved, prevented recurrence.

Scenario 7: Multiple Duty Holders - Coordination​

Situation​

Principal contractor, electrical subcontractor, and scaffolding contractor all working in same area.

Cooperation and Coordination (multiple duty holders)​

Shared Duties:

  • All three PCBUs have duty for workers' safety in shared area
  • All have duty to ensure others not put at risk

Coordination Actions:

  1. Communication

    • Weekly coordination meeting (all PCBUs represented)
    • Share work schedules, hazards, control measures

  2. Shared WHS Management Plan (WHS management planning)

    • Principal contractor's plan includes coordination arrangements
    • Each PCBU's SWMS cross-referenced

  3. Specific Coordination

    • Electrical subcontractor: Needs to isolate power to install switchboard
    • Coordination: Power isolation scheduled, other trades notified, work in affected areas rescheduled
    • Scaffolding contractor: Modifying scaffold near electrical work
    • Coordination: Electrical work suspended while scaffold modified, scaffold contractor trained in electrical hazard awareness

  4. Incident Reporting

    • Near-miss: Scaffold plank falls near electrical worker
    • All PCBUs notified immediately
    • Joint investigation (scaffold contractor and principal contractor)
    • Improved controls (scaffold edge protection, exclusion zone)

Consultation:

  • HSRs from all companies meet monthly (joint WHS committee)
  • Workers from different companies consulted on shared hazards

Outcome: Effective coordination prevents gaps in WHS management, ensures compatibility of controls.

Scenario 8: Worker Refuses Unsafe Work​

Situation​

Excavation operator refuses to enter trench, believes collapse risk.

Issue Resolution (right to refuse)​

Worker Action:

  1. Observes ground cracking at trench edge after overnight rain
  2. Reasonably believes serious risk (collapse → crushing)
  3. Refuses to enter trench
  4. Notifies supervisor and HSR

Supervisor Response:

  1. Takes concern seriously (inspects area)
  2. Observes cracking and water pooling
  3. Agrees serious risk exists
  4. Engages geotechnical engineer for assessment

Resolution:

  • Engineer confirms ground instability
  • Recommends benching and shoring
  • Controls implemented
  • Worker and HSR consulted, agree controls adequate
  • Work resumes safely

Outcome:

  • Worker's refusal was reasonable and prevented potential serious injury
  • No adverse action against worker (paid for time not working)
  • Issue resolved through consultation and implementing controls

If disagreement had continued:

  • Issue resolution process (formal process)
  • Either party could request WorkSafe inspector
  • Worker not required to perform work until resolved

Scenario 9: High-Risk Construction Work - SWMS​

Situation​

Demolition of internal walls in multi-story building.

SWMS Requirements (Safe Work Method Statements)​

Trigger: Demolition is high-risk construction work (WHS Reg 291)

SWMS Preparation:

  1. Before Work Starts:

    • Licensed demolition contractor prepares SWMS
    • Identifies hazards: structural collapse, falling debris, dust (silica), noise, asbestos (if present)
    • Details step-by-step work method and controls for each step

  2. Consultation:

    • SWMS prepared in consultation with workers performing work
    • Workers' practical knowledge incorporated (sequencing, access, equipment)

  3. Coordination:

    • SWMS provided to principal contractor
    • Principal contractor reviews for compatibility with site WHS management plan
    • Other subcontractors notified of demolition work and hazards

  4. Implementation:

    • SWMS explained to workers (toolbox talk)
    • Workers sign acknowledgment (understand and will follow)
    • Supervisor monitors compliance

  5. Review:

    • SWMS reviewed if conditions change (asbestos discovered → method revised)
    • Worker feedback: Access difficult due to rubble → clean-up frequency increased

Content Example:

StepHazardsControls
1. Isolate servicesElectrical shock, gas leakLicensed electrician isolates power; plumber caps gas; test before work
2. Asbestos checkAsbestos exposureLicensed assessor confirms no asbestos present (or method revised)
3. Remove non-structural itemsManual handling, cutsTeam lifting, gloves, progressive lowering (no throwing)
4. Demolish walls (top-down)Structural collapse, falling debrisEngineer confirms sequence safe; exclusion zone below; wet suppression (dust); progressive removal
5. Remove debrisManual handling, silica dustExcavator with enclosed cab; water suppression; waste management

Outcome: Systematic approach to high-risk work, controls for each step, workers involved in method development.

Key Takeaways​

WHS Framework Integration:

  • Duties, risk management, hierarchy of control, and consultation work together
  • Each scenario shows multiple framework elements in practice
  • Real-world application requires judgment and consultation

Common Threads:

  • Identify hazards early (inspection, worker reports, during planning)
  • Consult workers (practical knowledge improves controls)
  • Use hierarchy (start with elimination, work down)
  • Combine controls (multiple levels often most effective)
  • Review and improve (incidents, feedback, changing conditions)

Worker Engagement:

  • Workers identify hazards (they see the work up close)
  • Workers suggest practical controls (they know what will work)
  • Workers' concerns taken seriously (right to refuse, incident reporting)