Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales in Court Session CITATION : Inspector Robinson v Chubb Securities Pty Ltd [2003] NSWIRComm 467 PARTIES : Inspector Robinson Chubb Securities Pty Ltd FILE NUMBER: IRC 1402 of 2003 CORAM: Curtis AJ LEGISLATION CITED : Occupational Health and Safety Act 1983 HEARING DATES: 12/15/2003 EXTEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE : 12/15/2003 PROSECUTOR: Miss PE McDonald of counsel SOLICITORS: Miss R Panagoda WorkCover Authority Legal Group LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: DEFENDANT: GJ Bellew of counsel SOLICITORS: Sooji Seo Legal Counsel Chubb Australasia JUDGMENT: - 4 - INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION OF NEW SOUTH WALES IN COURT SESSION CORAM : CURTIS AJ DATE: 15 DECEMBER 2003 IRC 1402 OF 2003 INSPECTOR PETER ROBINSON v CHUBB SECURITIES AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED Prosecution under section 16(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 1983 EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT 1 Chubb Securities Australia Pty Limited (Chubb) pleads guilty to a contravention of s16(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 1983 on 15 March 2001, in that it failed to ensure that persons not in its employment, in particular Mr Badeh Shaddad, Samear Razzak and Daniel Bayer, were not exposed to risks to their health and safety. 2 These reasons are to be read in conjunction with the factual observations in the previous matter involving the Inspector and Macquarie University, matter 1401 of 2003. 3 The gravity of the offence as measured by the potential for grave harm is, of course, at the most serious end of the scale. The culpability of this defendant, however, is to be seen as quite distinct from that of Macquarie University. 4 Mr Murphy of Chubb Securities, before the contract was entered, discussed the requirements of the University with a Mr Hayward, an employee of the University in charge of security. Mr Murphy told Mr Hayward that a system whereby the cash was to be carried directly across the quadrangle was safer, and that the time of each cash transit should be staggered. 5 To my mind such a conversation is irrelevant to the commission of this offence and the omissions of this defendant. If the University failed to act upon Mr Murphy's advice, the danger faced by the security guards, Mr Shaddad and Mr Razzak, and the cashier, Mr Bayer, was increased to the knowledge of Chubb Securities. 6 Chubb admits; 1. That it did not conduct an adequate risk assessment; 2. That it did not require that the vehicles used by its subcontractors had such simple safety features as central locking; and, 3. That it did not ensure that either JAF or its security guards received adequate training or information. 7 It is quite apparent that that which is said to be a "work method statement" completed by JAF Management Services has been completed by the hand of an unsophisticated person of limited education. That much is apparent from the handwriting. That "work method statement" does not even commence to address the problems posed by the particular work at Macquarie University. 8 It is quite patent that neither JAF nor its employees were given any training at all. 9 There is a gross discrepancy between the claims made by Chubb in the documents tendered and the reality of its service to Macquarie University. The tender proposal speaks highly as to the training of Chubb staff; the Contractor Safety Policy of Chubb speaks of the necessity "to ensure that all its contractors receive appropriate training to effectively and safely manage all tasks associated with specific contracts". In a document entitled "Robbery Procedures" Chubb states, "It is imperative that we focus on prevention of an incident by education, training and developing a general awareness of prevention". A document entitled "Security Officer Standing Instructions 2000" on its first page holds that, "As a key member of a dynamic team it is expected that we see constant training and self improvement." 10 A document published by WorkCover New South Wales entitled "Guidelines for the Cash In Transit Industry" possessed by Chubb provides: Employers, when contracting out CIT [cash in transit] work to subcontractors, should ensure the subcontractor is carrying out the work in a safe manner and in accordance with these guidelines. To fulfil his obligations the employer and/or contractor should plan for the work to be done safely. When planning a safe system of work, which may also include standard operating procedures, the employer and/or contractor should prepare and document a health and safety management plan. This plan should be based on the consultation with the contractors and their employees or representatives and should describe how the work is to be done safely. 11 In all the circumstances I regard the culpability of Chubb as moderate. I accept that the failure by Chubb to address the real problems posed by the work at the University was not a failure to devise a system for training but an aberrant failure to train the particular men involved. 12 Objectively the gravity of the offence would warrant a fine of $150,000. Subjective features 13 It is apparent again from the documents in evidence that Chubb was not entirely without a system pursuant to which it addressed known dangers. I take into account that Chubb no longer carries out this work and the need for specific deterrence is in that sense moderated. 14 Chubb, notwithstanding the dangerous industry in which it operates, has never been convicted of an offence against this Act, and I accept that it pleaded guilty at the first available opportunity, given the particular problems it faced because of the dismissal of some relevant employees. I apply a discount of approximately 35 per cent so that the defendant is convicted and fined $100,000. 15 I direct that a moiety of the fine be remitted to WorkCover and that the defendant pay the prosecutor's costs as agreed, taxed or subject to further order. DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated.