A grease injection incident at an open-cut coal mine in Central Queensland has prompted a reminder to the industry to review the safety and compliance of high-pressure lubrication equipment.

While servicing a light vehicle inside the mine’s workshop, the worker involved in the incident was lubricating a leaf spring bush assembly using an 18V cordless grease gun when the grease pump hose failed near the grease coupler. The sudden release of energy resulted in a grease injection injury to the worker’s left thumb.

According to Resources Safety & Health Queensland (RSHQ), the cordless grease gun did not meet minimum safety requirements. The flexible grease hose fitted to the tool had been modified and was not compliant with current standards, which require hose assemblies to have a safety factor of at least 4:1.

The installed hose had an assessed safety factor of approximately 1.2:1, based on a maximum working pressure of 10,000 psi. The hose failed at the connection between the hose and fitting at the coupler end, which RSHQ said is a known stress and kink point.

Additionally, spring guards were not fitted at either end of the hose, increasing the risk of failure during high-pressure operation.

RSHQ also found that the mine’s ‘Management of Change’ process was not applied to the replacement or modification of the hose. As a result, maximum working pressures were not assessed or verified, and the replacement hose was not confirmed as compliant with minimum safety factor requirements.

Following the incident, RSHQ is urging operators to take action and ensure associated risks are appropriately mitigated. This includes discontinuing the use of cordless grease guns until compliance with current standards is verified, auditing grease guns and similar fluid power equipment, reviewing inspection and maintenance programs for high-pressure hoses, assessing contractor-supplied hydraulic tooling, reviewing emergency response arrangements for injection injuries, and reviewing personal protective equipment for workers exposed to high-pressure fluid hazards.

Following a near-collision on a surface coal mine haul road, the NSW Resources Regulator is highlighting the importance of speed management and situational awareness when interacting with mobile equipment.

The regulator has released details of the incident involving a 775G rear dump truck and a grader during road maintenance activities. The incident occurred while the dump truck was travelling uphill on a haul road where the grader was operating in the middle of the roadway.

According to the regulator, the dump truck was estimated to be travelling at 55 km/h, while the grader was visible from approximately 300 to 350 metres. Despite this, the truck driver did not react until the vehicle was about 50 metres from the grader.

When braking was applied, the truck’s wheels locked, causing it to skid slightly uphill for around 50 metres. The truck came to a stop approximately 700 millimetres from the grader.

In light of the incident, the regulator reiterated expectations for equipment operators working around mobile plant. Operators are required to apply correct speed limits when approaching or operating near other equipment and to maintain situational awareness to identify hazards early and apply appropriate controls.

The regulator also outlined actions for mine operators in response to the incident. It has directed operators to review the Resources Regulator’s Technical Reference Guide (TRG) for Surface ROVOA as part of their consideration of the event.

Operators must particularly review Layer 3 of the TRG, which addresses operating procedures, including standard operating procedures, maintenance, road rules, quality control and lockout processes. The regulator also highlighted Layer 6, which focuses on measures in place to ensure equipment is operated within its design parameters, including the use of in-vehicle systems to monitor operator behaviour.

Truckies can now access a new free industry-led online safety program addressing the behaviours that influence the choices they make behind the wheel.

Devised by the Queensland Trucking Association, the Think.Act.Drive program is built around short, scenario-based online quiz modules that encourage drivers to reflect on their behaviours and actions in everyday driving situations.

Delivered in bite-sized units and accessible online at thinkactdrive.com.au, the program is free for truck drivers around Australia and available 24/7.

According to the QTA, the platform has been designed to be practical, simple to use and easy to integrate into existing driver routines and training schedules.

QTA CEO Gary Mahon said the focus of the program was on helping drivers recognise how everyday experiences can influence decision-making on the road.

The program targets common reactions and behaviours in real-world scenarios that may increase the risk of an incident, including interactions with other road users, distraction, lack of awareness, speed choice and following distance.

Mahon said while truck drivers could not control the behaviour of other road users, equipping drivers with the right knowledge and tools was critical.

“We know that we can’t control other road users’ behaviours or decisions so it’s critical we give our truck drivers the best possible knowledge and tools to keep themselves safe,” he said.

He also stressed the program is focused on awareness rather than fault.

“I’d like to reinforce that this program is about recognising behaviour, not blame. It’s about understanding those moments that may influence driving choices and to be able to make safer decisions in real time.”

Using short interactive quizzes, Think.Act.Drive reinforces safer choices through direct language and explanation, with the aim of supporting long-term behaviour change. The repeatable format is intended to encourage ongoing engagement and help translate awareness into action to reduce incidents on the road.

“I encourage every operator and driver to try the free quizzes at thinkactdrive.com.au – safer habits start with a single choice,” Mahon said.

The program aligns with key findings from the 2025 NTARC/NRSPP Report, which identified human factors as the leading cause of major heavy-vehicle crashes, with inattention, distraction, inadequate following distance and inappropriate speed listed as primary contributing behaviours.

Think.Act.Drive is funded through the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator’s Heavy Vehicle Safety Initiative and supported by the Australian Government.

More information and access to the quiz modules is available at thinkactdrive.com.au.

Most operators understand fines.

Many understand prosecutions.

Very few fully appreciate the impact of a Supervisory Intervention Order (SIO) until one lands on their desk.

And right now, I am seeing more of them than ever.

Under the Heavy Vehicle National Law (HVNL), SIOs were designed as a compliance tool for persistent and repeat offenders.

In practice, they are becoming a routine add-on to prosecutions including permit and dimension offences with conditions that can cost thousands of dollars to implement.

What Is a Supervisory Intervention Order?

A Supervisory Intervention Order is a court-imposed compliance regime made under section 600 of the HVNL.

It allows a court, at sentencing, to place a business under active regulatory supervision for up to 12 months.

In plain terms, it means:

The National Heavy Vehicle Regulator (NHVR) is given power to monitor, audit, demand reports, require training, and impose structural reforms on how your business operates.

Why courts and the NHVR use them

SIOs exist for one reason:

To force systemic change where a regulator believes “business as usual” is unsafe.

They are typically sought where:

• There is a serious risk breach

• The regulator alleges systemic failure

• There are repeat issues

• Management systems are weak

• Permit, loading, fatigue or dimension breaches suggest poor controls

The new trend: SIOs for permit and dimension offences

Traditionally, SIOs were reserved for more serious offences.

Increasingly, I am seeing them sought in permit and dimension matters.

Cases involving over-width, over-length, or permit non-compliance are now being treated as “systems failures”, not isolated mistakes.

That changes everything.

What used to be a fine and a warning can now become a year of regulatory supervision.

What conditions can look like in practice

A recent matter illustrates just how far these orders can go.

In that case, the court imposed extensive compliance conditions, including mandatory reporting, staff disclosure, compulsory training, fleet registers, subcontractor controls, and installation of monitoring systems.

The order required, among other things:

• Full disclosure of all staff and contractors

• Ongoing reporting to the NHVR

• Mandatory training in mass, dimension and loading

• Evidence of attendance and competency

• Fleet and vehicle registers

• Accreditation requirements

• Installation of dimension monitoring systems

• Pre-departure and in-route checking regimes

• External training providers

• Compliance audits

• Record-keeping systems

• Notification obligations for operational changes

All flowing from a single offence.

The real cost of an SIO

Operators often focus on the fine. The real cost of an SIO is operational.

Typical hidden costs include:

• External consultants

• Training providers

• Audit firms

• New IT systems

• Monitoring equipment

• Staff time

• Compliance managers

• Legal oversight

• Reporting administration

• Lost productivity

Over a 12-month period, it is not uncommon for compliance costs to exceed the original fine several times over.

Why these orders are so powerful

SIOs matter because they change the power balance.

Once imposed:

• The NHVR gains ongoing visibility into your business

• Non-compliance becomes a fresh offence

• Minor breaches can trigger further prosecution

The strategic risk: “Consent orders” without negotiation

Another emerging issue is how these orders are obtained.

In many cases, they are presented as “reasonable”, “standard” or “rehabilitative”.

SIOs are discretionary. They are not automatic.

Courts must be satisfied they are:

• Necessary

• Proportionate

• Linked to the offending

• Capable of improving safety outcomes

• Not oppressive

That requires proper submissions, evidence, and negotiation. If you do nothing, the regulator’s draft order usually becomes the court’s order.

If your company is facing prosecution, permit issues, or regulatory scrutiny, get advice early.

The difference between a fine and a year of supervision is often decided long before sentencing.

Operations at Newmont’s Tanami mine site in the Northern Territory continue to be suspended, as investigations into the fatal incident on February 4 remain underway.

NT WorkSafe has confirmed its enquiry into the death of a 47-year-old worker on one of Australia’s largest underground gold mines is ongoing, with initial inquiries by the regulator suggesting a potential winch failure during a lift could have been a contributing factor.

According to the NT Police Force, after being notified of the fatality at 4 pm on February 4, officers from one of the closest towns to the site, Yuendumu, which is located 270 km away, attended the scene.

“Investigations are ongoing with members from the Coronial Investigation Unit and Crime Scene Examination Unit [on site],” police said.

Tanami, the most remote mine site in Australia, supports a workforce of more than 1800 fly-in-fly-out personnel.

Following the incident, Newmont has reaffirmed its commitment to safety and its employees.

“Safety remains our highest priority, and we are committed to supporting our people,” the company said in a statement.

“Our thoughts are with the individual’s family, friends and colleagues during this very difficult time.”

In the aftermath of the incident, Newmont said its “emergency response procedures were immediately activated” with all activities at the Tanami site suspended.

As authorities work to establish a cause, the company added that it will support all investigative efforts.

“Newmont will provide our full support to assist with the investigation into this tragic incident.”

The National Heavy Vehicle Regulator (NHVR) has released details about upcoming changes to the Directional Stability Under Braking (DSUB).

The changes, coming into effect on July 1, 2026 will apply to newly built vehicles and existing in-service vehicles entering PBS for the first time.

“The Directional Stability Under Braking (DSUB) standard is being updated to modernise braking requirements under the Performance Based Standards (PBS) scheme,” said the NHVR.

“Vehicles that were PBS-approved prior to 1 July 2026 are unaffected, except for limited connectivity requirements when operated in combinations with DSUB-compliant vehicles.

“The revised DSUB standard will improve safety outcomes by increasing the use of advanced braking and stability technologies.

The new braking standard does not apply even if you re-certify or add that vehicle to a new or existing PBS Vehicle Approval (VA) after 1 July 2026.”

The changes mean that first-time PBS trailers and dollies must meet the revised DSUB requirements, including the fitment of Trailer EBS with full roll stability functionality.

Under the revised DSUB standard, load proportioning valves (LPVs) will not be permitted.

For further information, click here. The NHVR will also be holding an introductory webinar on Tuesday February 3, at 10am (AEST). To register, click here. 

Occupational Violence and Aggression (OVA) incidents are increasing across all industries -healthcare, retail, emergency services, education, hospitality, predominantly in public-facing and frontline roles. These incidents range from verbal abuse and threats to physical violence, which have significant impacts on employee wellbeing, productivity, and organisational liability.

Our core belief at Resolution Education is that no employee should feel unsafe at work. Many organisations today lack structured approaches to prevent, manage, and respond to these situations effectively.

Understanding the Complexity

OVA isn’t simple or predictable. Each incident involves multiple factors:

• Dynamic situations – Circumstances change rapidly and unpredictably
• Individual responses– Team members respond differently based on experience, stress levels, and personal factors
• Environmental factors – Timing, location, and environmental layout all influence how situations develop
• Escalation patterns – What de-escalates one person may escalate another. These complexities mean that generic training doesn’t work effectively. Organisations need OVA management frameworks tailored to their specific environments and the specific situations their people encounter.

Building a Comprehensive OVA Protection Plan

Effective occupational violence management requires more than one-off training. A robust approach includes training that accounts for real -life circumstances.

Scenario-based training is significantly more effective than theoretical instruction. When training reflects the actual situations your team faces -whether that’s managing difficult customers, handling escalated clients, or responding to threats -employees develop genuine confidence and competence.

Training methods should match your organisation’s capacity:

• Face-to-face workshops for hands-on skill development
• Virtual reinforcement sessions to maintain learning and adapt to changes
• E-learning modules for ongoing reference and accessibility to supplement training

Embedding Training in Your Culture

The most effective and value-add approach is our Train the Trainer program. When your own accredited team members deliver training, as well as regular briefings (even 20 minutes during toolbox meetings), OVA management becomes part of your organisational culture rather than a one-off compliance exercise.

Other ways we can help embed OVA prevention in your workplace

Resolution Education can assist with development of policies, procedures and risk assessments to implement OVA prevention strategies in your organisation.

Policies alone don’t change behaviour, but clear, communicated expectations do. Policies help your team understand:

• What constitutes unacceptable behaviour
• How to document and report incidents
• What support is available post-incident
• How the organisation responds to breaches

Understanding the patterns in your workplace is essential. A structured risk assessment identifies:

• When incidents are most likely to occur
• Where high-risk situations cluster (specific locations, times, client types)
• Which tasks or interactions carry higher risk
• Root causes and contributing factors

With this insight, you can implement targeted controls before incidents happen.

Supporting employees after an OVA incident is critical for their wellbeing and your organisation’s resilience. This includes:

• Immediate incident investigation and reporting
• Staff debriefing and support
• Analysis to prevent future similar incidents
• Implementation of safeguards and system improvements

Why Customisation Matters

Every organisation is different. A training program for aged care differs from one for retail, customer service, or emergency services. The de-escalation techniques that work in healthcare may need adjustment for law enforcement or education settings.

Generic programs miss the mark because they don’t account for your specific:

• Industry and client base
• Current incident patterns
• Organisational policies and culture
• Team composition and experience levels
• Legal and safety obligations

Moving Forward

If your organisation has experienced OVA incidents, is looking to improve your current approach, or wants to build a proactive prevention culture, it’s worth exploring a structured framework tailored to your needs.

A qualified approach involves:

1.      Understanding your organisation’s specific challenges and incident data

2.      Reviewing your current policies, procedures, and training effectiveness

3.      Designing a customised protection plan

4.      Delivering practical, relevant training and support

5.      Evaluating outcomes and refining approaches over time

A serious crush injury caused when the safety lock on an automated machine was tampered with has prompted a SafeWork SA warning.

Inspectors recently attended a worksite where a worker had become trapped in an automated computer numerical control (CNC) machine and suffered broken ribs.

An examination of the equipment found that the electrical interlock device used to prevent the machine’s door from being opened while in operation had been overridden with a home-made metal key – exposing the worker to dangerous moving parts. Inquiries are continuing.

SafeWork SA reminds businesses that disabling the safety features of CNC machines and any other automated tools can have serious consequences and is a significant breach of work health and safety laws.

Employers must ensure that safety devices such as electrical interlocks, light curtains, pressure mats and guards are not overridden and/or bypassed to undermine the safety features of any plant and equipment.

Regulation 208 (3) of the Work Health & Safety Regulations (2012) (external site) states the person with management or control of the plant must ensure that the guarding is solidly constructed, securely mounted, well maintained and not easily bypassed.

Penalties for failing to comply with the regulations attract maximum penalties of $6000 for an individual and $30,000 for a business.

Safety solutions

To reduce the risk of incidents and injuries, employers must:

• Ensure plant with safety devices is regularly inspected and tested by a competent person to verify the safety devices are operating in accordance with the manufacturer’s requirements.
• Implement a system of work for the testing of safety devices prior to the operation of the plant. This may involve a daily checklist or similar system of work.
• Ensure all workers required to use plant which has safety devices installed, are provided information, instruction and training on the correct operation of the devices.
• Ensure workers and/or other persons do not deliberately bypass or override safety devices fitted to plant and equipment.

SafeWork SA Executive Director Glenn Farrell said safety locks and guards on machinery provide a physical barrier that when utilised appropriately and maintained provides a highly effective means of preventing injury or death.

‘Failing to have adequate control measures in place on items of plant, such as safety locks, can have significant life changing consequences for a worker,’ he said.

Warning about dangers of improper use of high-power lasers

SafeWork SA has identified a growing concern regarding the unsafe use of Class 3B and 4 lasers in entertainment venues, particularly in laser light shows.

Lasers can add visual appeal to events but they can also pose potential risks to the health and safety of staff, performers and audiences if they are not used and managed properly.

Class 3B and 4 lasers are classified based on their potential to cause harm to eyes and skin burns, with Class 4 lasers being fire hazards if they are not properly controlled and positioned.

Emissions from lasers may be visible and non-visible light and are commonly used at concerts, festivals, and events for light shows, projections, and special effects.

Regulation 223 (5) of the Work Health & Safety Regulations (2012) (external site) states the person with management or control must ensure workers operating laser equipment are trained in the proper use of the equipment.

Safety solutions

A person conducting a business or undertaking (PCBU) must identify and assess all risks associated with the use of high-power lasers and ensure that lasers are not directed:

• In a manner that the laser beam could interact with a person
• Towards a surface that the beam could reflect off
• Towards a surface or substance that has the potential to ignite

All lasers require correct labelling to warn of the hazards involved with the radiation source as per Australian requirements.

If a business identifies that they have Class 3B or 4 lasers, they should consider if that category of laser is appropriate for the location and activity undertaken.   A lower class of laser can produce a similar effect without the associated risk.

Further information

• Laser classifications | Safe Work Australia(external site)
• Lasers | ARPANSA(external site)

AS/NZS IEC 60825.3:2022 Safety of laser products, Part 3: Guidance for laser displays and shows | Standards Australia Store

Two separate explosive fires causing serious burns to workers have prompted SafeWork SA to warn employers about the dangers of cutting into used storage drums.

In both of the recent incidents, the drums had previously contained flammable substances but had been empty for a long period of time.

In January 2025, a worker in Murray Bridge was cutting into a 166-litre storage drum with an angle grinder to repurpose it.

The drum – although empty – had previously contained oil.

Sparks from the angle grinder and residual vapours caused an explosive fire, resulting in serious burns and lacerations to the man’s hand, arm and torso, requiring treatment at a nearby medical clinic.

In March 2025, a worker in Tailem Bend was cutting into a storage drum with an angle grinder to repurpose it.

The drum had previously contained a carcinogenic and flammable liquid and was clearly labelled with a red flammable liquid diamond warning.

Sparks from the angle grinder caused an explosive fire, resulting in serious burns to the man’s torso.

He was taken to Adelaide for medical treatment.

SafeWork SA is urging employers and workers to stop, think and assess the risk before modifying a storage drum that has been used.

Even drums that have been empty for a long period of time are likely to contain residual substances or vapours and should not be exposed to heat.

The heat and sparks from tools can cause a fire, explosion or release of hazardous vapours. Rinsing drums with water or other cleaning substances does not eliminate the risk.

Safety checklist

Before reusing a drum, check what the drum was previously used for:

• Did it ever contain a flammable or combustible liquid, or gas?
• Did it ever contain a hazardous chemical?
• Does the drum have a hazardous chemical label on it?
• Is there a hazard diamond on the drum?
• Is there a single word such as “danger” or “warning” on the drum?
• If the answer to any of these questions is ‘yes’ or ‘I don’t know’, do not apply heat to the drum.

Keep the drum away from oxyacetylene torches, naked flames or sparks from grinding and welding equipment.

Assess the storage drum before starting work

Before making that first cut, check:

• the Safety Data Sheet and the manufacturer’s instructions and precautions before performing any work on the container
• the container has been properly cleaned and certified vapour-free by a competent person
• that there are safe work processes in place to manage the hazard and ensure all workers understand and are properly trained on these processes
• controls are in place to extinguish any flames that may eventuate.

Working with or near storage drums

• Never conduct hazardous work without proper training and supervision
• Never assume every worker is fully aware of the risks involved in the task
• Never weld, grind or do any other hot work activity near empty drums
• Do not use drums as a welding or work platform
• Store empty drums with bungs removed in a well-ventilated place away from other work areas. Removing the bung will not guarantee all hazardous residues and vapours have been naturally vented.
• Do not cut or apply heat to these drums.