Download the Body of Knowledge

(23) Comments

• 

  Pam Pryor May 28, 2014 @ 9:28 am

  Please post any comments on how you have applied the information in specific chapters to your work

  Reply
  • 

    colin corlass-brown November 5, 2014 @ 7:02 pm

    As busy professionals is it possible to set up a complete set for down load like for instance some Australian Standards
    Regards
    Colin

    Reply
• 

  Annonymous July 30, 2014 @ 2:51 pm

  Isn’t this a Safety institute of Australia publication and shouldn’t the author (SIA) be recognised here? I can’t see the SIA mentioned once on your website..

  Reply
  • 

    GB Cooper August 25, 2014 @ 4:29 pm

    I suggest you read the preliminary download above in full.

    Reply
• 

  Andrew Heinrichs November 5, 2014 @ 3:04 pm

  Was terrific to see the new chapters launched last week, with future topic areas mooted. Let’s hope some funding comes through for them!

  Reply
• 

  Andy B November 24, 2014 @ 1:27 pm

  I would suggest that it would be useful to have the release date next to the title of chapters. Also an option to download all at once.

  Thanks

  Reply
• 

  Wayne G December 25, 2014 @ 3:44 am

  As always, excellent information, might suggest a hover box or drop down over each header that gives a synopsis and list of contents, would help in the initial searching, also, the logon is a tad weird, it says I have an account, when I put in the details it says I am wrong, I’d suggest your system maybe, as I only have one and I use it daily, this site got wrong, so opted for a guest – cheers :)

  Reply
• 

  Syamsul Arifin June 15, 2015 @ 11:05 am

  very good, thank you very much for sharing

  Reply
• 

  Syamsul Arifin June 15, 2015 @ 1:11 pm

  very good, thank you very much for sharing

  Reply
• 

  Ashari Aris Ais June 22, 2015 @ 11:12 am

  good e-book.. thank you

  Reply
• 

  Brad July 24, 2015 @ 4:00 pm

  Might I suggest that if you use the book, buy a hard copy and support the research that has gone in. more money means SIA can put the book in front of people who need to see it. Best thing I did upon launch and I have to periodically go through and clear out the flags as I change topics. My greatest concern is that I have just joined a high risk govt organisation which prefers to use the Wikipedia safety manual rather than use evidence based material. I have a job ahead of me.

  Reply
  • 

    Phil Pavlidis March 7, 2017 @ 3:30 pm

    Do you know where to buy it and how much it costs?

    Reply
• 

  Bernard Corden April 28, 2017 @ 10:16 pm

  Managing Process Safety is an extremely valuable addition to the BOK and must be digested by many of the BBS acolytes who persist in teaching rodents or pigeons how to play table tennis and wallowing in scientology, neurolinguistic programming and obscurantist psychobabble. To reiterate the late and much lamented Trevor Kletz…….Try changing the situation, not people, it is far less complicated and if you think safety is expensive, try an accident.

  Reply
• 

  Bernard Corden April 30, 2017 @ 4:08 pm

  The topics covering Managing Process Safety and Process hazards are long overdue and provide a simple and compact explanation of the difference between operational or material risk and general OHS risks.

  The pagination in Managing Process safety requires synchronising following Page 34 when changing from portrait to landscape.

  Managing Process Safety Page 44 also needs attention regarding “Buncefield in Texas City” ??

  Otherwise it’s an excellent overview from an individual who is fully conversant with their portfolio

  Reply
• 

  Jean AArouet August 31, 2017 @ 2:44 pm

  If we could just go directly to the new books instead of around the world first it would be welcomed more….I wonder even what are their names?

  Reply
• 

  Rob Long September 26, 2017 @ 10:58 am

  I recognize at least 9 schools of thought in safety and wonder why the SIA chose to focus only on one?

  Reply
  • 

    Craig Wilson November 15, 2017 @ 4:48 pm

    Because the OHS BoK is evidence based, peer reviewed and the model of practice was developed in consultation with 137 OHS professionals across Australia.

    Reply
    • 

      Rob long November 20, 2017 @ 4:03 pm

      The peer review process endorses it’s own assumptions and WHS has a long way to go before it can ever be considered professional. 137 people schooled in the orthodoxy of safety will only see the myopia of that school.

      Reply
      • 

        Bruce Jackson January 22, 2018 @ 5:15 am

        Hello from Canada. I’ve just read a critique of yours on the INSHPO Framework document adopted in Singapore last fall. You made some very compelling arguments regarding the limitations in that document, and I certainly agree with your comments on the identity crisis safety seems to face. Hopefully that document will evolve over time, and that some of the more glaring shortcomings can be addressed by the inclusion of additional coursework in OHS education programs.

        Reply
• 

  Bernard Corden November 20, 2017 @ 3:33 pm

  Much of the work on climate change is also peer reviewed and an article from Cory Bernardi in a recent edition of The Spectator that reviewed Ian Plimer’s latest book: Climate delusion and the great electricity rip-off. It scorns the peer review process and together with the University of East Anglia scandal anthropogenic global warming, much like OHS has had its legitimacy shredded beyond repair.
  In Australia it commenced in the early 2000s with the dissolution of the NOHSC under the Howard government and true independence was relinquished. The long march of neoliberalism has continued and laissez faire safety with a malevolent freedom to harm is evident in the US (Upper Big Branch & Deepwater Horizon) and Australia (Coal workers’ pneumoconiosis).
  The ultimate objective of any neoliberal government is to extirpate any humanitarian or social reforms of democratic governments, which includes WHS and environmental legislation. Just take a look at the CSG environmental approval processes and read between the lines in the SWA strategy. Its vision implies that productive workplaces enhance safety performance. Andrew Hopkins challenged this back in 1994 and we have long wall mining and top coal cave in processes, which have increased productivity significantly yet 22 cases of black lung have been confirmed in the Queensland coal mining industry. Correlation does not imply causation and such definitive statements are pure corporate hogwash. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

  Reply
• 

  Joe Coope May 9, 2019 @ 11:00 am

  Red religion in a blue church or blue religion in a red church.. could we unite the tribes under a green church? The triple bottom line includes the environment. Its a SHE! That said, you are now on my home page. Well done..

  Reply
• 

  BestMavis August 10, 2019 @ 5:20 am

  I have noticed you don’t monetize ohsbok.org.au, don’t waste
  your traffic, you can earn additional bucks every month with new monetization method.
  This is the best adsense alternative for any type of website (they approve all websites), for more details simply search in gooogle: murgrabia’s tools

  Reply
• 

  Eldonrog December 17, 2019 @ 10:09 pm

  терминал metatrader – instaforex опционы, rebate

  Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.