Thinking about introducing compulsory health assessments to mitigate safety risks in the workplace? Well think again. In light of a recent Fair Work Commission (FWC) decision, employers face more red tape when it comes to implementing preventive strategies for addressing workplace health and safety.
 
After previous unsuccessful efforts to reduce high injury rates amongst heavy vehicle drivers, a transport company sought to introduce compulsory health assessments. The results of the assessment would go on each employee’s health file and be used to evaluate the level of risk in performing their duties.  

However, the union contested the company’s right to direct drivers to participate in the assessment. They argued that there was no genuine need for it in circumstances where drivers already undergo regular medical assessments under national heavy vehicle legislation.  

At arbitration, the company argued that the assessments were designed to alert driver of “any existing and developing risks of injury in performing their work” and provide them with “information and advice on how to reduce those risks.”  

Commissioner Spencer ruled that the company’s direction was unlawful and unreasonable. She said that there was “insufficient data to establish a genuine need to direct an entire segment of the workforce to undertake the assessment” and “the outcome of the assessment was not relevant to the inherent requirement of the job.” FWC distinguished between a test designed to determine the employees’ ability to do their job, and a test to assess the level of risk of injury when performing their duties. 

This decision shows that the FWC can take a fine grain approach to testing whether compulsory health assessments are lawful and reasonable. If employers want to implement similar strategies for reducing workplace injuries, they must take into consideration whether or not these strategies are relevant to the inherent requirements of their job and there is a genuine need to implement them. 

Back to Newsletter