Do More Steel Manufacturing Company Case Study


  • Introduction

The accident happened on February 1, at around 1:00 am. On the material day, Rob Hansen, a fitter who had worked with the company for 18 months, was called into to help get the slitting line threader table clamp back on its rail after it came off during the day shift. Apparently, the one work on the threader during the day shift forgot or ignores a common operation procedure that had been established by the engineering department to insert a safety pin whenever the line was shut down. The clamp had overrun down the table and two wheels on either side had come off the ratchet. Imma Necte, the production foreman, had been contacted by Dave Base, an operation of the slitting line, to help return the able camp to it rails, but the foreman did not know how to do it and therefore called Craig Pollard, a slitting line operator. Craig Pollard started the all the pumps, which was the normal practice to start a line, although he was not sure the exact button that starts each part of the hydraulic.



3 Written Assessment

Assessment Title

Legal analysis of workplace incident

Task Description

Read the scenario provided on the unit Moodle site.

With reference to the material presented in weeks 7 – 12, you are required to determine whether any of the provisions of the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (or comparable legislation in Victoria or Western Australia) been breached? Explain your answer with reference to the various duty holders involved and specific provisions of the Act, Regulation, relevant Codes of Practice and any other relevant guidance material.

(2 500 words)

Submit your answer as an essay, in Word format only. Inclusion of external sources should be referenced appropriately.

Assessment Due Date

Review/Exam Week Monday (8 Oct 2018) 10:00 am AEST

Return Date to Students

Exam Week Friday (19 Oct 2018)

Following certification of grades.



Minimum mark or grade

You must achieve a minimum grade of 50% for this item and an overall composite grade of 50% to be eligible to pass the unit.

Assessment Criteria

Your submission will be graded according to the following criteria:

Relevance (30%)

  • Depth of understanding in formulating responses to the assigned task
  • Alignment of responses to the assigned task
  • Connections between discussion and evidence

Validity (40%)

  • Depth and extent of discussion i.e., understanding of concepts and evidence
  • Accuracy and originality of the discussion
  • Judgment and reasoning i.e., assertions made based on level of critical thought, analysis and synthesis
  • Depth and extent of evidence used

Organisation (20%)

  • Consideration of required components of the assigned task
  • Structure and flow of information
  • Coherence and clarity of expression (spelling, grammar, syntax)

Presentation (10%)

  • Style and formatting in accordance with required academic standards
  • Typographical matters
  • Referencing protocols
  • Length

Referencing Style



Learning Outcomes Assessed

  • Describe the current work health and safety and workers’ compensation legal frameworks in Australia.
  • Apply relevant principles in order to determine workers’ compensation entitlements.
  • Adopt a legal fault tree approach to the chain of incident causation in order to construct an accident analysis from a legal perspective.
  • Apply common law and statutory work health and safety provisions to determine liability.
  • Identify appropriate responses to the enforcement mechanisms contained in work health and safety legislation.


Graduate Attributes

  • Communication
  • Problem Solving
  • Critical Thinking
  • Information Literacy
  • Information Technology Competence
  • Cross Cultural Competence
  • Ethical practice


Workplace health and safety law:(References)