Occupational Medicine & Health Affairs
Open Access

The concept of "safe work system" is a basic concept that applies to the design, operation, and evaluation of work systems. This is a basic principle of the International Level Occupational Safety and Health Act (OHS) and is usually included in the general obligations. For example, employers are tasked with providing employees with a reasonably safe and healthy work system [1]. Although a central concept in safety practice, it is difficult to find a logical and comprehensive definition of what constitutes a safe working system. Providing a "safe working system" is a phrase used to explain the employer's general obligations and responsibilities that the court expects [2], and health and safety professionals say that it is acceptable safety. Often you will be asked for advice on whether your system is in place. The lack of a clear and consistent definition can weaken expert evidence of safe working systems and make them more vulnerable to challenge. In addition, this issue can undermine communication about expectations from a regulatory perspective and prevent the adoption of an increasingly advocated systematic approach to occupational health and safety [3]. In most cases, documents related to the employer's obligation to provide a safe working system define it as such. B. Codes of conduct, guidelines and concepts are not just [4]. Defining a Secure System; many of the works offered are incomplete or problematic. For example, some sources have defined a safe working system as a legal "duty" before describing the components that may be part of such a system [5].

“A safe working system is a formal procedure that results from a systematic investigation of tasks to identify all hazards. It defines safe ways to eliminate or minimize risks’’. It is by this definition, an example of a safe working system is a procedure for the proper use of equipment items such as: B. Forklift [6]. The definitions of these types are fairly narrow. Procedures or standardized work practices are just one of the factors that can contribute to safe work and are at the bottom of the risk management hierarchy. The procedure can be a "working system," or planned way of working, but it does not make the entire system safe. The "safe working system" mentioned in the general obligation clause means a much broader focus than declaring a single task method. This includes consideration of workplace conditions and objectives (as suggested by the overall risk management process), related tasks, equipment, policies and procedures, scope of training and competencies, and workplace culture, organizational structure and leadership included. In addition, defining a safe working system as a task procedure is especially problematic in proceedings involving complex investigations and psychological injuries. Like many workplace cases, cases of mental injury include many interaction failures at all levels of the workplace system.

Evaluating workplace compliance with best practice recommendations related to the integrated system approach is important for several reasons. Understanding the link between working conditions and occupational health and safety outcomes informs researchers, policy makers, and employers in prioritizing and making decisions, and actions taken by employers to improve working conditions which can be motivated to cause [7]. Second, identifying the impact of worker health and safety on an organization's performance, such as worker performance, productivity, and turnover, is important for protecting worker health and promoting profits that helps to show [8]. Baseline data with follow-up assessments can also provide a means of tracking improved working conditions and associated health outcomes over time. An important part of the process of assessing compliance with workplace recommendations and understanding how they relate to worker and business outcomes effectively captures the implementation of best practice recommendations which creating an evaluation tool to accomplish the same.

There is also the temptation to define a safe working system by referring to the description of the safety management system [9]. Occupational Safety and Health Management System OHSMS, "A set of institutionalized, interrelated and interacting strategic safety aimed at establishing and achieving occupational health and safety goals and objectives. It is defined as "health and safety practices" [10].

OHSMS may be used by organizations to organize and manage security activities, and the implementation of such systems is not always required by law or regulatory bodies. It is understandable to confuse a safe working system with an occupational health and safety system.

However, you need to make an important distinction. The management system contains plans, policies, and responsibilities for achieving and managing security. A safe working system results from a wellimplemented, resource-rich and comprehensive safety management system. However, the existence of a safety management system does not always lead to a safe working system. In fact, the working system can be inherently safe without such interference. Conversely, poorly designed and poorly implemented occupational health and safety management systems cannot make work safe enough for a variety of reasons. Implementation gaps often become apparent when compared to management plans intended for real-world practice. It is logically flawed to equate a particular mechanism for achieving the desired result (occupational health and safety management system) with the desired result itself (safety system), and in the case of occupational health and safety, all parties involved.

Based on the above analysis, it provides the following extended definition of a broad and comprehensive safe working system that is consistent with general obligations under Robens-style law.

A secure work system is characterized by an integrated, continuously improving set of activities that are performed together within a particular work context.

• Make sure that work tasks, work environments, and processes are designed to be less likely to cause physical or psychological harm to relevant stakeholders.

• Identify predictable risks and control them to acceptable levels.

• Minimize damage if it does occur. When

• Facilitate the re-entry process.

Relevant stakeholders may include workers (including managers) and senior management, or various other individuals or groups depending on the work situation. For example, in some companies, the relevant stakeholders may include clients, customers, passengers, visitors, or the general public.

All types of danger can be physical or mental harm. Dangers that are usually considered "physical," for example, fever, biological hazards, or dangerous manual labor, can result in physical harm from burns, infections, and / or musculoskeletal disorders. At the same time, exposure to these hazards can cause psychological harm (eg, exposure anxiety or social pressure to perform dangerous tasks). Causes of psychological harm such as work overload, conflict of roles, bullying and harassment may be related to psychological and physical harm (eg, thought and emotional disturbance, nausea, headache, malaise). However, there is a physiological mechanism for injury. The proposed definition has several advantages and can serve a variety of stakeholders and purposes. The broad system-wide description of the overall safety due diligence imposed on the workplace reflects the interaction of various means of helping to ensure safety, rather than focusing on individual hazards and individual controls. It is beneficial because it is. One aspect that distinguishes this proposed definition is: It emphasizes the importance of work design in achieving a safe work system [10]. This focuses health and safety efforts on preventative and prophylactic strategies rather than ineffective risk management strategies after problems have already occurred.

The above definition is also broader in terms of duties as it involves psychological harm. The integration of mental health into health and safety obligations has recently gained more recognition (especially in best practices such as law and the new international standard ISO 45001). Nevertheless, evidence is that organizations usually do not have a high level of awareness of the need for psychological factors in health and safety systems [11] and mental health is dealt with in health and safety management systems. It suggests that it is often not. Including these aspects in the description of a safe working system draws attention to the fact that the prevention and management of psychosocial hazards is an important element of an integrated comprehensive safety system. Managing return to work after an injury is an area that requires further attention in occupational health and safety practices. This definition includes recognition of the importance of supportive return-to-work practices in a wider range of safe working systems. After an injury, whether temporary or permanent, the individual must return to a safe working system. Data on the impact on injured workers show serious negative experiences for injured workers, especially those with mental injuries [15].

Incorporating the return to work system into the wider safe system of work, as this definition does, is a more complete view of the duties to provide safety before injury or illness, during their management, and in rehabilitation, when a worker returns to what might be a different job. The potential users of this revised definition include

• Managers and duty holders, for whom a summary of the scope of the system may aid in understanding their duties;

• Inspectors and regulators who need to support and train duty holders

• Consultants, researchers and educators working in the training, development and evaluation of safe systems of work;

• Occupational health and safety experts, who need to consistently evaluate whether, and to what extent, aspects of a safe system were present when providing evidence to court, for example; and

• Workers who need information on the breadth of what should be expected in their workplaces.

Social, political, and economic environments include structural forces that influence employment and labor patterns, shape working conditions at the enterprise level, and ultimately impact worker safety and health as well as enterprise outcomes. These forces include what the International Labor Organization (ILO) has called “megatrends” globalization, technology, demography and climate change [12]. Additionally, we consider the potential effects of changing patterns of disease distribution; demographics and social inequalities; and the policy and regulatory environments that are indicative of governments` stances on protecting worker safety, health, and welfare.

Globalization: The increasing internationalization of financial markets and trade is affecting global production patterns. Manufacturing tasks are becoming more fragmented as global supply chains expand and costs associated with trade and transportation decrease [12]. For example, being able to outsource work within the supply chain makes large companies less responsible for hiring people who produce goods and services, reducing employers' responsibility for safe working conditions [13, 14]. Intensifying global competition has forced employers to reorganize their work to increase efficiency, often increasing the pace of work, changing schedules and personnel, and reducing investment in occupational health and safety [15]. Costcutting pressures can lead to both lower wages and reduced investment in health and safety protection [16]. Technology: New technologies, from artificial intelligence and robotics to the use of big data, are shaping patterns of economic growth and development, contributing to major changes in the labor market and labor patterns. For example,analysis tools allow employers to manage logistics, anticipate consumer demand, reorganize production streams, and adjust workers' working hours in the short term. As a result, workers' schedules can be less predictable and reliable, making it difficult to balance work demand with competing demand from family, long-term care, or part-time work. Mobile technology makes it easy for workers and businesses to make non-standard work arrangements through an on-demand business platform. For some jobs, technology has made remote work easier [17].

The COVID-19 pandemic is accelerating many of these changes, dramatically increasing reliance on remote work and increasing the use of technology-dependent delivery services [18].

Automation increases productivity and efficiency and creates new jobs, but these jobs are not evenly distributed by industry, gender and skill level. New technologies can also lead to changes in work quality and mobility, which can accelerate skill obsolescence. The resulting skill gap can increase the need for continued education and training of workers [19].

Climate change: As a result of increasing pressure on sustainability, achieving climate change targets will require significant changes, such as emission reductions and new consumption and production patterns. The transition to a sustainable economy requires shifting jobs from the carbon production and carbon processing industries and adapting existing jobs to the needs of a greener economy. Climate change can also have a direct impact on workers who work outdoors and are exposed to rising temperatures and more frequent extreme weather events [20].

Changes in exposure and illness patterns: Incapacitating injuries and deaths continue to hurt workers, but the role of occupational exposure in the risk of non-communicable diseases such as cancer and heart disease is just as important. Consistent evidence emphasizes work contributions to behaviors associated with the risk of chronic illness, such as tobacco use, lack of exercise, and lack of sleep. The COVID-19 pandemic further highlighted the difference between the importance of the risk of infection in the workplace and the exposure of workers to work-related risks.

The new future can be impacted by informed and empowered workforce, policy initiatives, and evidence-based options driven and put into practice by research. Research approaches that can predict and adapt trends in the way workers structure, manage, and experience work can effectively inform such policies and practices.

None

None

1. http://www.oshc.org.hk/eng/main/osh_info/osh_legislation_statist/
2. https://www.worksafe.qld.gov.au/forms-and-resources/case-studies/common-law-claim-case-studies/employers-must-provide-safe-work-system
3. Macdonald W, Oakman J (2015) Requirements for more effective prevention of work-related musculoskeletal disorders. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 16(293).

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

4. https://www.safework.nsw.gov.au/advice-and-resources/online-safety-webinars/webinars-accordions-2/a-safe-system-of-work-easier-than-you-thought
5. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=CCH+occupational+health+and+safety+glossary+1992+CCH+Australia+Ltd+Sydney
6. Pronk NP (2013) Integrated worker health protection and promotion programs: overview and perspectives on health and economic outcomes. J Occup Environ Med 55: S30-S37.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

7. Loeppke RR, Hohn T, Baase C, Bunn WB, Burton WN, et al. (2015) Integrating health and safety in the workplace: how closely aligning health and safety strategies can yield measurable benefits. J Occup Environ Med 57: 585-597.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

8. https://www.labour.gov.hk/eng/public/os/D/SafeSystem.pd
9. http://www.safety.uwa.edu.au/__.../OSH-Legislative-Hierarchy-and-Components-of-a-Safe-
10. Yorio PL, Willmer DR, Moore SM (2015) Health and safety management systems through a multilevel strategic management perspective: theoretical and empirical considerations. Safety Science 72: 221-228.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

11. https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/system/files/documents/1702/does-the-evidence-theory-support-good-work-design-principles.pdf
12. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953620308121#bib36
13. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953620308121#bib35
14. Schnall P, Dobson M, Landsbergis P (2016) Globalization, work, and cardiovascular diseaseInt. J Health Serv 46: 656-692.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

15. http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/enews/enewsV12N12.html
16. https://op.europa.eu/publication/manifestation_identifier/PUB_TERO18008ENN, https://iloblog.org/2020/06/22/business-as-unusual-how-covid-19-brought-forward-the-future-of-work/
17. Schulte PA (2020) A global perspective on addressing occupational safety and health hazards in the future of work. Med Lav 111: 163-165.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

18. https://www.mattioli1885journals.com/index.php/lamedicinadellavoro/article/view/9735/8897
19. https://iloblog.org/2020/06/22/business-as-unusual-how-covid-19-brought-forward-the-future-of-work/
20. Sorensen G, McLellan DL, Sabbath EL, Dennerlein JT, Nagler EM,et al. (2016) Integrating worksite health protection and health promotion: a conceptual model for intervention and research. Prev Med 91; 188-196.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref