Workplace Safety Consultants: Building a Safer and More Productive Victorian Workplace
December 4, 2025
Industry news, The Saw Constructions Case and Incident Response Failure
Staying updated with industry news is essential for safety professionals.
In the realm of industry news, this incident highlights the need for robust safety measures.
On 14 February 2023, a bricklayer fell 2 metres from incomplete scaffolding at a Keysborough construction site, sustaining serious spinal and lung injuries. What happened next demonstrates how critical incident response failures can result in criminal prosecution—and provides essential lessons for safety professionals and employers managing high-risk worksites.
The Incident Response Timeline
14:00 – Worker falls from scaffolding missing guardrails, kickboards, lapboards, and ties
14:05 – Site supervisor contacts OHS Manager (off-site) by phone
14:06-14:15 – OHS Manager verbally instructs three workers to climb the incomplete scaffold, install bunting, inspect for defects, and reinstall missing components
14:25 – OHS Manager arrives on site and climbs the scaffold himself, working for approximately one hour
15:30 – WorkSafe Victoria arrives to find workers have descended; inspectors observe critical non-compliance
This case serves as a stark reminder of the importance of staying informed about industry news.
Legal Outcome
The OHS Manager/ Consultant was charged under Section 25 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004 (Vic) for failing to take reasonable care for the health and safety of four workers. The breach specifically related to Clause 118(a) of the Victorian OHS Regulations 2017, which prohibits work on incomplete scaffolding except for erection or dismantling.
Sentencing:
- OHS Manager: Diversion plan, 12-month good behaviour bond, $5,420 costs
- WW Masonry (subcontractor): $32,500 fine + $5,023 costs
Understanding incidents through industry news can help prevent future occurrences.
Knowledge gained from industry news should inform best practices.
Why This Response Was Wrong
The OHS Manager’s immediate actions violated fundamental incident response protocols:
What should have occurred:
- Immediate evacuation of all personnel from the hazard zone
- Emergency services notification (ambulance for injured worker)
- Physical barricade preventing scaffold access
- WorkSafe Victoria notification (mandatory for serious injury)
- Scene preservation (no disturbance of equipment or materials)
- Incident controller assignment
What actually occurred:
- Workers were directed onto the same incomplete scaffold
- The OHS Manager accessed the scaffold himself
- Evidence was contaminated
- Regulatory notification was delayed
- Additional workers were exposed to the hazard
The Human Factors
Research demonstrates that under acute stress, decision-making deteriorates through several mechanisms:
Tunnel Vision: Focus narrowed to immediate problem (securing the scene) rather than comprehensive risk assessment
Action Bias: Psychological compulsion to “do something” rather than pause and implement protocols
Time Compression: Perceived urgency overriding procedural compliance
Normalisation of Deviance: If incomplete scaffolding work was routine on this site, the OHS Manager may have underestimated the hazard
The critical failure was the absence of rehearsed protocols and scenario-based training. Under pressure, professionals revert to practiced behaviours—if those behaviours are unsafe, the response will be unsafe.
Legal Implications
Section 25 prosecutions signal regulatory intent to hold individuals accountable where personal conduct creates hazards. Safety professionals must understand:
- Personal liability is distinct from employer liability. Professional indemnity insurance does not protect against criminal prosecution.
- Competence under pressure is a legal requirement. Good intentions and experience are insufficient.
- Regulatory compliance is non-negotiable. When in doubt, notify the regulator and preserve the scene.
Critical Lessons
For WHS Consultants and Advisors:
- Develop incident response protocols before incidents occur. Written procedures must be accessible and simple.
- Conduct scenario-based training under time pressure. Knowing rules intellectually is insufficient; professionals need automatic responses.
- Establish decision trees that override stress responses. Use checklists to ensure compliance even during emergencies.
- Understand your personal liability. Section 25 applies to individuals, not just employers.
For Employers:
- Invest in crisis management training with realistic scenarios and consequence-free learning.
- Ensure incident response protocols are clear and accessible to all supervisors.
- Create psychological safety so workers can refuse unsafe instructions regardless of source.
- Audit whether safety leadership can perform under pressure before an incident occurs.
For Workers:
Regularly consuming industry news is critical for compliance and safety.
Keeping an eye on industry news allows for proactive safety adjustments.
- You have the right to refuse unsafe instructions, even from supervisors with safety titles.
- Incomplete scaffolding is a non-negotiable hazard. Clause 118 exists for good reason.
- Speak up if post-incident response seems unsafe. Your psychological safety matters.
The Business Case
Direct costs of this incident exceeded $250,000:
Each incident covered in industry news offers valuable lessons.
Consultants must leverage industry news to enhance their response strategies.
- Fines and legal costs: $40,000–$60,000
- Workers’ compensation: $150,000–$300,000
- Investigation and work stoppage: $35,000–$50,000
- Insurance premium increases: $10,000–$30,000 annually
- Reputational damage and tender impact: Unmeasurable
A $10,000 investment in crisis management training and protocols prevents $250,000+ in incident costs.
Conclusion
The Saw Constructions case establishes that good intentions, experience, and a safety title are insufficient. WHS professionals require preparation, protocols, and practiced competence under pressure.
When an incident occurs, your response defines whether it remains a near-miss or becomes a prosecution.
Employers should prioritize insights gained from industry news.
Case Reference: Saw Constructions Pty Ltd, Dandenong Magistrates’ Court, 2025
Understanding risks highlighted in industry news is vital for workers.
Critical insights from industry news must inform operational decisions.
About the Author
Aiden Nawaz
WHS Consultant & Safety Auditor | HSE Direct
Aiden Nawaz holds a Bachelor of Laws (LLB) and a Master of Occupational Health & Safety, and is a certified ISO 45001 Lead Auditor. With hands-on experience across construction, mining, and renewable energy sectors in Australia, Aiden specialises in WHS management systems, compliance auditing, incident investigation, and contractor safety management.
Sydney, NSW | HSE Direct
Credentials & Affiliations:
Bachelor of Laws (LLB)
Master of Occupational Health & Safety
ISO 45001 Lead Auditor
ICAM Lead Investigator
Member of Various Organisations
High-Risk Work | Construction & Mining Safety Specialist
This article is intended as general WHS guidance only and does not constitute legal advice. For site-specific compliance support, contact HSE Direct.
Last reviewed: April 2026