Case Study Solution on Diploma of Building and Construction Management

Students will find high quality Management Case Study Assignment Writing Services only at Casestudyhelp.com. We provide Project Management Assignment Help for CPC50210 Diploma Building and Construction Assignment. Also avail services like case study solutions, Real Estate Case Studies. We assure students that all assignments are written by a professional of the field.

Case Study 1: Site Works

1. In this case, the drilling operator reported the incident to the supervisor. The excavator operator was instructed to resume work after inspecting the area and ensuring no risk of direct damage to the excavator or electric shock. Power authorities and safety inspectors later trained the miner operator to remove the miner to ensure that any measures agreed with the power authority to protect these overhead power lines from entering the danger zone were not effective at the time of the incident. Places for health and safety protection should be analyzed regularly to ensure that the controls are adequate. Reviews should be done periodically and can be done using the same method as the initial risk identification process. They need to quickly read the Safe Work Statement (SWMS) here to understand what is planned to ensure risk management, control implementation, and providing work is done by SWMS (Borys, 2012).

2. The Australian Safety and Compensation Council have recognized the following five principles (essential elements) for a safe design that could apply to construction and other industries. This Code of Conduct for Construction Work is a recognized practice under “Section 274 of the Work Health and Safety Act (WHS Act)”.

a. People with Control

Safety design is the responsibility of every person – Safety design ensures that stakeholders or persons can control or impact the design of a product, process or item.

b. Life Cycle of Product

Security design adopts the life cycle concept – Security design applies to the renewal and settlement from the idea of each step of the life cycle, eliminating or minimizing risk as quickly as possible throughout the life cycle.

 c.Systematic Risk Management

Safe design executes effective risk management. The risk assessment, identification, and management process enable a secure strategy for risk management.

 d.Safe Design Knowledge and Ability

The safe design needs skills and knowledge that anyone should access or demonstrate with influence or control over the design (BRESLIN, 2013).

 e.Data Transfer

The safe design depends on communication – Safe design approaches require effective communication and documentation of design and risk management information among every individual involved in the life cycle stage.

3. At construction sites, work activities often overlay and interact. This means that everyone at work, for example, is liable for protecting the health and safety of workers. In such situations, everyone is responsible for sharing health and safety needs to coordinate consultation, cooperation, and activities. This gap in health and safety risk management often occurs when there is a lack of understanding of how each person’s activities relate to the hazards and risks that others may disclose (Pillay, 2013).

Case Study 2: Scaffolding

1. Most scaffolds had guardrails over most stands (including the middle and top rails). However, if the scaffolds are tilted towards the complex adjacent to the work platform in front of the front door, there is a gap covered with the wooden boards’ bricks. There was no rail above the scaffolds adjacent to the void. An 18-year-old employee of QPR Plastering was on a scaffolding platform performing work on the rendering of the complex windows. As the apprentice tried to reach a window above the void near the scaffold, he stepped onto the piece of timber that gave way, causing him to fall through the gap a distance of approximately 3.3 meters.

2. OH&S R3.67 Scaffold etc. to be erected, designed etc. following standard p84

It indicates one who erects or dismantles a scaffold ought to perform according to the AS/NZS 1576 parts 1 to 6. In addition, it suggests that there are penalties for those who do not comply with the standard.

OH&S R3.70 incomplete scaffold, the duty of employer etc. as to p86

It must be ensured that the employer, large contractor or self-employed person in the workplace has installed scaffolding and is incomplete, using danger tags and warning signs for forgery with the sculpture. Moreover, it indicates that unauthorized access should be blocked.

OH&S R3.72. Specific scaffolds to be inspected and tagged p86

It indicates that one needs a licensed person who holds a high-risk work license for a platform.

To develop a useful as well as effective scaffold plan, one can consult with:

a.Scaffolding designers for discussing design loads and structural features to support additional loads.

b.The building contractor for assessing the location of Underground pits. Scaffolding Work needs to be planned so that excavation can be avoided through engraving or adjacent services.

c.Employees, the “Workplace Health and Safety Committee”, along with the “Workplace Health and Safety Worker (WHSR)” are interested in collecting, dismantling, maintaining, and modifying sculptures (Moon et al., 2016).

3. The nature of the work, along with loads of work and the height from which falls might happen, should be allowed for the risk assessment. Also, the person assessing the risk must consider two aspects of scaffolding work:

 a.Possibility of injury during loading (unloading), lifting, use, removal or loading;

 b.Potential injuries can be severe.

The more considerable the probability or harshness evaluated the more significant risk that somebody could be wounded. This precaution ought to be appropriately detailed in the safety statement or the health and safety plan. General prevention policies must be considered throughout the risk assessment procedure. It is included in “Schedule 3 of the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005”. These general principles determine the classification of control systems applicable to all workplaces. Without the appropriate standards for design, planning, equipment, supervision, training, and examining to ensure safety, the most enjoyable emergency, use, and elimination risk assessment shows a high level of risk (Hou et al., 2017).

Case Study 3: Edge Protection

1. This case study found that a roofing contractor was working on the roof about two and a half meters above the roof’s edge and slipped. Around the same time, another employee of the roofing contractor was working on the roof from a height of about 500 mm to 5 m above the edge of the roof. The edge on which the employee worked was not protected by edge protection, and there was no fall injury prevention system. The reason is as follows.

 a.Deficiency of WSH-related training when working at heights and does not accurately identify perimeter risks.

 b.Adequate failure to provide adequate training to employees to work safely (Borys, 2012).

 2. In this case, the task at hand is to conduct a roof survey to ensure that the proposed risk management measures proposed by the RA have been appropriately implemented and strictly followed. Make sure one has a safe work method suitable for working on your roof, considering the roof’s characteristics (such as roofing material, profile, operation, height) and work duration and frequency. If one uses a fall protection system, one should check the presence and appropriateness of all anchor points and lifelines before starting any related work activities.

 3. Edge protection has to endure the impact of the person lying on the other side. The company must make and execute a secure work process (SWP) for framework related activities and emphasize the requirement for employees to always anchor staff safety responsibilities to secure lifelines or anchor points when working at heights. Also, all staff involved in the framework activities (including the formwork supervisor and staff) must provide adequate protection and be prepared for training. It gives edge protection where people are at risk of falling from the outside. For guardrail systems, they are always in good condition and good condition, capable of withstanding a person’s weight (at least 100 kg, “SS 567: 2011 Code of Practice for factory layout – Safety, health and welfare considerations”) implemented in any way at any point (Loudoun & Townsend, 2017).

Case Study 4: Elevated Working Platform

1. This case study shows that it found that the rigger was fitting bridging ties (steel joining brackets binding the roof purlins together) in the front building entry. Also, a rigger remained in the EWP till it hit the concrete, falling about 6.2 meters. Rigger grieved a perforated right lung as well as fractures to his ribs, femur, pelvis, and L1 vertebrae.

The guideline explains how safe EWP can be used and protected and helps workers perform their duties under the “Health and Safety in Regulations 1995 (HSE Regulations)” and the “Health and Safety in Employment Act 1992 (HSE Act)”. Besides, the duty holders include employees, employers, principals, manufacturers, designers, suppliers, and hirers involved in EWP work.

2. All practical measures described in the “Health and Safety in Employment Act 1992” and The “Health and Safety in Employment Regulations 1995” are related to achieving results in any situation; having regards to:

 a. The nature and severity of the damage that can suffer if results are not achieved

 b. A present state of knowledge in regards to injury of that nature

 c. A present state is now aware of the potential damage to nature, and its severity would agonize if results are not accomplished

 d. A current circumstance of acquaintance about the ways existing for achieving the result, and the possible efficacy of every direction

 e. The availability and cost of all techniques. To avoid hesitation, people needed by this Act to take every workable step are essential to take these steps only about conditions that the person recognizes or has to practice knowing about (Nadhim et al., 2016).

 3. The organization must plan a safe way to do work that can help recognize the risk of work using EWP. Safe work planning includes risk management processes. First, try to eliminate the risks and if that is not possible, isolate them and try to minimize the damage caused by the threat.

Develop hazard control methods using “group control” (edge protection) that protect some employees from harm. In this way, group control is better than “individual control” that protects only one person (i.e. fall restraint). This section also covers some significant threats of using EWP, accompanied by the proposed control measure. EWP compatible with AS/NZS 1418.10 will have the following safety feature (Chen et al., 2012).

The operator ought to:

a. be informed about the risks of working on the structure and surrounding structures to get stuck or installed between the platform and the structure.

 b. wear hardhats with a chin strap

 c. be aware of the work environment all the time

Case Study 5: Demolition

1. A safety pin is provided to ensure that the attachment cannot be easily lost if the safety pin of the hydraulic pin fails. However, in this case, it was discovered that DEF Demolitions decided to forever remove the safety pin from the quick hitch. During the demolition of the house, they used the excavator without the safety pin on the site. Besides, the quick hitch and bucket fell off the excavator and hit a worker on the upper back, injuring a severed spinal cord. The employee was taken to the hospital. After treatment in the rehabilitation hospital, the employee was seriously injured and paralyzed (Park & Tucker, 2017).

The risk assessment is not required for this demolition case study following WHS regulations. In this case, a risk assessment will help in deciding what control measures need to take. This will help:

a. Recognize which employee is at risk of exposure

b. To identify the sources and processes that create this risk

c. Find out what kind of control measure need to implement

d. Test the functionality of an existing control measure.

2. This Code of Practice to manage Health and Safety Risks related to demolition work is a legal code of practice u/s 274 of the WHS (Work Health and Safety) Act. The authorized Code of practices is a practical guide to meeting the required welfare, health, and safety standards under the Work Health and Safety (WHS) Regulations and Act. Besides, the WHS regulations consist of specific obligations for individuals to be liable for doing business or managing risks related to their demolition work. These responsibilities include:

a. Prepare SWMS for the recommended work or make sure someone else has previously made a SWMS before starting any High-Risk Construction

b. Accepts a copy of the asbestos register on behalf of the organization before the demolition work is done.

c. If there is no asbestos register, the project manager cannot use it until the structure or plant has been reviewed to regulate if asbestos or asbestos comprising materials (ACM) are fixed to or installed in the plant or structure.

d. Assured that the asbestos that is expected to be hampered by the demolition work had been removed just as before the demolition.

e. Confirm that an experienced person starts the purpose if asbestos or ACM are presumed or determined to be present, notify the occupier and the owner of the buildings (if domestic premises), and the organization with management or control of the workplace (Yuan & Shen, 2011).

f. For the determinations of this Code of practice, any business that conducts demolition work is sometimes referred to as a “demolition contractor”.

3. According to Regulation 297, any person doing business must manage the risks related to construction work. There must be a task to manage the risk following WHS regulations, the duty holder should:

a. Find rationally foreseeable risks that could increase the risk

b. Remove the risk that is reasonably workable

c. If this is not rationally possible to minimize or remove the risks, it is rationally possible by applying control measure in keeping with the risk control hierarchy.

References

Borys, D. (2012). The role of safe work method statements in the Australian construction industry. Safety Science, 50(2), 210-220.

Borys, D. (2012). The role of safe work method statements in the Australian construction industry. Safety Science, 50(2), 210-220.

BRESLIN, P. (2013). What are the benefits and costs of developing, implementing and reviewing Safe Work Method Statements for high-risk works in the Australian construction industry?. Journal of health, safety and environment, 29(5), 269-283.

Chen, G., Zhang, G., Xie, Y. M., & Jin, X. H. (2012). Overview of alliancing research and practice in the construction industry. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 8(2), 103-119.

Hou, L., Zhao, C., Wu, C., Moon, S., & Wang, X. (2017). Discrete firefly algorithm for scaffolding construction scheduling. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, 31(3), 04016064.

Loudoun, R., & Townsend, K. (2017). Implementing health promotion programs in the Australian construction industry. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management.

Moon, S., Forlani, J., Wang, X., & Tam, V. (2016). Productivity study of the scaffolding operations in liquefied natural gas plant construction: Ichthys project in Darwin, Northern Territory, Australia. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 142(4), 04016008.

Nadhim, E. A., Hon, C., Xia, B., Stewart, I., & Fang, D. (2016). Falls from height in the construction industry: a critical review of the scientific literature. International journal of environmental research and public health, 13(7), 638.

Park, J., & Tucker, R. (2017). Overcoming barriers to the reuse of construction waste material in Australia: a review of the literature. International Journal of Construction Management, 17(3), 228-237.

Pillay, M. (2013). Exploring resilience engineering through the prescription and practice of safe work method statements in the Victorian Construction industry. The University of Ballarat.

Yuan, H., & Shen, L. (2011). The trend of the research on construction and demolition waste management. Waste Management, 31(4), 670-679.