During the last week, several independent schools in Sydney have had to shut their doors and send students and staff home when a student tested positive to COVID-19. This occurred within the first couple of days of welcoming students back after weeks of remote learning due the COVID-19 pandemic. On returning to school, the risk of a student or staff member being tested positive for COVID-19 is a foreseeable workplace hazard that the school must address or be in breach of workplace health and safety legislation (as well as having sick staff and students).
All workplaces have a duty under health and safety laws to maintain a safe working environment and to prevent harm to workers and any other persons that may be impacted by the school’s operations. The legislation in most states/territories goes further and requires schools to adopt a systematic approach by:
At the most obvious level, the hazard is the transmission of COVID-19 in the school, and the enterprise-level risk could be described as:
Failure to take all steps that are reasonably practicable to reduce COVID-19 infection transmission in the school community.
For each area of school operations, we suggest the following process in line with health and safety legislation in all states and territories:
This first step requires every aspect of school operations to be ‘put under the microscope’ from a hazard or risk mitigation perspective, including taking a look at all of the activities, specific locations and operations that are, or are likely to be, conducted in the school, and where the possible transmission points are likely to be.
A useful starting point for all schools is the Australian Health Protection Principal Committee (AHPPC) statement on risk management for re-opening boarding schools and school-based residential colleges (AHPPC Statement). We have combined their list with further suggested areas and issues that might present a COVID-19 transmission hazard for most schools:
Boarding schools will have additional areas of operations to consider.
Once identified, the next step is to assess the risks associated with that activity or area of operations, again, from the COVID-19 infection transmission perspective. The risk assessment involves determining the likelihood of the harm occurring and the seriousness of the consequences. This assessment for each hazard will determine how much effort and resourcing is warranted to ensure that all “reasonably practicable” control measures are in place for that hazard.
The likelihood will depend on the situation, the amount of contact, the frequency of contact, the length of time of the contact and all the other factors that we are aware of related to the transmission of the infection in particular situations and contexts. Issues to consider in determining likelihood include:
The consequence of the spread of COVID-19 infection transmission within the school community would be considered to fit the “major” category, that is:
A life-threatening illness requiring lengthy hospitalisation/rehabilitation with more than a month off work/school.
The severity of the consequences does not change from one school activity to the next. We know that not every case of infection is in the “major consequence” category but it is not sensible to try and predict the consequence of infection in relation to a particular individual or group of individuals. It is better to take a more cautious approach and assume that the infection of an individual will at least have a “major” consequence.
Once each risk has been assessed, control measures should be put in place using the “hierarchy of controls” method. This is a requirement under the harmonised work health and safety system and recommended in the AHPPC Statement with reference to risk mitigation by schools. The “hierarchy of control” approach requires the school to consider implementing the control measures that provide the highest level of protection and most reliable controls, and consider the next lower level of controls where the previous one is not “reasonably practicable”. Some hazards may require more than one level of control measure to provide an acceptable level of risk of harm.
As part of the determination of control measures, health and safety laws require consultation with “workers” likely to be affected by the controls. This means that schools must consult with staff and contractors, but should also consult more widely with the school community including students, parents, and others that may be affected by the school operations in relation to the control measures. For example, if changes are to be made to the way that the school administration functions to reduce the frequency of student-staff contact, staff that are affected by these changes must be consulted.
Once the controls have been identified for each area of school operations, the next step is to implement the controls.
Once implemented, the next crucial step is to review the effectiveness of the controls. This is an essential step. It is important to ask:
Complying with the methodology required by workplace health and safety legislation may seem like time wasted that could be better spent cleaning, however, its value is in being systematic. It is also the approach recommended by the AHPPC. Rather than just ‘jumping’ to control measures, it provides a framework designed to ensure that a school turns its mind to as many foreseeable hazards as is reasonable, then determines the priority of control measures in an informed and sustainable way. Nevertheless, whichever method is used, cleaning and social distancing will probably still be key to keeping staff and students safe.