Dust hangs around long after the tools stop, and the health damage can follow workers for years. Having the right controls, and making sure they are effective, is the only way to keep that risk in check. By Shane Conroy
Construction dust is generated by routine jobs that happen on every site, every day. But the health risks it poses can carry a heavy cost if not properly managed. “Workers on a construction site can be exposed to many dust hazards, including from cutting, crushing and grinding concrete, bricks, stone and tiles, during removal of asbestos containing materials, and dusts from cutting and sanding timber,” explains Rebecca Newton, Safe Work Australia branch manager for Hazards & Industries Policy. “Breathing in airborne contaminants, such as dusts, at work can cause significant harm and lead to serious diseases or conditions like silicosis, lung cancer, asbestosis, mesothelioma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and asthma.”
While dust may be part of the work, the harm it causes doesn’t have to be. Implementing the right controls for the job, and monitoring to make sure they are effective, will keep long-term health risks down.
ELIMINATION—THE FIRST AND BEST LINE OF DEFENCE Employers carry a clear legal responsibility to manage dust risks before they cause harm. This requires a proactive approach that identifies hazards early, removes them where possible, and puts strong controls in place when elimination cannot be achieved.
Newton explains that employers must treat risk management as an ongoing and structured process that covers all foreseeable hazards and sets out how exposure will be controlled onsite. “Once a risk is identified, the most effective way to manage the risk is to completely remove the hazard from the workplace,” she says. “In some cases, elimination might not be reasonably practicable. In these cases, employers must minimise the risks as much as they possibly can by selecting and implementing effective control measures.”
UNDERSTANDING THE HIERARCHY OF CONTROLS Safe Work Australia’s model WHS Regulations require employers to work through the hierarchy of control measures, starting with hazard elimination. Gavin Bean, national category specialist – Respiratory at PIP Global Safety, points out that where elimination is not possible, the emphasis shifts to reduction. “If we can’t eliminate the hazardous material, can we substitute it for something that’s less hazardous? That’s where we go from an engineered stone benchtop to a marble benchtop, for example. We’re substituting a very hazardous product to a less hazardous product,” he explains. “We then have the next cab off the rank, which is what we call an engineered control. That’s things like on-tool extraction and wet-cutting methods that reduce the exposure to the worker. Finally, we use personal protective equipment (PPE) such as respiratory protection, as the last line of defence—but it should still be the first thing you put on.”
YOU CAN’T MANAGE WHAT YOU DON’T MONITOR Once the right controls are in place, ongoing monitoring is crucial for effective risk management. “Employers must organise and pay for air monitoring if they are not certain if the relevant workplace exposure standard is being exceeded,” Newton says. “Employers may also be required to organise and pay for health monitoring. For example, if a risk assessment identifies a significant risk to the health of workers from exposure to silica.”
Brandon Colledge, technical product specialist at Maxisafe, says this means that site managers on the ground cannot simply rely on what they see to judge dust levels. “As regulators base their safe exposure standards on the number of particles in the air over a set period of time, sites need a way to accurately track and monitor particle levels,” he explains. “It can’t be done by sight.”
While not appropriate for determining compliance with WHS laws, he says tools like Maxisafe’s Dustlight real-time particulate monitor make monitoring easier because they give workers real time feedback. The device is worn on the body and signals when safe limits may have been exceeded, which helps managers understand exposure as it happens.
REAL PROTECTION FOR REAL CONDITIONS The effectiveness of PPE depends on choosing respiratory protection that actually works in real conditions. Colledge says confusion still exists around what masks are suitable when workers have facial hair. “Standard dust masks and half masks cannot seal properly unless the wearer is clean-shaven,” he says. exposed to the hazardous dust,” he explains.
Colledge adds that choosing “Powered air respirators are required to protect workers with facial hair and should be an essential option onsite.” Critically, Bean points out that the correct PPE must also be worn during clean-up: “Many tradies may be using on-tool extraction and PPE, but when they empty out their on-tool extraction or clean up dried waste from wet cutting, they’re not following the same practices and are therefore being re the right controls is rarely a one size-fits-all decision.
Working closely with your chosen PPE supplier can help sites work through your specific exposure levels and workforce needs so managers can implement strong controls and clear monitoring to ensure workers don’t pay for their work today with their health tomorrow.
