essay修改：风险评估和管理
风险评估和管理在工作场所是必不可少的。这种风险和危害的衡量和优先次序必须根据危害发生的可能性和危害可能产生的影响进行评估。研究表明，所有组织都必须投资于风险管理系统(Power, 2008)。合规规则使其成为一种法律必要性(新南威尔士州立法，2016)。为了保护员工和客户，工作场所必须有安全声明。有必要对工作场所可能发生的风险进行评估和分类，以确定风险治疗的优先次序
鉴于这一背景背景，本报告的目的是查明在个案研究组织中所指出的西隧立法中的违规行为。风险和风险得到识别，并通过控制层次结构创建风险管理过程。不遵从的后果明显大于成本，因此建议组织对遵从文化进行投资。此外，必须持续维护法规遵循工作。
1. 违反西隧法例
工作场所没有适当的风险评估程序。根据2005年《安全、健康和福利工作法》第19条，雇主有必要制定适当的工作场所风险控制政策，并在确定工作场所风险和危害的地方进行登记(健康和安全管理局HSA, 2006)。由于没有根据案例研究对工作场所进行风险评估，这是违反法律的。
工作安全与健康法案2011年,适用于新南威尔士州立法和根据该法案,雇主的主要目标之一是对“保护工人和其他人员对危害他们的健康,安全和福利通过消除或最小化风险的工作或从指定类型的物质或植物”(新南威尔士州立法2016)。然而，正如案例研究显示的那样，雇主未能保护那些似乎受到伤害的工人。
essay修改：风险评估和管理
Risk assessment and management is imperative in the workplace. The measurement and prioritization of such risks and hazards must be assessed based on the likelihood of occurrence of the harm and of the impact the harm would have. Research studies indicate that all organizations must invest in a risk management system (Power, 2008). Compliance rules make it a legal necessity (NSW legislation, 2016). For the protection of both employees and clients, a safety statement must be present in the workplace. It is necessary to assess and categorize the risks that would happen in the workplace in order to determine the priority for risk treatment
Given this background context, the purpose of this report is to identify the breaches in WHS legislation as noted in case study organization. Hazards and risks are identified and a risk management procedure is created by means of the hierarchy of controls. Consequences of noncompliance clearly outweigh the cost and hence it is recommended that the organization invest in a culture of compliance. Furthermore, the compliance effort must be maintained continuously.
1. Breaches in WHS Legislation
There is no proper risk assessment procedure in the workplace. Now according to the section 19 of the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act, 2005, it is necessary for employer to have a proper workplace risk control policy and register where risks and hazards of the workplace are identified (Health and Safety Authority HSA, 2006). Since there is a no workplace risk assessment done according to the case study, this is a breach of legislation.
The Work Safety and Health Act 2011, applies to NSW legislation and according to the Act, one of the main objectives for the employer is towards “protecting workers and other persons against harm to their health, safety and welfare through the elimination or minimization of risks arising from work or from specified types of substances or plant” (NSW Legislation 2016). However, as the case study shows, the employer has failed to protect workers who seem to have suffered injuries.
